Violence or Non-violence ?

which path is better ?

I'll tell you the middle one.
-----------------

-THREAD-

Gandhi was a warrior without armor, save the invulnerable breastplate of Truth.

Non-violence is passive resistance to evil by love and by spiritual force.

if it is necessary to shed blood to protect innocent,
then let that blood be his own!

He who is the strongest follows the path of forgiveness & non-violence.

BUT...

imagine

walking into a tiger's cage to teach him non-violence.

The tiger learns nothing from the experience ,unless it be that a fool is an easy meal.

Smart crack of trainer's whip would be best.

Though force itself is evil,

when employed against a greater evil,

the lesser of two evils becomes in this world of relativity an act of righteousness.

But this is not a free license to resort to force of retaliation.

there is a difference between an righteous war,

protecting the helpless is righteous,

wars to satisfy greed is evil.

fight for a bad cause & karma will bite you.

It is best to consult true men of God whenever there is doubt as to whether or not a war is righteous.

" O Arjuna, fortunate are the Kshatriyas when such a righteous battle has, unprovoked, fallen to their lot;
they find therein an open door to heaven. "

(Bhagvat Gita II:32)