Mercy over Justice

On Mercy and Justice

Portia: Mercy or Justice?

IN Shakespeare’s play, The Merchant of Venice, When Shylock demands justice for his pound of flesh, the fair Portia disguised as an advocate counsels a plea for mercy:

The quality of mercy is not strained;

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven

Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest;

It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:

‘T is mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes

The throned monarch better than his crown:

His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,

The attribute to awe and majesty,

Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;

But mercy is above this sceptred sway;

It is enthronèd in the hearts of kings,

It is an attribute to God himself;

And earthly power doth then show likest God’s

When mercy seasons justice.

Of course, Shylock demands the fulfillment of his contract.

 He is a man of law and contracts. But the rule of law is against him. To demand a pound of flesh is to conspire against a man’s life. Accused of murder he loses everything.

Shylock would have been better off pleading for mercy. Shakespeare’s point? Mercy is above justice.

In the practice of surrender this is an important point. In Hegel’s famous master-servant dialectic the problem of thesis-antithesis-synthesis is worked out through the process of “Die to live.” By giving oneself fully in surrender, one lives anew.

In Hegel’s analogy, complete self-consciousness is impossible for either master or servant unless they come to terms with the relationship that exists between them. In Hegelian language “Master” is an analogue for Thesis and “servant” is analogous to Antithesis. Their self-realization through complete consciousness is Synthesis, according to Hegel’s philosophical system.

As the great German transcendentalist saw it, the master is incomplete in his role as master without the antithesis of a servant. The servant is incomplete without a master. The master needs service or he is no master.

By the same token, the servant needs the master or he has no existence as servant. Lack of a master is an existential threat. And yet, through the submission of the servant the relationship changes.  Why the servant must “die” through submission, what he loses through surrender is regained by way of self-transformation and realization.

The master's self-consciousness, on the other hand, is dependent on the servant for recognition. Without the service of a subordinate he cannot properly exist as master. The master is existentially dependent on the servant.

Furthermore, as the servant serves the master with greater and more intense love, the servant achieves self-consciousness and perfection; self-mastery. The servant becomes master.

On the other hand,the master has become wholly dependent on the service offered by his servant. In Hegelian language, the master is enslaved by the labour of his servant. In the end the servant, through service comes to dominate the master; the master becomes enslaved through service. The roles of master and servant, of thesis and antithesis have become modified, even reversed through self-realization. Hegel calls this synthesis.   http://www.gwfhegel.org

Sri Krishna, Reality the Beautiful

Sri Caitanya

Shridhar Maharaja

Hegel’s analogy was especially appreciated by Shridhar Maharaja who saw in his analysis of the master-slave dialectic the profound relationship between soul and God discovered through bhakti: “According to Hegel, the Absolute contains both the conditioned and unconditioned. The finite and the infinite combined is the Absolute. The infinite in itself is not sufficient. There will also be finite in relativity to it.”

Many examples are given in the ancient wisdom scriptures of India of how one is transformed through divine love. But the idea that God Himself is transformed by the love of his devotees is a singular proposition advanced through the rupanuga school especially as seen in the writings of Kaviraj Goswami. His Chaitanya Charitamrita reveals how Krishna, the Supreme Godhead, descends in the mood of his own devotee to experience the rapture and passion of pure bhakti, krishna-prem.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu embodies the Hegelian dialectic of “Die to Live.” He is God the Master, living as “servant of God,” experiencing the supreme transformative of self-realization at the highest level of reality.

The dynamic dialectic of surrender is at the heart of bhakti. And yet, sometimes the followers of bhakti entertain a misconception about the nature of that dynamic. They feel that bhakti is really a technique. Since we so often talk about bhakti-yoga, the idea of practicing bhakti as a form of yoga or technique becomes enfolded into the concept of surrender.

Self-Interest and Yoga techniques

This kind of self-interested point of view interferes with the true purpose of surrender. In devotional circles, surrender is its own end. Devotees are not Machiavellian. On the path of surrender, ends are not different from means. If the means are the different forms of surrender, the ends are also surrender. The transformative character of self-realization is a side-effect of the process of surrender. But one may not indulge in the process as a means to effect the end of self-realization. In this sense, the idea of bhakti as a yoga technique is misleading.

If we could use bhakti as a way of forcing ourselves into the kingdom of heaven or the devotional plane of Vrindaban, it would be a process more resembling something like karma-kanda where God only exists to satisfy the law of karma.

Once upon a time a businessman, upon dying, found himself at the pearly gates of heaven before Saint Peter himself. Saint Peter was locking up for the day, but patiently attended the spirit of the recently deceased businessman.

“Yes?”

“Is this heaven?”

“Yes it is,” said the saint. “How can I help you?”

“Well, you can let me in.”

“Name, please?” said the saint, opening his book.

“Schwarz,” said the businessman, wiping his forehead with a linen handkerchief.

Saint Peter paged through the book patiently.

“Hmm....Schwarz... Sorry. Name’s not in the book.”

“What? That’s impossible.”

Saint Peter looked up over his horn-rimmed glasses: “Excuse me?”

“That’s impossible. I gave ten dollars every Sunday in the church.”

“So?”

“Talk to Him!” said the businessman, indignant now that his time was being wasted.

The saint smiled. “I’ll see what I can do.” And leaving aside the book, he went upstairs, closing the gate.

“Excuse me,” said the saint, addressing the almighty.

“What is it? Can’t you see I’m busy?” said God, who was listening to the prayers of thousands of supplicants.

“Sorry to interrupt,” said the saint. “But there’s a businessman at the gates.”

“Is his name in the book?”

“Well, his name’s not in the book.”

“Send him to the other place.”

“Well, he says he gave 10 dollars every week at the church.”

God looked up from the prayers he was reading. He said: “Then give him his money back and tell him to go to hell.”

If we demand justice, we may find like Shylock and the businessman at the pearly gates that we have no rights to anything. Simply by practicing prayer and following rules and regulations, simply by doing certain rituals we have no right to claim that we have conquered God with love and therefore deserve the highest kingdom. Surrender does not guarantee our place in heaven or Vrindaban.

If we place our demand in the department of justice, we may find that we haven’t followed the law perfectly. There may be some indiscretion. No one is perfect. Our only hope is for mercy.

The French essayist Michel de Montaigne records an instance of mercy. The Emperor Conrad III, having besieged the city of Weinsberg, was determined to kill all its citizens as revenge for the rebellion of the Duke of Bavaria. His thirst for blood was not slaked by all the terms and conditions that were offered to him as he began the final onslaught.

Finally, he relented, thinking it unmanly to kill innocent women. He allowed that the ladies of that town might escape without violation of their honor, on foot, and with only such possessions as they could carry with them. Upon hearing this, the humble ladies of Weinsberg made their escape carrying upon their shoulders their sons, husbands, fathers, and even the rebellious Duke of Bavaria himself.

Having granted mercy, the Emperor was moved. Montaigne reports: “a sight at which the emperor was so pleaed, that, ravished with the generosity of the action, he wept for joy, and immediately extinguishing in his heart the mortal and capital hatred he had conceived against this duke, he from that time forward treated him and his with all humanity.” (from William Hazlitt’s translation)

According to Shridhar Maharaja, both justice and mercy are found in the divine nature, but mercy is better. He makes this point when commenting on the verse satya-vratam satya-param... from Srimad Bhagavatam: 10.2.26

“He sees us not only with an attitude of justice, but also through His other eye, that of mercy. Rta can mean that which can attract mercy, that which is deduced from the fundamental truth and can attract mercy; the deduction that can produce mercy in Him. So, He sees with the eye of affection and the eye of justice. According to the circumstances; He may have to distribute justice, but that is not vindictiveness; it done with mercy. So, He is rta-satya-netram. He sees everything with justice and affection, mercy.

Satya can mean impartial estimation, equity and good sense, justice, and rta can mean mercy. He sees things in two ways: impartially and practically, theoretically and practically. This also may be a good interpretation. (https://premadharma.org/the-eyes-of-truth/ Transcript 31 August 1981 )

Elsewhere he has also said:

“On the order of Gurudev Devarsi Narada, the scripture Srimad Bhagavatam was given by Vedavyasa as the conclusion of his teachings. After giving the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Mahabharata, Bhagavad-Gita, etc., the last gift of Vedavyasa in the world of scriptures was Srimad-Bhagavatam. And the message of the Bhagavatam is that beauty is above all; not knowledge or justice. Mercy is about justice. Affection, love, beauty, charm, harmony; these are above all, and this absolute conception of the ultimate reality is in the Krishna conception.”

“Beauty is above knowledge and power. Knowledge is above power, and above knowledge is beauty, charm and love. That is the supreme. Srimad-Bhagavatam has declared krsnas tu bhavan svayam: the Krishna conception of Godhead is the most original conception of the Absolute. This is the prime declaration of the Bhagavatam: the Lord, as Beauty, is above all. And below Him is awe, reverence, power, etc.

Mahaprabhu Sri Chaitanyadev pointed out, “Go to the beautiful, Reality the Beautiful.” This is the highest realization. Don’t waste your energy by engaging yourself in any other pursuits, but go straight to jnana-sunya bhakti (devotion devoid of the covering of knowledge). By the help of sadhu sanga (association of saints), take the name of the Lord and try to march straight onwards to the Krishna conception of Godhead. Krishna consciousness is our highest achievement, and this is given by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Srimad Bhagavatam.

Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu recommended, “Don’t waste your energy for anything else. Utilize your energy for the Krishna conception of Godhead.”

http://www.sevaashram.net/3184/grand-victory-of-love/

In connection with this idea of mercy, Shridhar Maharaj liked to tell the story of Queen Victoria’s first act in power, just after her coronation.

Queen Victoria wearing her coronation gown

When Queen Victoria got the empire, the first case brought before her was a death warrant for th execution of a deserted soldier. And the Duke of Wellington presented her with the death warrant to sign. But Victoria was reluctant to s8gn the death warrant, thinking “The first case dealt with, that will be of punishment, and not of mercy?”

She was reluctant, and pushed back: "Is there nothing you can say for the soldier?" The prosecutor general replied, "Thrice he committed this offence, so this time, the law cannot give any forgiveness for him."

But Victoria continued pushing back: "You are always speakin against him, but can't you say anything in his favor?"

Then, perhaps knowing about the heart of the queen, the General said, "His private life, his charcter, is very good."

"Then I forgive him", Queen Victoria said.

"He is pardoned. The first time I have come to judge, and that will be an instance of punishment?" She did not like that.

King Puru and Alexander

So forgive and forget. The principle of love and affection, that should be the greatest consideration. Another example of mercy is that of Alexander and Puru. Now I shall say, you know perhaps Alexander, when he came to conquer India, he conquered the then King of Punjab, Puru. And Puru was taken captive before him, and Alexander asked him, "What sort of treatment do you expect from me? How should I treat you?" Puru told him, "Like a king." Alexander was very impressed and satisfied, and he released him, saying, "Yes, I'll treat you like a king. You are at liberty to go." That is a famous story about Alexander and Puru.

http://www.vrindavan.org/English/Books/search-for-purity.pdf

Shridhar Maharaja’s message on mercy and forgiveness is clear. On the one hand, our only position with divinity is one of expecting mercy like the chataka bird who holds his beak out expecting rain. The chataka bird will not drink any water from the ground. He will only drink rainwater. The quality of mercy is not strained. It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven. Our only hope for deliverance is the mercy of God.

Why, then, should we not demonstrate mercy in our dealings with others? A saintly person is gentle, tolerant, humble, and merciful. Shrila Prabhupada showed gentility and tolerance by example. So did Shridhar Maharaja and Govinda Maharaja. The teachings of gurudeva are not merely theoretical but also practical. Mercy and forgiveness are important values to be treasured. Mercy is above Justice.