When
asked 'what peace is', many are wont to respond: ''peace is an absence
of war''. I think I should differ a bit. Peace should not be defined or
determined by war. There could be a situation in which there is no war,
yet there is no peace; where people don't quarrel, yet they don't
interact; where we live in a community, yet without co-existence. Can't
we define peace by itself, I mean with no tag or reference to war?
Some of us lack inner peace, yet we want the world to be at peace.
Yeah, we want Syria to have peace. It's a dream, but quite realizable,
yet that peace which we seek for us MUST come from us. It must flow from
us, but first in us. We have to create it first within us, since
charity begins at home.
I then see peace as a condition of total
harmony and co-existence between two or more parties; between the body
and soul; between the oppressor and the oppressed; between Obama and
Osama; between master and slave, neither out of force nor fear, but of
free and selfless commitment. Yes, in peace there is no war, but there
is much more to it than just 'absence of war'. Have you, have I really
got true peace? It wouldn't be out of place if we ask ourselves such
questions.
Peace! Shalom! Udo!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment