*"There are no two people in the world whose thoughts are 100% similar. There is always some difference in their thoughts. *"Wherever there is a difference in the thoughts of two people, there also arise problems like differences of opinion, fights, quarrels, hatred etc. In such a situation, both those people tolerate some things of each other. And some things cannot be tolerated. When they cannot tolerate, then they start complaining about each other in the society." "That is, as time passes, if their differences increase, then the conflict of speech and behavior also increases. Then one or both of those people start complaining about each other to the people of the society."*
And this thing of psychology is often seen, that *"When a person complains about another person, he does not speak impartially. He presents his point with bias. He hides his faults, does not tell them properly and completely. Tells less. And exaggerates the faults of the other person. So that the person listening turns against him and gives a decision in favour of the person accusing him. Most people do this except for some truthful people. *
Then the person listening should be careful that *"Whenever he hears someone else's fault, he should not consider that person guilty without testing it with direct inference and other evidences. Rather, he should examine those allegations with direct evidences." "If the accused person is found guilty, then he should consider him guilty. And if he has the right to punish him, then he should punish him." "And if even after testing with direct inference and other evidences, that person is not proved guilty, then he should punish the person who made the false allegation." "By doing this, the tendency of making false allegations and spoiling the image of others will be reduced in the people of the society. Injustice will be reduced in the society, and everyone will get justice. Everyone's happiness will increase." *
*"Therefore, if someone tells you about someone's fault, then you should also not consider him guilty or a criminal without testing it with direct inference and other evidences. Rather, first examine him with direct evidence. And if that person is found guilty, and if you have the right to punish him, then you must punish him. And if he is proved innocent with direct evidence, then punish the person who made the false accusation. *
If you do not have the right to punish him, then you must tell the person who made the false accusation, *"You are such an educated and intelligent person, yet you present the matter in such a biased manner and spread confusion in the society. This act of yours is not good. Please do not do this in future. Otherwise, when some other person also makes such false allegations against you and spreads confusion in the society and spoils your image, then you will also not like it."*
In fact, the best thing is that *"Don't listen to one person at all. When both those persons are present in front of you, and both of them are ready to accept your decision, then only your time spent in listening and the time spent by the other person in telling will be worthwhile, otherwise it will be useless. There will be no positive result from it. Rather, there will be some confusion, and if a wrong decision is given, there will be some harm to the society."*
*"Therefore, be very careful while listening to someone, and give your decision without any bias, so that everyone's happiness increases."*
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें