It is widely preached that it is wiser and greater to forgive someone who has hurt you and to forget the incident that caused the hurt. So, if someone rapes me, I am supposed to forgive the culprit for violating the single most space of my existence that identifies me as a woman. Moreover, I must forget the fact that the most private and sacred part of my physical body was ruthlessly savaged by some mentally deranged individual who has permanently damaged me for life.
Okay, maybe I am looking at an extreme. What if someone invades the privacy of my house and plunders and loots some of my precious material belongings that have been acquired through toil and struggle? Would it be a good idea to forgive all thieves for breaking into homes and snatching away others’ belongings so that they can rest assured and continue to make a living out of such invasions? How about if someone causes me a lot of mental or emotional trauma by being dishonest, by cheating, or by using hurtful words? Does the offender then deserve the greatness of forgiveness for the seemingly benign mistakes probably made out of carelessness, selfishness, or insensitivity?
For the first case of rape, most mentally developed human beings will likely rate it as a heinous crime undeserving of forgiveness from anyone, and moreover, as one unlikely to be forgotten especially by the victim. For the second act of stealing, many might consider it forgivable based on the reasons and background of the criminal, but will likely not stress on the need to forget. For other situations, like lying, cheating, and abusing, that cause hurt, will often be evaluated on a case by case basis to understand the background, the intentions, the amount of damage caused, and so on, before deciding whether or not they can be forgiven and/or forgotten.
As humans, we seem to naturally and authoritatively decide which acts should be forgiven and why a victim should forgive his/her offender and move on. So, what right or capability do we have in categorizing or rating an offense as greater or smaller, and why do we assume the extent of a victim’s pain without leaving it up to him/her to decide whether they want to forgive someone or not? Who has the right to decide this? Leaving aside the legal aspect of any crime, it is the mental and moral choice of forgiveness that we often find ourselves deliberating upon the commitment of an offense.
Irrespective of the crime, there will always be situations where the offense can be attributed to some condition, probably a health related issue, where the offender would generally be considered as deserving of the forgiveness due to his/her incapacity to control the offensive behavior. But does the knowledge of that condition have the power to rewind time and undo the pain caused to the victim? If not, then why should the person committing the crime be forgiven for something that cannot be undone? And what difference does it make if the culprit does not care about being forgiven either because he/she is unaware, or unrepentant of the offense caused. In fact, some may argue that it is immoral or irresponsible to forgive someone who is unrepentant and continues to repeat the offense because this can encourage the offender in the wrong-doing and also set a wrong example for others.
Hence, the greatness of forgiving is really a one-sided act perceived to bring solace to the victim of hurt. The real issue then is not about forgiveness but to find a way to move on after a disturbing life changing experience without affecting one’s own peace of mind in the long term. It goes without saying that when someone is hurt or has been violated, it is natural to be in pain for a length of time beyond the incident that caused it in the first place. Such pain for elongated periods can cause detrimental effects one one’s physical and mental health thus leading to emotional trauma with a much larger magnitude than the initial hurt caused during the incident. How soon one recovers oneself so as to prevent more hurt, while dwelling on the incident or act that caused the pain, will determine how to positively move forward whether in other activities or in bringing satisfactory closure to the hurtful incident.
To be able to do this, one needs to attend to the wound created in their heart and do everything necessary to heal it in order to reduce the pain if not completely remove it. In essence, this means that one has to possess the ability to protect themselves, attend to themselves, and take care of themselves in order to survive in life. From this perspective, this capability is synonymous with the act of selfishness, with respect to a desire to live the best way they can.
Can someone consider a crime so big that they decide not to forgive or forget out of moral and ethical obligation to the world? Would it not be unselfish and great if a parent can gather the courage to NOT forgive their son who has committed rape? By forgiving such a crime, the forgiver in fact actually encourages the crime by sending a message that it’s okay. In such a situation, forgiving someone can become unethical and hence a crime in itself, especially if it helps the culprit to overcome their guilt and commit the same or other crimes again. But since no one really has the moral authority to judge if someone should be forgiven, it is best left up to the victim or anyone offended to decide, based on their personal level of comfort and sensitivity.
Can it then be perceived that the act of forgiveness has nothing to do about greatness but about having the ability to survive? In fact, it may so happen that one who is not selfish in finding ways to survive is the one who is perceived as not being forgiving. Sure, if the offender asks for forgiveness, or rightfully put, begs the offended to forgive, and if the victim feels so, they may oblige the request to put the offender at ease. This may be considered acceptable if the offender has addressed the situation to the satisfaction of the person they offended or the victim, and is considered to be genuinely sorry for their mistake with an unconditional willingness to repent for their behavior as required by the offended.
Now, what if a crime was not actually committed, but assumed to have been committed? Very often, in cases of mental or emotional hurt, human beings make the mistake of assuming wrongdoing especially if they themselves or someone they love has been hurt. Because of varying value systems that people adopt or build in life, the definition of morality and ethical behavior changes from person to person. Without a universal agreement on such issues of human behavior, it thus becomes impossible to judge an act that caused hurt as an offense, leave alone the consideration that it needs to be forgiven.
From another perspective of values, it may even be perceived that the person feeling victimized or hurt is in fact the offender himself/herself. Hence, in such cases, unless the offense can be analyzed, dissected, and universally accepted as an act of misdoing, the argument to forgive does not even arise. More importantly, it can be argued that a person unilaterally (or supported by those sharing a value system) declaring to forgive someone may be pretentious especially when the perceived offender does not accept or agree that an offense has been committed. Taking such a high-handed position of forgiveness is in fact a reflection of arrogance.
For those who believe in the concept of God, it should be simpler to understand that only a universal superpower would have the ability to objectively judge the actions committed by human beings and decide who to forgive and how. Humans with a moral bent of mind can only ask for forgiveness for the mistakes they make or pray to a higher power to forgive those they want to be forgiven. Beyond that, they must realize that their capabilities are limited and therefore, it is best not to endow a badge of greatness on oneself by behaving as if they have the power of forgiveness in a unilateral manner. Considering this, their right to forgive somebody can only be given to them by the person asking for forgiveness. And if and when that occurs, their decision to forgive is not obligatory and is only limited to the comfort they provide to the offender. Depending on the situation, it may or may not even be ethical to absolve someone who is unaware and unrepentant of their mistake. More importantly, the act of forgiveness should not be confused with the act of survival where one tries to overcome an emotional downfall in an effort to continue with life.
This brings us to the second part of the proverbial “Forgive and Forget” where it is expected that a person who has been victimized should forget the incident of hurt. There are several flaws in this. First, it says that in certain cases, forgetting is a good thing. Then it assumes that forgetting is under a human being’s control. Furthermore, it does not even consider the damaging repercussions of living under the misconception of having forgotten something that may resurface later beyond one’s control.
Since our inception into this world, we are taught and encouraged to build our memory. Memory has always been considered as one of the biggest assets of human beings and it is what equips us to grow and survive. If the human brain is considered to be the most superior of all parts and living beings, then the role of memory in making the brain smart cannot be ignored. Tremendous amounts of time, money and energy get spent in finding ways to enhance one’s memory. Memory is what governs our thinking, our knowledge, and our ability to apply this knowledge towards our actions. It is the memory that helps us to remember not to repeat the mistakes of the past and to grow in a positive manner.
Then suddenly, when something happens that shakes our resolve, we are taught to forget, to fail to remember. The excuse given is that it is better to forget bad or negative things, incidents that have caused us physical, mental or emotional hurt. Certainly, it may be perceived that if we forget, then it becomes easier for us to recover from the pain and trauma caused to us, and simultaneously helps us to overcome any negative feelings towards the person who has hurt us.
The question is, can we really forget? Yes, we can try to, but as modest human beings not in complete control of our body and mind, we do not possess supernatural powers to remember and forget at will. Distractions and other temporary methods may push the incident away from our active memory, thus fooling us to believe that it has indeed been forgotten. But such painful experiences end up staying hidden deep down in our episodic memory where they may lie dormant, until triggered by another event in the future when the memory finds a way through an emotional, irrational, and unjust outburst referring back to an incident or negative experience that was supposed to have been forgotten! Such examples not only expose our failure in forgetting but also unravel the potential danger of burying feelings that may reveal themselves in future situations in the most undesirable ways.
Hence, rather than trying to forget, or being arrogant about having the ability to do so, the wise thing is to address the situation, deal with the issues, and find a way to overcome the pain and hurt. This enables one to face the problem rather than try and escape from it thereby bringing some sort of a closure to the incident or relationship in question. This in turn empowers us to act positively instead of enslaving us to the unpredictable whims of our inert memory and leaving the door open for it to rear its ugly head without our permission.
Since memory is indeed a prized commodity, we should never be frivolous in tampering with it. Rather, we should always make every effort to remember everything, good and bad, learn from it, and strengthen ourselves for a sustainable survival. Moreover, we should not be arrogant in believing that we have complete control over our memory.
Therefore, rather than preaching about the greatness of “forgive and forget”, one should teach and encourage how to move ahead positively without forgiving or forgetting. The real trick or greatness must lie in the ability to address the pain and find a way not to be negatively affected by it nor act with negativity in the future. If at all, it may someday be possible to forget, which may happen as a result of age or disease which is a physical condition, and therefore can be attributed to factors beyond our control. In such circumstances, those memories surrounding unpleasant experiences may dissipate without our efforts and those we want to remember may vanish against our wishes. But before that happens in a natural manner, it is most necessary to find the strength to survive through the pain and develop feelings that help one to recuperate and look forward without losing one’s ability to remember.
While forgiveness is a state of mind practiced by someone who has been or feels to have been offended, it does not guarantee that the feelings of hurt have vanished forever. Unless properly addressed and dealt with, suppressed feelings of resentment often reside deep within people and constantly create in them biased opinions about the world that they are themselves unaware of. If an incident causing a negative experience is forgotten naturally by the offended person, then it may be perceived that the offender was forgiven. Otherwise, we should always remember that pure forgetting and forgiving are not under our control and we can only devise ways to live with every experience we have, creating positive feelings for our own survival, and helping an offender to be absolved of their wrongdoing if it seems appropriate and ethical. Being aware of our limitations as human beings will help us to rid ourselves of the arrogance and stop us from trivializing the usage of the words “forgive and forget”. It is only then that we can teach ourselves to understand the real intention behind the phrase in order to enable us in successfully overcoming our weaknesses for making responsible and ethical choices for a sustainable state of peaceful existence.