AT THE CENTER OF NONVIOLENCE
We now move to what is the core of Nonviolent engagement: the application of love. I stress the word application because many profess the accolades of love -- some even professing there is no greater force in the universe than love. Yet when it comes time to act, many choose or allow something other than love to be the determining force of their actions. King addresses this head-on, in a way that emphasizes a practical application of love to how we engage (in actions) the conditions we encounter.
King continues in the article:
A fifth point concerning nonviolent resistance is that it avoids not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. The nonviolent resister not only refuses to shoot his opponent but he also refuses to hate him. At the center of nonviolence stands the principle of love.{88} (emphasis mine)
We have already explained how love, a maturity of ahimsa, is one of the pillars of Satyagraha and Nonviolence. In fact, Gandhi describes love as “the active state of ahimsa.”{89} But what does love really mean in a practical sense within the conditions of addressing injustice and oppression?
To begin answering this question, King first clearly delineates love from hatred. Even in situations of severe oppression, where the mental disposition of anger may be justified, he calls for adherents of Nonviolence to uphold the maturity that refrains from responding to hatred with hatred:
To retaliate in kind [with bitterness and hatred] would do nothing but intensify the existence of hate in the universe. Along the way of life, someone must have sense enough and morality enough to cut off the chain of hate. This can only be done by projecting the ethic of love to the center of our lives.{90}
Many philosophical and ethical arguments have been made throughout human history that warn of the foolish danger of responding to hate with hate. The continuing predominance of conflict and suffering, even in a so-called “civilized age,” is proof enough of the fallacy of seeking to eradicate hatred by hatred. (Remember the war to end all wars which was followed by more unending wars and armed conflicts.) In light of this, King says it is time for those who sincerely wish to overcome hatred to grow up: to be sensible and moral enough to not succumb to the destructive immaturity of hatred.
A sure way to transcend the immaturity of hatred is to have love be the defining means through which we live. To this point, Gandhi states:
The solitary Satyagrahi has to examine himself. If he has universal love and if he fulfills the conditions implied in such a state, it must find its expression in his daily conduct.{91}
When we literally live every single action -- including the small ones -- through love, we safeguard our lives from falling into the domain of hatred. This is a danger we should not underestimate since so much cultural and social conditioning orients us toward hatred -- sometimes in ways we are unaware of.
So, again emphasizing the practical application of this, a direct and obvious question arises: what is love? King addresses this question in precise and practical terms to be applied to the specific conditions we face. First, he clarifies:
In speaking of love at this point, we are not referring to some sentimental or affectionate emotion. It would be nonsense to urge men to love their oppressors in an affectionate sense.{92}
Sentimentality and affectionate emotion can become means by which to be manipulated. This plays out even in situations where the parties involved have friendly relations, so how much more in oppressive conditions? Instead of this, King offers a working definition of what he means by love and then references three Greek terms to further explain:
Love in this connection means understanding, redemptive good will. When we speak of loving those who oppose us, we refer to neither eros nor philia; we speak of a love which is expressed in the Greek word agape.{93}
In reflecting on what it means to engage those who oppress us with a good will that is understanding and redemptive, the clarity of the Greek terms offer valuable assistance. Greek is relevant because the books of the New Testament (of the Bible - mainstream versions) were written in Greek, including the four Gospels which give accounts of Jesus’ life. In An Experiment In Love, King does not explain what eros and philia mean -- probably for the sake of keeping the article short. But he did so in another article titled Nonviolence and Racial Justice, which was published a year prior in 1957. He writes:
There are three words for love in the Greek New Testament. First, there is eros. In Platonic philosophy eros meant the yearning of the soul for the realm of the divine. It has come now to mean a sort of aesthetic or romantic love.{94}
When confronting injustice and oppression, none of the above meanings of eros fit the approach of Nonviolence. To yearn for the realm divine while suffering injustice on earth can lead to avoidance, denial, and escapism. King was critical of those in the Black community who were willing to bear injustice without challenging it, having faith they will be rewarded for their hardships in heaven. Nor should we adore the beauty of our oppressors or engage them in romantic swooning as a remedy to unjust treatment: such will rarely end injustice or lay the framework for beneficial community building.
King continues:
Second, there is philia. It meant intimate affectionateness between friends. Philia denotes a sort of reciprocal love: the person loves because he is loved.{95}
Although Nonviolence works to establish healthy community (some may say friendliness) among all parties involved, philia is not appropriate where oppression and injustice prevail. When someone consistently oppresses you and treats you unjustly, such a person is not your friend despite what that one professes. This becomes more evident when notice is given of the oppression and injustice and yet the person continues to inflict these upon you. Such situations are not befitting to the intimate affections and reciprocal sharing that occurs among friends. The intimacy of such sharing requires some vulnerability which we should not expose to those who oppress and treat us unjustly. To engage philia in these circumstances can leave us exposed to further exploitation, abuse, and manipulation -- and sometimes through our own actions of offering benefits to those who take advantage of us.
So King is very clear:
When we speak of loving those who oppose us, we refer to neither eros nor philia; we speak of a love which is expressed in the Greek word agape. Agape means understanding, redeeming good will for all men.{96}
Hopefully, it is clear by now how cultivating understanding (even if through creatively exposing existing tension) is a vital component of Nonviolence. So too are redemption (including forgiveness and reconciliation) and good will (beneficial intentions for and relations with others). To offer assistance in assessing whether we are truly imbibing these, King offers descriptions of what agape in action involves:
It is an overflowing love which is purely spontaneous, unmotivated, groundless, and creative. It is not set in motion by any quality or function of its object. It is the love of God operating in the human heart.{97} (emphasis mine)
The last sentence is key. Often, even if with good intentions, many seek to embody the qualities listed above through their own self- based (mind / ego-based) efforts. As noble as such efforts may be, these often fail; or in the rare instances where a person achieves such through these efforts, excessive energy and strain are often required to not only attain but also sustain these qualities. But when we surrender to a spiritual path, and tread what may be challenging transitions to drop who we hold ourselves to be (personal identification), the spiritual path reveals our genuine human nature. This lays beyond the mind in the heart -- the innermost essence of our being. Herein, “the love of God” operates powerfully yet effortlessly. And we find this love, with its amazing qualities, overflowing within and through us -- the overflows permeating our interactions with