Nonviolence is both a form of theory and the commitment to a lifestyle which adheres to this theory. Although there are different perceptions of the importance of direct action, nonviolence is mostly defined by its attitude of understanding and humility. The nonviolent tradition believes strongly that the ends and the means are to be consistent, meaning that nonviolence cannot be achieved through the use of violence. Merton says that this act of "fighting for peace" that starts all wars . This is just one of the many paradoxes which Merton explores through his intimate discussion. At times, the reader can feel all of the hopes of the ages being channeled in merely a couple of lines of social commentary by Merton: "A personal crisis comes when one becomes aware of nearly irreconcilable opposites within oneself."
[...] Without too much discussion of governmental ethics, and the ethics of warfare, we must first realize that these ideas are an oxymoron. This is different from paradox because there is no figurative basis for this idea. In other words, war has no need for peace, and peace cannot be defined by war. A person is born with tendencies for both love and violence, but he or she only needs one of these. Merton's constructs our rational need for kindness towards one another, but also showing the life-giving force of this idea in nature. [...]
[...] He relates this to the entire history of human society: history of the world, with the material destruction of cities, nations, and people expressed the interior division that tyrannizes the soul of all Merton's ability to connect ideas from different sides, such as the eastern and western cultures, are what allows him to engage in the conversation of unification. We can see his ability to apply his notion of interconnectedness to the conversation of ideas as a spiritual as well as a physical act. [...]
[...] With this conception, nonviolence shows its inversion of a violent action, already quite obvious from the prefix but there is now the three dimensional shape of this idea. Here we have the action of the body taking the pain, absorbing the sins of itself. Merton warns against ideas of masochism, but the Buddhist notion of suffering is easily seen as a parallel, which Bonhoeffer also reflects through an understanding of our search for Christ: life falls crashing down into the bottomless abyss.”[11] This understanding of the power of human good comes with a new awareness of the other side of the spectrum. [...]
[...] His ethics reflect both the traditional Judeo-Christian non-violence of “love thy neighbor,” as well as the intensely intellectual activism of Thoreau and Gandhi. His ability to connect Christian agape love with the emptiness of zen Buddhism creates epistemological questions regarding spirituality within ethics. The necessity of spiritual understanding when approaching problems of both individual and collective ethics can be constructed by the parallel study of nonviolence and religion. These are not esoteric questions, although Zen can be very difficult to grasp. [...]
[...] Merton earlier reflections of this idea in New Seeds of Contemplation through his understanding of the self: must live outside of our self in order to fly toward the center of our being.[8]” Bonhoeffer reflects this in his writings called Living Together, saying “Jesus lived with his enemies” and echoing the Christian notion of “Love thy enemy.” Jesus had extended this idea from the original, love thy neighbor. This radical pacifism seems lacking of any utilitarian reward, save the fact that it would lead to less violence however. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
