A Matter Of Words:
Far be it for The Sikh Renaissance to support the liberal atrocity of modern decolonisation that seems nothing more than an exercise in concealing the innate weaknesses of civilisations that fell to the white man. But a timely case needs to be made for the preservation of the original message of indigenous texts when they are simplified into English. What we lose in translation is often the fundamental meaning of the text, rendering it a hollow shade of its original self.
While we have discussed this problem in previous articles, the most viable solution seems to be a constant updating of Sikh historic and religious texts with the aim of preserving their essential message for non-Gurmukhi readers. This is due to the rapidly evolving nature of the English language. Its universalisation opens it to constant fluctuation often outdating several prior terms supplanting them with newer terminology retaining a more precise meaning.
The challenge for translators is not to preserve the lyrical prose of Sikh texts but to convey their unchanging meaning from era to era; time to time. This then necessitates an intimate familiarity with the disciplines of etymology, philanthropy, and linguistics. The Gurmukhi must speak across the ages, its message cannot be altered. But the terminology conveying the message compels change from era to era to preserve its originality.
Mercy vs. Pity:
In two prior articles we discussed that forgiveness is the prerogative of the strong and forbearance is a grater virtue than forgiveness; that unreciprocated love is a weakness. Both arguments seemingly run contrary to the modern anglophonic translations of the Guru Granth that falsely embellish Gurbani to state that both unrequited forgiveness and love are some exemplary Khalsa behaviours. The reality is ironically different.
To summarise, only the strong are able to forgive for they retain what might be considered as unlimited power in certain contexts. Unreciprocated love is a base-minded frailty that disallows one from upholding justice and disciplining both oneself and others when necessary. A similar issue permeates the discourse on mercy and pity. While both terms are used interchangeably as synonyms in Gurbani translations, the reality is fundamentally different.
What is Mercy? What is Pity? The etymological history of both terms is discussed in detail by the Stoic Seneca in his letters to Nero. Due to the observation-based nature of Stoicism, there are some inherent similarities with Sikhi and its emphasis on experiential living. This is why we are using Seneca’s words as a yardstick to establish a commonsense measure of what is mercy and what is pity to compare and contrast it with the Gurmat principle.
Seneca To Nero:
In his discourses to future Roman emperor Nero, Seneca distinguishes between mercy and pity for his student given that his era’s discourse is nefariously oriented towards favoring emperors expressing pity and not mercy. Why are merciful emperors more successful than their pitiful (pun intended) counterparts? The elderly Stoic succinctly relays the differences between both, carefully numbering the essential points of his summary:
“(1) And lest the fair-seeming name of mercy should at times deceive us and lead us in the opposite direction, let’s see what mercy is, what characteristics it has, and what its boundaries are. Clemency is the mind’s moderation when it has the power to take revenge or mildness in a superior towards an inferior in determining punishment…It is safer to advance several definitions…
“(2)…mercy is moderation that diminishes a due and deserved punishment to some degree. Expect an outcry: No virtue does for anyone less than what is due! Yet everyone understands that mercy reins itself in short of what could deservedly be ordained. What, then, is the opposite of mercy? Cruelty, which is nothing other than a mind made savage in exacting punishment…(3) I will call cruel, then, those who have grounds for punishment but set no limit on the punishment…”
-Seneca, Being Merciful (circa AD 54-AD 62), translated by Robert A. Kaster.
Seneca argues mercy to be entrenched in rationale. A realistic approach to mercy is only feasible when it is rooted in three elements:
(a) Correction.
(b) Betterment.
(c) Removal.
These three are not entirely interdependent. A merciful individual looks to correcting a transgressor; bettering them or the society around them to eliminate or mitigate the transgression and, in the most extreme case, remove the transgressor and the temptation to transgress from their environment through force. Contrastingly, what is pity? What does Seneca summarise and then advocate? Nor are these three of Seneca’s own making but pre-exist.
“At this point it is relevant to ask what pity is; for most people praise it as a virtue and call someone prone to pity a good man. This too is a vice of the mind. Both vices, pity and cruelty, are close to mercy and strictness, and we must avoid them…Erring in the direction of pity entails less risk, but those who fall away from the truth err equally in both cases…all good people will display mercy and mildness but avoid pity for it is the fault of a paltry spirit that collapses at the impression of other people’s woes. Pity looks only at the state a person is in, not its cause; mercy is in accord with reason.”
-Ibid.
Mercy, to clarify Seneca, is a corollary of wisdom. A wise individual is intuitively oriented towards mercy that consists of giving an individual what they deserve rather than what they want which is often at variance with their beliefs. A merciful individual takes into account the more ubiquitous consequences of their actions and act for the betterment of the whole i.e. the whole of creation going so far as to execute belligerents. Mushashi calls this the true state of zen.
Pity is emblematic of a weak and unbalanced mind. It is spontaneous and done hastily often leading to later regrets. A South African urban legend relays how a man felt pity on a leopard cub and brought it home where it sheltered in his roof. Village elders warned him of the leopard’s aggressively independent nature and treachery telling him to consider the fate of his own children. The man refused to listen and the leopard finally gorged on him and his progeny.
The spontaneity of pity is based on blind emotion and not clear-sightedness disallowing its expressors from considering the far-reaching consequences of their actions. This is not to argue that mercy is a constant Quid pro quo calculation but instead a consideration of how the whole benefits from an individual’s sole act. Pity, though, does not take any realistic long-term ethical effects into consideration contrary to what one may passionately feel at the time.
The Sikh Purview:
The semantic variations between mercy and pity aside, what then is the Sikh purview? Short-term pity with scant attention paid to the future? Or, long-term mercy after careful deliberation of cause and effect? One might argue but how does one make a rapid decision that is timely and wise? This necessitates a considerable effort and the destruction of one’s base mindedness to pursue such perfection. What is the Gurmat stance? First, the Sikh perfect themselves:
ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਸਾਚਿ ਸਮਾਵੈ ॥੨੭॥
“Nanak, the Gurmukh forever immerse themselves in the truth.”
-Guru Granth, 941.
And then they sit to comprehend the riddle of the bull.
ਧੌਲੁ ਧਰਮੁ ਦਇਆ ਕਾ ਪੂਤੁ॥
ਸੰਤੋਖੁ ਥਾਪਿ ਰਖਿਆ ਜਿਨਿ ਸੂਤਿ ॥
ਜੇ ਕੋ ਬੁਝੈ ਹੋਵੈ ਸਚਿਆਰੁ ॥
ਧਵਲੈ ਉਪਰਿ ਕੇਤਾ ਭਾਰੁ ॥
“The mythological bull of righteousness is mercy’s offspring. Contentment is what holds it in place. One who comprehends this becomes enlightened, how much weight does this beast truly hold?”
-Guru Granth, 3.
Contrary to the Sanataan falsity that some bull lifts the earth on its spine, Gurbani posits that speaking figuratively if such a bull exists then it is righteousness. And who or what is the parent of this righteousness? Mercy. Righteousness emanates from mercy and none else. Nor are these abstractions. They are virtues to be imbibed and lived in the Sikh’s waking life until their dying day,
ਸਤੁ ਸੰਤੋਖੁ ਦਇਆ ਕਮਾਵੈ ਏਹ ਕਰਣੀ ਸਾਰ ॥
ਆਪੁ ਛੋਡਿ ਸਭ ਹੋਇ ਰੇਣਾ ਜਿਸੁ ਦੇਇ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ॥੩॥
“Accumulate truth, contentment, and mercy. This is the true way of life. In this way you will efface your base self and be humble earning the Master’s blessings.”
-Guru Granth, 51.
Mercy is a central tenet of the Sikh credo but it is more akin to Seneca’s Stoic version rooted in observable reality. Mercy is not pity as anglophonic obfuscations convey today. Rather, it is an exalted state of being where the Gurmukh (the enlightened Sikh) undertakes the correct course of action (remedial or otherwise) based on the deserved benefit of the whole including the immediate second party. This theme is prevalent throughout Gurbani.
ਕੈਹਾ ਕੰਚਨੁ ਤੁਟੈ ਸਾਰੁ ॥
ਅਗਨੀ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਾਏ ਲੋਹਾਰੁ ॥
ਗੋਰੀ ਸੇਤੀ ਤੁਟੈ ਭਤਾਰੁ ॥
ਪੁਤੀ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਵੈ ਸੰਸਾਰਿ ॥
ਰਾਜਾ ਮੰਗੈ ਦਿਤੈ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਾਇ ॥
ਭੁਖਿਆ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਵੈ ਜਾ ਖਾਇ ॥
ਕਾਲਾ ਗੰਢੁ ਨਦੀਆ ਮੀਹ ਝੋਲ ॥
ਗੰਢੁ ਪਰੀਤੀ ਮਿਠੇ ਬੋਲ ॥
ਬੇਦਾ ਗੰਢੁ ਬੋਲੇ ਸਚੁ ਕੋਇ ॥
ਮੁਇਆ ਗੰਢੁ ਨੇਕੀ ਸਤੁ ਹੋਇ ॥
ਏਤੁ ਗੰਢਿ ਵਰਤੈ ਸੰਸਾਰੁ ॥
ਮੂਰਖ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਵੈ ਮੁਹਿ ਮਾਰ ॥
ਨਾਨਕੁ ਆਖੈ ਏਹੁ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥
ਸਿਫਤੀ ਗੰਢੁ ਪਵੈ ਦਰਬਾਰਿ ॥੨॥
“When pieces of metal shatter a smith bonds them together through flames. A discordant husband and wife finally bond through the necessity of raising their children. A monarch upon being satisfied bonds with their loyal courtiers. A hungry man bonds with food to sustain his starving self. The people bond with rivers when they overflow to flood away famine. Sweet words augment any bond. One bonds with books of wisdom by speaking the truth. The dead bond with the living through deed and virtue. But the only way to bond with a fool is to render a blow to their face. This is Nanak’s view. Above all, we bond with the Maker through praise.”
-Guru Granth, 143.
The above verse reflects the essence of Sikh mercy. To realign the separated; to unite for the common good; to reward merit; to obtain sustenance; to utilise one’s environment for benign purposes; politeness; to inspire from behind the grave; and even preventing a foe from further spreading their malice-all these are acts of mercy rooted in correction, betterment, and removal. There is no scope for pity in the Gurmat praxis.
The Here And Now:
Observe the Sikh world today and we witness an undue emphasis on pity. That somehow by expressing pity to non-Sikhs retaining more sociopolitical mobilisation than us we can accrue some divine favor. The tragic imbecility here is that contrary to arguments that Sikhs are merciful, in reality the Sikhs of today are actually pitiful thinking that their passionate pity is mercy. The profound philosophical implications of their acts are beyond them.
There is however a cry for change. It is slight. A whisper in the dark but is increasing. And when it becomes a torrent, only then will the dregs of pity be drowned and the warriors of mercy ascend to the fore to show the world the true path to living and warring in the greatest battle: life. Only then will pity’s predatory sting be warded off by the Khalsa.