Revenge

It can be a vicious circle. What you give out comes right back to you.
But it can also be a wonderful circle.
What you give out comes right back to you. The choice is ultimately ours.
What we choose to hand out to others,
whether it be a loving eye or a revengeful one,
is what we will receive in return.
If we seek inner peace as well as outer peace,
we must first "give" what we desire to receive.
If we desire love, we must give love.
If we desire prosperity, we must share prosperity.
If we desire freedom, we must allow freedom.
If we want a life full of joy and laughter, we must share joy and laughter.
If we want a life of peace, we must start within our own self,
and watch it come back a thousand-fold.
Thus perhaps "an eye for an eye" and
"love thy neighbor as thyself" are the same teaching.
They are actually based in what we have discovered in modern physics:
What goes around comes around.
Nothing is ever destroyed.
There is a cause for every effect.
Which cause will we choose?
Which effect do we desire?
These are questions that we must answer in every moment of our lives --
in every thought, every word, every action (or inaction) we take.

~ Quote: Marie T. Russell ~
Excerpted from: Is Revenge Spiritual?

Mustang,
That is all good and proper BUT unfortunately you DO NOT always get back what you give, ask Anne, Me personally, or even yourself. If only that was really the way the world worked how sweet it would be...

This is thought provoking. I don't think that revenge is spiritual. I don't get the connection between revenge, which is a fear based thought/action and spiritual, which is based on love.

Quote:

---

This is thought provoking. I don't think that revenge is spiritual. I don't get the connection between revenge, which is a fear based thought/action and spiritual, which is based on love.

---

Quite right, Lynnie. Revenge is never spiritual.

An "eye for an eye" actually has a spiritual context to it because it was a law of mercy. It was not a law which gave an individual the right to extract vengeance. Although many had presumed it to be the case and more than a few had used it to justify deeds which were actually in opposition to it. Lex Talionis, the law of "tit for tat" within the Code of Hammurabi, was used by judges and courts, in biblical times, to assess punishment and penalties and must be seen in the context of society as it was then. The law was part and parcel of a code of ethics in righting wrongs. Much in the same way as courts function now i.e. compensation and damages.

Where the author has actually skipped a beat is in "turning the other cheek" (something I'm having a terrible time with at the moment) which is actually the lesson following the "eye for an eye" because it is unconditionally non-retaliatory and non-compensatory. Then and only then, when such is achieved, can I fully lay claim to: "Love thy neighbour as you love yourself". Which is then followed by "who is my neighbour?"

I must learn to love even the militant atheist. Maybe I'll do that tomorrow, or the next day...or the day after...