is it that pity when you take pity or ‘tarss’ on someone.
it is empahthy and regard for the other person?
or is it a willingness to let go of induced principal of least interest in someone,
because the interest is there, but it is not expressed for hid reasons from the person who is not seen in good light?
& if someone does not show you that, nor explain why it is not there, should you give a benefit of doubt to that person?
is it possible for rehm to spring back into real life situation from which it is excluded?
As adl is the tit-for-tat reward equal to the deed, then fadzl is the reward exceeding the deed. This must mean rehm or rehma by Divine definition is being given bounties without reason.
Human forms of rehm come not close to this:
All I can say is that human definitions of rehm are plentiful and non-discrete.
Killing someone quickly instead of slowly can be seen as rehm, but letting one free who is on deathrow can also be seen as so, but who would give a villa and a lifetime supply of food to a convict?
The meaning of rehm most closest in the English is 'mercy' - I feel this concept is somewhat a relative term with increasing intensity with time. i.e. the easing of pain, in time the pain is eased therefore mercy was shown, or the increasing in pleasure. Being merciless on the otherhand is like an intensifying of anguish and pain, demise or misery through advents of time. This is why I do not agree with the idea that shooting someone in the head can be viewed as mercy even if the subject is being gradually burned at stake.
is it that pity when you take pity or 'tarss' on someone.
it is empahthy and regard for the other person?
or is it a willingness to let go of induced principal of least interest in someone,
because the interest is there, but it is not expressed for hid reasons from the person who is not seen in good light?
& if someone does not show you that, nor explain why it is not there, should you give a benefit of doubt to that person?
is it possible for rehm to spring back into real life situation from which it is excluded?
any views?
dushwari
I think the most important factor is ones upbringing and the environment one is brought up in. One learns to be forgiving over a period of time.
witchdr, great perspective, bro!
glad you said that. we men dont easily say so.
a man's up bringing definitely has a deep influence on him.
in picking or being suggested life situations/ ordinary things or valuable people, and how he takes them.
in forgiving, certain things cannot be forgiven, when we are wrong.
we must first admit that we are wrong.
and then, we can develop peaceful buildings of renewed relationships.
good points, thanks for the perspectives everyone. could it be that some have the fazeelet to be considerate and others just do not?
does empathy stand to reason to those who willfully tarnish their image as a human being?
what happens to the inner self as it evades itself and becomes cruel?
any thoughts?
is it that pity when you take pity or 'tarss' on someone.
it is empahthy and regard for the other person?
or is it a willingness to let go of induced principal of least interest in someone,
because the interest is there, but it is not expressed for hid reasons from the person who is not seen in good light?
& if someone does not show you that, nor explain why it is not there, should you give a benefit of doubt to that person?
is it possible for rehm to spring back into real life situation from which it is excluded?
any views?
dushwari
Nice topic Dushi.
I think to limit rehm to mercy or forgiveness is going against its meaning. When we forgive we, as humans, have the need for gratitude or a silent acknowledgement for that forgiveness. If we can rise above those needs then it will be true rehm.
I, being the imperfect human, will be somehow proud of being the "forgiver".
Rehm therefore means giving without any expectations of receiving.
Ok so on a lighter note, I have given my opinion on this topic and I don’t expect to receive any counter-arguments!! :D
alysam,
awesome and humbling. totally agree w/ you
i believe in forgiveness as well but it has to be asked for with an apology made in a genuine way, so that we know that the same mistake is not going to be repeated again ever.
no counter arguments. :)
dushwari
az51,
i agree with this rationale. Rehm is mercy from Almighty indeed. and that being free willed to a considerable extent as humans are, we are not absolved of the accountability of how we mistreat each other.
and that is where the whole idea of tars as a qualifying factor, comes in.
pity is earned, not to-be-granted.for pardon is to be asked of Almighty and is said that it is unto Almighty who will be pardoned and who may not be.
everyone made great points above.
yes, pity is not an across the board free ride to absolving ones' misdeeds in the eyes of Almighty.
we can get inspired by it, but not become godlike or rarely does it happen.
'godly' and 'from god' are concepts that deal with the creature in the grand scheme of things. the focus of this thread's issue is philosophizing human to human dealings as fairly as we possibly can and when does the feelings of rehm or pity come about, in case of human to human interactions?
<!--[endif]-->
any thoughts?
dushwari
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]-->
my head is fine thus far. how do you come up with so much intellect? :)
mercy is for Allah to grant us.
we can strive to obtain it and earn it, though.
Dush ,
a human is totally different from heavenly bodies , that is it has the ability to err, this ability can change anything , anytime . thus reham can be changed into pity , just by some limitations and pity can be viewed as reham ,
you said that they are interchangeable - rehm and pity.
if an apology is offered for a deliberately bad deed that a given person did with all his /her might.
when they ask for an apology, if they are to be forgiven, is that act of forgiveness functioning as rehm or as tars ( controlling for the fact that there will be other feelings attached to that response)?