← Back to Kinfonet

Is forgivness a choice?

(Plz Excuse any grammatical mistakes)

Is forgiveness a choice?

If it is a choice, what would that choice be based on?

A choice is a choice, always based on information.

So is forgiveness based on information? Do I or the other have to satisfy or break certain conditions in order for forgiveness to be granted?

Who is deciding that? And on what basis?.. Which interpersonal system grants that?

Is it a choice based on my experiences? On the experience where the wrong doing happened?

What is the thing to be forgiven? A person? Their image of which I carry? The circumstances?.. Myself?

Before I go and figure out if I can forgive others: Can I forgive myself?

On what basis does that forgiveness stand on?

Am I… Is the ‘I’ capable of forgiveness?

Did I ever forgive or was I merely pretending because it was the right thing to do?

Ayham, I was just thinking about you and wondering if you cared for this kind of dialogue experience, which differs a little from our more immediate Zoom interactions. Glad you have dropped in and started this question.

Before forgiveness, doesn’t there have to be some kind of transgression? The awareness that I or someone else has done something wrong.

I have no idea about the kind of Dialogue this is because this forum is a first for me but I really am appreciative that I found something and someone as such.

About the topic, I took the transgression as a given, so yes. Is there any other thing to be forgiven for?

Should we inquire about the right place for forgiveness before inquiring if it is a choice or not?

Here a dialogue is slightly different. We have more time to prepare our words, clear our thoughts and present our responses. In this respect, it has advantages over what we are attempting to do through Zoom. And both of these approaches are a lot different from sitting in a room together. The point is, let’s assume it’s our first time and go from there.

Can we be clear about the type of transgression that would require forgiveness? Then the other questions may be very easy to answer because we’ll have done some of the work already. We are talking of psychological transgressions, aren’t we? If you trod on my toe by accident, you would say, ‘Please, forgive me,’ and I’d say, ‘Of course,’ and there would be an end to it. So are we talking about hurting one another verbally? Is this the transgression?

Great :). Let’s get to it.

There is a difficulty in distinguishing acts of transgression because each can slip in to the psychological realm creating division. Verbal, physical even professional. The scenarios are endless and each result when there is no meeting between the parties involved. But also there is the act of transgression one assumes against oneself and feeling guilt, shame, etc. Division is there as in there is no meeting/ direct contact.

In that sense I would say the type of transgression would be ‘unresolved’ transgressions.

But before any transgression can take place there has to be a sense of a rule or a law that exists against which one is offending. Perhaps what you are saying is that there are many moments of pain in our relationships with one another because a lot of the rules are unspoken, unexplained, unclear, and ultimately result in unresolved conflict. Would this be right? I am thinking specifically in terms of our group dialogues. And perhaps if we keep to this scenario of what takes place in a group dialogue it will help us to uncover some of the issues we are both meeting.

Even now, I see that I am assuming that the ground work for this topic is shared between yourself and me. And just for a little bit I feel resistance that this stream is being taken in a direction that is not ideal.
Now I wonder if these rules and assumptions are born out of the moment or I have been carrying them all along?

I see the logic of attending to our specific setting and agree on carrying on with it but just to add on this, is that I already have seen the effects of our dialogues in my day to day life and my 'normal 'relationships.

Are we saying that any assumption/ rule, psychologically, is there on the basis of/ or due to an unresolved transgression?

Does the wrongdoing create the rule? Or does the rule create the wrongdoing? I am trying to see the structure that exists before any thought of forgiveness comes in. Any image I hold of you is a psychological assumption that you will behave in a certain way. When you behave differently you are breaking the rule that I have imposed upon you. Then to think about forgiveness becomes rather hypocritical because you have hurt me only because I set up the very conditions which allowed that hurt to materialise. Does this make any sense? Is this what you are getting at when you ask if forgiveness is a choice?

It does make sense. let’s try this:
I witness the division taking place between people. I witness the injustice, aggression, negligence and the self obsession was it ‘so called’ noble or not. I’ve seen that. Now, is it a rule that those expressions are a result of division and self centered activity? A typical K’s follower would say: No, that is a fact.

Can a conditioned person distinguish between a rule and a fact?
Are we in the group saying that we are not conditioned? Or are we in fact conditioned by K’s teachings? Which later became actually ours in time?

Look, the whole thing is revealed in the question: ‘Am I conditioned?’ Any answer to this question will come from my conditioning. So whether I say, ‘Yes,’ or, ‘No,’ they are both meaningless answers. What matters then is not the answers but the sincerity of the question. Is it a really vital question or am I just placing it among the group because I already have an answer prepared? A vital question will have its own natural energy; whereas an artificially engineered question will just fizzle out. And I can only put a vital question when I am faced with something about which I know nothing at all. Then I have to look at it and ask, ‘What is this?’ This is what we are doing now with the word ‘forgiveness’ - and we are starting to see that it is part of a much bigger structure.

The question of forgiveness came about when the excessive lack of listening was noticed. When it was noticed that how come one is so unaware of one’s own conditioning. I mean, I am here because I know better, no? I am more aware of the average human being. I have all these structured sentences and pointers which all end up with, look, see and stay with it.

As you said, it is not a matter of words (questions) but a matter of energy. If so, What do I do, or what am I doing when faced with conditioned energy?

First of all, where is this energy now? Part of it is behind you as a memory of lack of listening; part of it is also in front of you as the anticipation of the future, a future which may or may not be just as chaotic as that past memory. Is the energy in those past and future incidents any different from the energy that is now looking backwards and forwards to seek to understand itself? Or is it only the outward expression of the energy that differs? We notice the explosions, the effects that they have, because they are so visible. Those explosions always belong to either the past or the future. But in the present, right now, what is the hidden aspect of this conditioned energy? It is still concerned about the explosions, isn’t it? So its activity now is what decides what will happen next time. If it is the wrong activity now, it will produce exactly those effects which then call for forgiveness. But the wrongdoing is now, not then.

Once we see this - if we see it - it means the whole centre of energy has shifted away from thinking about the past and the future and has turned to looking directly at its own present nature and state of mind.

Which energy are you asking about now? The conditioned one? Are we clear on being conditioned or just sure of it?

I’ll try to re express what you noted in my own words to see if I understood them as seen by you.
I am holding on to what should be taking place. Holding on to what should have been and holding on to what is the true nature of what is happening here and now according to Me?
Is that conditioned energy one of comparison? One of seeking? Seeking validation rejection, etc.

Also, Are you dismissing the term forgiveness as unnecessary and that the term forgiveness or the movement of it is one of conditioning?

I think there is more needed to be explored before sealing it off.

No, I am not dismissing the term forgiveness. On the contrary, perhaps we should try to go to the heart of it. Can you explain why forgiveness is such an important issue for you? Why do you want to get it clear?

If forgiveness was merely a continuation of cause and effect then it is not. Forgiveness is not so without forgetting. This is not an assumption but rather an observation which am looking at closely lately. If forgetting about the reasons is an essential element of forgiveness, which is another way of saying releasing of attachments, then it goes with love, compassion and intelligence. I don’t know if I am being clear here.

If so we see this together, then going into it will get us closer as it is an area that was not mentioned by K’s talks. I have not heard it being addressed directly as a term, let me know if you have. If so, then we have a chance to explore this freshly without being side tracked by what we already know.

Hi Ayham - just in case you find it useful (it seems to fit in with what you’ve already said about forgetfulness in relationship to forgiveness), there is a talk Krishnamurti gave in 1953 (in Bombay, India) in which he briefly addresses the topic of forgiveness (in the third question that follows the main part of the talk).

It begins:

Question: What is forgiveness? Are forgiveness and compassion identical? To forgive another may be possible, but is it not necessary to forgive oneself?

Krishnamurti: What is forgiveness? And when do you forgive? And is forgiveness ever necessary? I have hurt you, you store that hurt. Either time heals it or you deliberately set about cultivating forgiveness. First you store the hurt, you accumulate it, you guard it; and later on you forgive. But if there was no storing, there would be no necessity for forgiveness.

The link containing the rest of the passage can be found here: https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/bombay-7th-public-talk-1st-march-1953/bombay%201953

1 Like

Yes, people talk about forgiving and forgetting. But what usually happens with people who have been hurt by another person is that they say, ‘I forgive you,’ and yet they never forget the details of the incident that hurt them. In other words, they apply a verbal solution only. Forgiveness is then an intellectual concept applied to a much deeper, emotional problem. Do you see this? For me, this is a fresh observation because we have never talked about these matters before.

Yes I do see it. And then the relationship is changed and filled with inner conflicts.
Another usual way people say: I forgive you but I can’t forget so we won’t be friends anymore, and that relationship ends. However, they the one who can’t forget themselves are tormented by that same incident being stored in them dominating their future relationships and ‘so called’ choices.

What K, as @James posted, and what was previously said clearly hints at the fact that if there is no storing then there is no need for forgiveness. However, this is the fact we are living with now, we still record. Should we not talk about the movement of forgiveness and focus instead on the storing mechanism which we as a group usually tend to do?

Going into the question forgiveness. If I choose to forgive, then am doing so because it is the right thing to do which is based on an inner principle (a collection of information) which is always limited. As a result that relationship is going to be always limited as I am limited. Most of us are actually okay with how limited things are as long as order can be maintained ‘controlled order’

Another is I forgive because I now see that I myself am as wrong as the one who previously wronged me. When I start seeing more of myself, and accept that the image I hold of myself is different than what I previously held. However, there is still image being maintained, Altered, yet still being maintained. As the time goes I am now aware of such tendencies in people as I know of it in myself so I won’t get triggered in a similar ways. Yet, the same takes place from an area that is yet to be conscious to myself.

Is that forgiveness? Can control and forgiveness co-exist?

Most of our relationships are about control, aren’t they? And our closest relationships with our family, friends and life partners have probably the greatest degree of control, even though at a casual glance we’d assume those relationships were the most free. We generally think of control as affecting our professional relationships or when we come into contact with someone in authority. In a dialogue group we are a mix of friends and strangers, some we have known for years, some we are meeting for the first time. Then when we add in the presence of a facilitator, whose role it is to keep the group on track, all these hidden tensions are there even before we start to talk. When we discuss any topic, it is this hidden mix of inner tensions and conflicts that really we are investigating each time we meet.

What am I doing in the dialogue that comes from an impulse to control? As you say, that is then going to be a limited action.

Even the facilitator could have their own baggage in that sense. If control is present, which undoubtedly is, could we say that forgiveness is necessary to be looked at?

Are my expectations and the expectations of others regarding what such a space should or should not hold limiting others and myself?.. Obviously it is.

If so, is that something to be forgiven for?

The root of word forgiveness is, in a way, to allow. Both in English and Arabic funny enough. It is still control based.

Sorry if I am bringing it back to forgiveness. But In those times when it is witnessed that one is being violent/ aggressive, territorial, etc, the word forgiveness comes up. Yet not one of control. It did take place, the kind of forgiveness that is not out of the known alone.

What do you think? Is this being taken in the wrong direction or maybe the speed we are looking at this is somewhat disturbing?