Even now, many armed conflicts are ongoing in the world. It is unusual for people living in developed countries like Japan to actually and deeply know the tragedies of wars or armed conflicts. Such people would only touch a fraction of the tragedies through news media from somewhere or by a short passage printed in history books at most. But we can imagine there were people in the wars or armed conflicts who watch their houses burned in dismay, who shed sorrowful tears facing the corps of their beloved ones, and people who had everything taken away by the inferno of atomic bombs.
We can assume that the people, especially those in such tragedies, have sought to find a better society in the word "peace". Then, what is true peace?
In this essay, I show my answer to the question and present it as the Fundamental Philosophy of Peace.

Firstly I compare several concepts that are translated into "peace" in several languages.

"Santih" (Sanskrit): The main meanings of this word are "spiritually fulfilled peace of mind", “inner tranquility”, and "calmness of mind that could not be disturbed by pains or pleasures”.

"Pax" (Latin): In addition to the meaning “peace” in English, this word also means "treaty".

"Mir" (Russian and Serb-Croat): In addition to the meaning “peace” in English, this word also means "world"

"Frieden"(German): In addition to the meaning of peace in English, this word is said to be etymologically derived from "frei"(freedom) and "freund" (friend). And its origin from Indo European word "pri" is considered to contain the meaning of "to love" and "to care"

. "Eirene"(Hellenic): The main meaning of this word is "a state of no war" and "a short term between wars" same as "Negative Peace".

"Shalom" (Hebrew): In addition to the meaning of peace in English, this word includes a lot of meanings in it; It primary means "wholeness" and "perfection", and the shade of meaning are "accomplishment", “completion” "maturity", "healthiness", "integrity”, "community", "harmony", "calmness", "safeness", "happiness", "welfare", "friendship", "coordination", "success", and "prosperity".

"Salam"(Arabian origin): In addition to the meaning of peace in English, this word also means "healthiness" and "greeting". According to ""Koran"" this word also means "peace of this world and the other world"

"Heiwa" (Japanese): In addition to the meaning of peace in English, "hei" means "equality", " justice", " balanced states" and "harmony". "wa" means "softness”. It is also said that "wa” means a state of people not striving and so eating grains, and that "a tender language like an appearance of ear of rice bending before the wind".

These concepts of "Peace" are semantically classified into four: Inner Peace, Outer Peace, Negative Peace and Positive Peace. Inner Peace means peace inside of man, i.e. peace of mind. Santih is classified into this. "Outer peace" means a peace in a social relationship. Negative Peace means "absence of war". Positive Peace means a state of society which is affluent, harmonious, safe, democratic, respecting human rights, promoting welfare, filled with arts, fairness, richness, etc. in addition to absence of war. (Mr. Gultung’s definition of Positive Peace is different. For him, it means “integration of human society”)
Positive Peace is conversely derived from Negative Peace, regarding the latter as state of no peace, since it might include incompletion such as state of oppression, wide gap between rich and poor, and a colonial oppression even if there were no actual wars happening during Negative Peace.

I cannot regard all of the above mentioned concepts of peace as complete ones, because sufferings and conflicts among human beings might exist in the state of them. For example, even if somebody could attain, "Santih", a peace of mind, it is possible that his neighbors might be starving or freezing. In a Negative Peace, such as "Eirene", bloodshed might exist. Even if a society was filled with a lot of products and arts, and if all of the existing human rights are respected, they cannot fulfill all needs of the people perfectly. For example, the Right to Sunshine did not exist until recently.

Since the world, to which human beings are destined to be located, is always changing and their physical shapes and conditions, along with psychological are changing from birth to death, it is impossible that human beings can reach the permanent peace of mind, although it can be attained to some degree.
Whatever discipline a person attains and even if a person reached a spiritual enlightenment through a strict discipline of Buddhism to fast until entering into death being away from his neighbors, It must be impossible and meaningless for us "living" in a society. Accordingly, the peace of mind of human beings could only be attained intermittently in the substantial life. In short, "Inner peace" is an intermittent one.
It must be the same as "Outer peace". In a relationship in a certain situation, people can act in a way that won't be unpleasant to each other almost perfectly, while sometimes they dispute contrary. In other words, in human life and its social relationship, we can assume two opposing extreme; permanent pleasure, and permanent pain.

In light of the above representation, I am going to present the new concept of peace.
It is "Joyous Coexistence."
More particularly, it is a state in which people hold a permanent joy as an ideal where everyone permanently live a life full of joy and likewise in their relationships, then will be content with the status quo when they achieve a certain level of quality of life, and still, seek for a better condition progressively when they have an extra energy.
The reason why the ideal will finally be a state "to seek progressively" instead of "to achieve" is that we cannot achieve a permanent joy in reality.

I consider that this is a new concept of peace: Joyous Coexistence, which makes up for limitation of the previous ones.
Supplementary Explanation: The reason why I mentioned "become content with the status quo when they achieve a certain level (of quality of life)" is that seeking perfection excessively without affirming the status quo has a opposite effect to their joyfulness.

There are sayings like "the desire of perfection is the worst disease that can afflict the human mind."(Emerson) or “A contented mind is a perpetual feast.”

Seeking perfection is a noble thing, however, doing it without affirming the status quo causes displeasure and dissatisfaction, and leads to unhappiness.
Perfectionism could be a cause of depression.

Therefore, it is also necessary to be satisfied with the status quo, and to seek for a better society after that.

However, we should not be satisfied with the status quo if we are in extremis such as an incessant and a terrible hunger or conflict.
It obviously has room for improvement, since then, we should "accept" reality in the firsthand.

In other words and generally speaking, we should not be immediately satisfied with the status quo while accepting reality until a certain level of needs in biological and social sense would be fulfilled, then achieving a certain level and taking the state as satisfactory, we should seek for the improvement.

Also, it may be important not to be aware of some problems or ideals.
Because just to know about them, even if it has nothing directly to do with someone, it could lead to his/her unhappiness in cases where he/she feels unpleasant or frustrated because he/she thinks he/she cannot solve, improve and cope with those problems, or achieve those ideals.

It could be criticized saying that it is impossible to realize the Joyous Coexistence because of the selfishness of human beings.
Yes. It is impossible to “attain” Joyous Coexistence completely. As I have mentioned above, the goal of the ideal is not a thing to be attained but sought. Actually, because of the selfishness, we occasionally act being far away from Joyous Coexistence, in the dispute of insisting only one's own interests. For example, people sometimes favor conflict, even in the case where it damage others. I can show one typical example among many of them; A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies by Bartolomé de las Casas. And even if some of us set it as a goal to realize the state where man-made products are affluent and hunger is overcome, not necessarily everybody hopes for that. But by the act of adjusting interests, even being selfish, we can realize Joyous Coexistence to some degree. For example, when we divide works, the self-interested activities could be correspondingly profitable for the others, although not perfectly: Egoism and altruism do not always contradict. Human beings have ability to adjust things and are able to narrow the gap of the egoism and altruism for its coordination. I consider these are very important for Joyous Coexistence. Selfishness should not necessarily be morally denied. Since if a person did not fulfill his self-interests at all, he would be unpleasant and Joyous Coexistence would not be realized. Contrary, if a person never does any good for others, i.e., if one's deeds were not profitable at all for others, Joyous Coexistence would never be realized.
So I consider it is important to adjust the balance between egoism and altruism for its coordination in order to realize Joyous Coexistence.

It is also important to love even your enemies for Joyous Coexistence. The enemies of yours might be ones whom you hate and sometimes you might hurt. But through the deed of love (agape: unconditional love. It is different from neither “Eros" nor "affection"), the conflicting relationships in which people even hope the opponent's death could be changed for the better. By the act of loving our enemies, we will not miss the opportunities to understand our opponents and maintain the positive possibilities to alter the relationships for the better.

Since the aspects of human relationships have wide variety and human beings are imperfect, the state of "Joyous Coexistence" in a reality is diverse, comparative and not perfectly attained. If I could indicate examples of Joyous Coexistence, they would be the ones that are much more closer to Joyous Coexistence compared with other states of relationships, since any state is not perfect. For example, if we could achieve a day when Jews and Palestinian could live together joyfully and respecting each other. This was the case in the days of Former Yugoslavia when different ethnic and religious groups had coexisted as good neighbors sharing various good things like food, smiles, etc. among them. This is an example of "Joyous coexistence". However in the present situation in Palestine, there are conflicts, many are killed by terrorist acts, and Palestinian’s employment rights are badly restricted and their standard of living is poor

After comparing the several concepts that are translated into peace, I presented a new concept - "Joyous Coexistence".

Considering the substantial aspects of life, Joyous Coexistence is an idea in which the goal is not a thing to be attained but to be sought. However, it is gained by satisfying the status quo at some degrees.

To love your enemy is also important element in seeking the idea; in order to overcome a hostile relationship and change it into a friendly and joyful one.

It is clear that in light of this new concept, there still remains a lot of problems to be solved. I believe we can solve these remaining problems because we have already made a lot of dreams come true.