What is Ethics/Morality - A Riddle... :(

[Guest guest]

As Swami Sivananda says the normal world, is full of

SEX AND EGO.

Infact both are same but the manifestations of one

another,

which takes us towards delusion and away from the

truth.

 

We have seen almost every discussions beased on this

EGO.

People especially in our country like India, get very

emberassed to talk or discuss spirituality wrt SEX.

 

I've read that morality is ground and means for

spiritual awakening but not the end.

Without a chaste brain nothing can be seen.

 

Okay, but what is chastisity when it comes to sex.

It depends really on culture to culture.

Especially nowadays even in inda, we see lots of

college kids,

engaged in free casual sex based on mutual agreement.

 

But these do not necessarily convey that they are less

spitiual than a heartless lala, who has no compassion

towards

any other person, other than himself and his

wife,children.

 

But there are also people among these, who do not

harm anyone, quite open, good citizens...

The only weakness(??) being sex.

 

So far so good, the no-committment affair

goes on for some time but when it comes to marriage,

its all about committment,trust,openness.

It then becomes so awkward to reveal your true

personality

to the partner, so there is no openness.

According to me such a relationship serves no purpose.

 

Now again, there may be difficulties in giving up the

old habits, and there is this clear case of cheating.

 

My point now is, there is another case, commonly seen

in foriegn

nations where most people consider sex as just another

need and

life goes on with mutual agreements, understandings.

Short term relationships.

 

Is this anti-social, if its not affecting any1 else

around?

I am not able to convince myself completely, where is

the mistake.

Though I know there has to be wrong something,

somewhere in this philosophy.

 

Especially I see this attitude of objectivism

in fans of Ayn rand's writings.

Her questions are valid. But the answers suggested

there, looks

very antisocial to me.

These are really troubling for a guy like me who has

been brought up

in an orthodox family and all of a sudden I see a

culture shock.

Especially in the software industry i see these

affairs

popping up around us like mushrooms.

 

With so much of artificiality hipocrisy around,

is the institution of marriage in current scenario

getting hollow?

I personally feel as long as divorce exists, marriage

had no meaning!

What is the role of marriage and ethical living in

spirituality???

What if tomorrow, the girl I get married to (if at all

I marry), is the so-called-broadminded "individual"

who doesnt value morality?

 

Some quotes...

 

A wise man should avoid married life as if it were a

burning pit of live coals. From the contact comes

sensation, from sensation thirst, from thirst

clinging; by ceasing from that, the soul is delivered

from all sinful existence.

- Lord Buddha

 

Hari Om.

 

Pradeep

 

 

PS: I know my thougts are very confused, but i hope

someone can understand, whats

troubling me for long. The concept of good/bad wrt

relativity of space/time/causation is

hard to digest and I dont see any point in marriage.

 

PPS: Pardon me for my ignorant thougts, but i want to learn...

 

=====

When dealing with people, let us remember we are not dealing with creatures of

logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotion, creatures bustling with

prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity.

Dale Carnegie

 

The great question that has never been answered and which I have not been able

to answer....is, What does a woman want?

--Sigmund Freud

[Guest guest]

"Love (including sex) in it's first impulse is Divine, but as soon

as it manifests itself in action, it gets wraped with individualised

ego,prejudices and self and becomes a poision bringing in the

spiritual death"------ Sri Maa, Auroibindo Ashram Pondichery.

 

As for morality and ethics, anything and everything which is

hypocritic is immoral and evrything and anything which is done

truthfully is ethical.

This is my understanding. I dont expect evryone to agree to it. But

dont let sex be an obssesion.

Love,

Satish

[Guest guest]

Dear Pradeep,

 

I would suggest that we should not be that absolute about anything,

we should try to look into it without any prejudices. Sex is part of

life and if it was something immoral then I can assure you it would

never be the creation of nature/god. It is our wrong assumptions

towards it that create all the prejudices and the mental problems in

people's minds. As a matter of fact people from all eras have had

various fears and prejudices when it comes to that subject. The

reason to that is that the sexual energy is extremely powerful, it is

a manifestation of the kundalini. Now kundalini is shakti, a creative

force. When we are ignorant about the mysteries of kundalini, it is

only natural that expressions such as the sexual ones will leave us

in doubt, wondering what is hidden behind them in terms of energy.

SEX IS AN OCCULT PHENOMENON according to my opinion, and a great

opportunity to transcend the physical boundaries and enter the world

of spirit. That is, if one uses it in the right way. But then

again... to me the whole world is an occult phenomenon! I think we

should take advantage of any opportunities we get in the world to try

and raise our vibrations. Be that encountering the nature and melting

into it, becoming conscious of the wonders of sleep and dreams, sex

(however not exactly regular one) or even death itself (when the

natural time for it comes).

 

The truth is that there is a catch. If we go beyond the limits of

logic and nature, then we will surely get problems. And thats where

the prejudices of people are based on. But this is valid for

everything in life, it is NOT NATURAL to misuse any power of force

that has been given to us from God. There is a subtle line that sets

the limits between using and misusing something and that is the line

that we should be cautious not to violate. Note that misusing refers

not only to overuse but to under-use too (and there are reasons for

that too). I have written it before and I will write it

again. "Virtous is that which has a limit."

 

Now you may wonder, which is that catch? Well, that catch is a purely

energetical one, and has nothing to do with morality. Morality comes

into existence only when "authorities" try to forbid things without

explaining the real reasons to them. That is what has happened to all

our religions and dogmas, they forgot to explain to people the

reasons behind all those rules. They still talk in the language they

talked to people way before the medivial era, when people had no

education, which is really impossible to use it to communicate with a

modern citizen. And yet religions stil do it, to makes us believe

that they possess some knowledge which cannot be understood by

anyother apart from them, so that we blindly follow them. And here I

must mention that the christian church has many more prejudices on

the matter of sex than hinduism. The thing is that no christian

listens to the church anymore, just like the indians that dont listen

to their original dogmas . This and one other is the reason as why

there is such misunderstanding in modern india about sex and

marriage. The other reason is that families are stil very

traditional, societies are very close and the parents overprotective

to the point of depriving their adult-children of their natural

freedom. I am sure you know what I am talking about, I am talking

about arranged marriages. And I am talking about the condemnation of

divorce from the indian society. These are tools to control people

and deprive them of their freedom and happiness. Thats the fault of

the people who dont revolute against the regime and allow their lives

be controlled in this way...Its a sort of slavery such as the one to

the British. Mahatma Ghandi said that the Indians must firstly

revolute against themselves, to be able to finally revolute against

the British.

 

This goes beyond what conscerns us about sadhana though.

 

Being a brahmachary can boost ones spiritual progress a lot because

the shakti accumulated from meditation is not being used for other

purposes. Some sadhanas require from the sadhaka to be a brahmachary

for a certain period of time. On the other hand, if one has not

learned to use his accumulated shakti for spiritual purposes, then

abstaining from sex can lead to energetical problems/blocks in the

subtle body. And those can truly be harmful and cause mental

illnesses such as depression. Thats why we should again consider the

middle path.

 

Namaste!

[Guest guest]

My sincere Thanks to every1 for the initial

responses...

I expect more views on this..

 

Like...I found some opinions controversial..

It may be my prejudice, but i found this hard to

digest.

 

Angie wrote

------------

And I am talking about the condemnation of

divorce from the indian society.

-------------

 

Isnt divorce really a condemnable thing? I thought it

is one of the social evil.

Can we have divorce with our parents? Can god have

divorce with his children like us?

Then how can divorce exist if marriage is considered

something divine!!

I agree if marriage is considered as just another

transaction then roll-back also exists .. But I always

thought marrriage makes sense, when

bonding,affection,uncondiotional love,divinity come

into picture.

 

(Please note that i am still talking in terms of a

very novice probable seeker..not a seeker already)

 

I recently read in a newspaper about the concept of

"wife swapping"... Do you mean to say, this looks

awkward but really isnt wrong, if done occassionally?

 

The fact is i seem to be misunderstanding the

statement "there is really nothing right or wrong but

its only our thinking that makes it so... "

That is troubling me.

 

I am in a phase where I would move from brahmacharya

ashrama to grihastha ashrama, and I am caught

between..can say..between morality and necessity.

Wud marriage really be a bondage or mere fulfilling

responsibilities.

 

On one hand, I personally blv marriage for sake of

marriage or in other words for sake of lust wud be an

act of hipocrisy and wud definitely not lead in any

growth or spiritual elevation,

 

On the other hand, in the contemporary world, its

tough (though not impossible) to abstain totally from

the colorful temptations of the world, with both sex

equally aggressive.

 

If not for this sex, other things are quite clear as

of what is Dharma and Adharmas.

 

Again please pardon me for my ignorance. I dont know

whom to ask these questions... so approaching the

group. I hope u ppl understand my catch-22 situation

caused due to my own ignorance.

 

Hari Om.

Pradeep

 

 

 

Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

http://taxes./filing.html

[Guest guest]

Dear Pradeep,

your views about marriage are truly very idealistic. You say:

 

-----------

Isnt divorce really a condemnable thing? I thought it is one of the

social evil. Can we have divorce with our parents? Can god have

divorce with his children like us? Then how can divorce exist if

marriage is considered something divine!! I agree if marriage is

considered as just another transaction then roll-back also exists ..

But I always thought marrriage makes sense, when bonding,

affection,uncondiotional love,divinity come into picture.

------------

 

Your perspective of marriage is respectable, thats how it should be.

Two people living together due to their bonds of true love... However

we should be practical and realistic. Marriage is NOT when two people

are living together due to society bonds! And such marriages should

break up, because they are ruining the name of marriage, when they

describe their relation by that name!

 

If we truly respect the divinity of marriage , then we would not

allow that people remain married when the divinity is not there! We

should look into the ESSENSE of things, not into their shop-window!

 

And thats why the option of divorce should be there, and it should be

respected by the society, because it serves its purpose and saves

people from being ruined physically or psychologically.

 

Unfortunately, this world is not perfect, no... its far from

perfect... very far from perfect actually, and from what I see around

me most marriages are unhappy. You cannot compare God with humans

like us! It is essential that we compare similar things , we cannot

compare the spiritual marriage to God , to the human marriage to

another human. The first relation is eternal, the second is just a

way of nature to settle our karmas. This does not mean that true love

cannot exist between two people. However, if this love is not there

and those people lead a miserable life, then what is the sense in

making them suffer more and more by condemning them in a lifetime-

torture through marriage?

 

This can be worse than a life sentence in prison!

 

Imagine a woman being beaten up by her husband, because he is not

spiritual at all. He is a drunkard, the wife suffers and her safety

is in danger and so do her children.

 

What would be immoral in this case?

1.The wife seeking protection from the police and applying for

divorce?

2.The drunkard beating up his wife?

 

???

 

Facts speak for themselves. This is not a situation that occurs

everyday, however it is a real situation and unfortunately there are

many similar ones in our world either we realize it or not.

 

Imagine a man who is a spiritual seeker, living with a woman who

doesnt have the slightest respect for that. On the contrary she makes

a great psychological war for him and ruins his mental peace. Their

children experience everyday their parents fighting, sadness and

disorder prevails in the house. However, the man who suffers from

chronic depression, did not know that this woman is so heartless

because he never saw her nor talked to her before marriage, since his

parents set everything up.

 

Whom should we condemn?

1.The man seeking divorce to restore his mental peace?

2.The woman that made his life hell on earth?

a.The parents for taking tyrannic decisions on behalf of their son?

b.The man for not being mature and strong enough to decide for

himself?

------

 

Unfortunately, cases like the last one are much more common than the

first one. I challenge you to approach people who are over the age of

35 and ask them sincerely if they are leading a happy marriage.

 

In order to reduce the possibility of falling into such difficulties

when getting married the parents should never interfere with the

wishes and needs of their children. Adult persons have the mental

maturity and the constitutional freedom to form their own life. So

that they can never blame another person, be that the parents, for

ruining their life due to their wrong choice. This has also to do

with becoming responsible and a strong individual. Weak are those who

allow others to think and decide for themselves.

 

Please dont misunderstand what I am writing. I dont imply that people

should jumb from one bed to the other, changing husbands and wifes

and misusing their right to divorce. This is the other side of the

coin and it is also an extrem, such as the extreme of being unable to

divorce. Extremes are never virtous. And we should use our rights for

their purpose, we should not misuse them.

 

Finally, I would like to mention that for a sadhaka and for any other

person, its of highest value and great necessity to lead a happy and

harmonious married life. If married people suffer, they can never

advance spiritualy since meditation and sadhana require a peaceful

and happy state of mind. That is why the option of divorce should be

there, it should be respected by society, it should be used within

the limits of reason and it should be honoured as a delivering human

right.

 

_/|\_

[Guest guest]

Pradeep ji,

I am happy that you are posing those questions, not merely for

discussion, but for your own guidence. Having read about your

confusion whether to marry or not etc. I feel there are some basic

questions one must ask to his/her own self and then proceed further

in acordane with the inner conscience. these qns are :-

1. What is the purpose of my birth ?

2. Who an I ? Am I my flesh and blood only which changes every 6

years (scientific postulation) or some entity free from "body" ?

3. What are dos and dont does for me in the given society in which I

live.

Forget about sex, morality ethics, and try to question yr own self.

I am sure that honest and earnest enquiry must lead you to correct

path.

Love,

Satish

[Guest guest]

The moral and ethics have no value for two types of persons; those

with no dharma in them and living life of a demon; and also for those

who have attained Nirvikalpa samadhi and have transcended the

physical plane. But we all here are in between these two and have to

follow morals and ethics. If Mother Nature has given us birth in a

society, She expects us to abide by the rules and morals set by that

society, because She has given this body to fulfil certain karmic

debts and unnecessarily revolting against the rules and morals of the

society, will be disastarous spiritually.

 

The morals and ethics of the society in which we are born are like

barbed wire protection for a tender plant which needs protection till

it becomes a mighty tree.

 

In Hindu dharma, marriage is a sacred thing it is considered as

union of shiva and shakti to help in running of the universe. NOw

extra marital relations, divorces and swapping is really against the

ethics of our dharma.

 

I have seen many of my known persons, who had a sour domestic life

and once they started on the sadhna path sincerely, all probs in the

domestic life vanished and they started loving their partner and

getting love too.

 

Make an honest analysis of those couples who are fighting and are

preparing for divorce and you will find that none of them is on the

path of sadhna. So For a common person it is obvious to be troubled

by Maya

 

The key to all these is DO SADHNA and see how beautifully Mother

Nature arranges things for you. Those who are dragging your soul

downwards, will be removed from your life and those who are helpful

will be brought back to you forcefully. It is my practical

experience that instead of fighting with so many confusions and

negativity, if we only sincerely concentrate on our sadhna, all these

confusions are sorted out automatically.

 

AMEN

[Guest guest]

Pradeep's question "

> But these do not necessarily convey that they are less

> spitiual than a heartless lala, who has no compassion

> towards

> any other person, other than himself and his

> wife,children.

>

> But there are also people among these, who do not

> harm anyone, quite open, good citizens...

> The only weakness(??) being sex.

 

was very imp but nobody looked into this. Any comments ?

[Guest guest]

I have a lot of respect for your views and I apreciate them, but I am

going to have to disagree. I think we should take our life in our

hands and not blindly follow the way of life that people have set as

ethical. If morality was objective then it would be the same for all

people of the world, and for all societies. The morality of a person-

"A" may be different than the morality of a person-"B", this would

make person-A look immoral in the eyes of person-B. On the other

hand, person-B would think that person-A is immoral. When, in the

very end, both of them are people who lead spiritual lives. So

morality is something relative.

 

In my society, if I say that I am a Hindu then people will make me an

outcast. The will not come to my office, they will not visit my

house. What kind of morality is this(?) that forces a person to hide

its soul from the public. In my society, if you are a vegetarian you

are considered to be a member of a sect! My relatives never miss to

point out how immoral it is not to eat meat and how immoral it is to

go to yoga class! Yet I consider all these limitations of their own

minds, limitations of the society and limitations of the church that

condemn yoga as a sect.

 

I want to be free! Free from the prejudices or any society, I want to

experience life as it really is and not as people want to present it

to me. And if I had never had this revolutionary spirit, I would

never be able to practice any sadhna in my society, when even family

members try to prevent me from that. The great thirst for freedom and

for an objective, true and divine knowledge are the fuels of my life.

And to me its not worth living as a prisoner of the opinions of any

society.

 

_/|\_

[Guest guest]

Dear Angie,

 

Hmm..Yep. valid point.

But in true sense, there should not be agreements or

disagreements.

 

It is when I started to look more closely at this

life, I could no longer digest these things easily.

I just couldnt let go...

Its only then I realised that decisions are not made,

they happen as a process.

 

Again and Again, I realized that anything that

"appears" to be true/right/correct, because of law of

averages or majority, cannot be the absolute

truth/right/correct.

So this is relativity. And then there is also

individuality and freedom to exist an individual.

 

Now, (according to me) that doesnt mean or suggest us,

that we should look to or hold on to and cling to "my"

truth/right/correct nor to the "not-mine" owing to

indiviuality. Instead this itself is a strong

suggestion towards something that is absolute truth.

That there "HAS" to be something that is absolute.

So we have to leave all this, attachment to our

judgements.

 

If someone says "I do it cos society says so" and if

he is wrong then

another person who says " I will NOT do it just

because society says so..."

also is wrong.

Both individuals existing freely?? No this is not the

solution. Both people are clinging to a relative idea.

One thing is we should also see, are we moving towards

the lower self governed by(drivenby or

opposedto)nature or moving towards the higher self

irrelevant of nature.

 

Indecision really exists,(provided we are thinking)

when we are living in the relative world and still not

entered the absolute;

Here social harmony would be higher priority to the

individual. But again this wud mean law of

averages/majority.

 

But as dr nachiketa said, we shud incessantly do

sadhana, and automatically this attachments will get

cut.

(I personally blv one can do sadhana, such that only

his heart knows that he is doing sadhana and so

society not in picture)

 

Even I have heard people saying about belief in

morality thrusted upon us. But if some morality is to

restrict an ego-tainted action which may be bringing

happiness to an individual but misery to other

people(May be ignorant in the individual's views), I

would personally feel that, such morality serves the

purpose and we shud go with the society.

 

All in all what i mean is,(though its not so easy as

it looks)

 

Do anything, but make sure it pleases god and not our

ego!!

 

Hari Om.

Pradeep

 

 

 

Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

http://taxes./filing.html

[Guest guest]

Yes one can switch loyalities to another culture while living in one

culture. spritual revolt against one's culture and surrendering to

higher truth is a sure sign of spiritual progress. If we look at

lives of all great saints and reformists, had they not revolted

against the set up of their society, they would not have achieved the

goal.

 

But i was talking of following morals or not following any

morals. An infant soul, if not subjected to the morals of the

society may become a demon. Now whether those morals of a particular

society are right or wrong, is not the issue. Each culture has this

weakness that what they have set up for the society is the only

truth. This is a common weakness of all human beings and this

foolish assumption accompanies us even while we ar making progress on

the path of sadhna. Everyone thinks what he knows is the only truth.

What we forget is that our truths are nothing but pieces of the

truth, and there is nothing absolute in that. Absolute Truth is only

one.

 

So till one is an infant on the path of sadhna one set of morals

have to be followed to save ourselves from Asuric vrittis. The more

the progress on sadhna path, Nature will decide morals and ethics for

us and finally relieving us of all obligations of morals and ethics.

[Guest guest]

Very true Dr.Nachiketa. That was a beautiful way to convey and point

out the problem of morality among different cultures. I agree

completely in this sense.

 

I agree about truth too... Truth should be unique and objective. And

that is why religious fanatism is an illness of the mind and a source

of many evils.

[Guest guest]

Hi Pradeep,

 

I believe your misgivings on current developments are justified.

 

Here in Germany things are not much better, it must have started

during the mid-1990s. We have now reached a stage where even short-

term relationships get hollowed out by refusal to commitment, and

among the younger generation cheating a partner has become a wide-

spread habit as polls show. It is almost considered natural. Immoral

or not, this behaviour undermines any chance of trust and emotional

fulfilment; those relationships become psychologically violent and

eventually split up.

 

My observation is that people lack orientation in life and hence find

it difficult to stand by ethical principles and form an own

personality. It has become a trend to present an artificial image of

oneself to others, and this stands in the way of opening to others

and caring about them. Society has become somewhat atomised, people

living for themselves. Some do not even have friends, many suffer

from depressions and frequent a psychologist.

 

Considering the present situation and seeing the fate of some of my

best friends I have lost faith in marriage as it presents itself here

and now.

 

I believe that the custom of arranged marriage in India was/is a wise

institution. By placing social rule above the urges of nature it has

been managed to balance the difficult natural conflict between the

sexes. But this only works when the whole society, or a great

majority, observes the same strict rules.

 

Of course, from a modernistic point of view one can easily find fault

with this institution, and no doubt it has its negative sides, but I

have spoken with and seen on TV young couples from India who

uniformly said they were quite happy with their situation and their

parents' choice. They preferred the traditional system because not

being concerned with finding a mate means they can devote their life

to study and their own interests. Life is much more peaceful then.

 

Whether marriage is compatible with spirituality is another matter.

Marriage -- including a good traditional one -- usually means all

kinds of trouble and responsibilities that leave little space for any

endeavours apart from working and child-raising.

 

I take the chaotic present situation from the positive side and lead

a life on my own. As there are hardly any social obligations anymore,

I can invest much of my energy in sadhana, which would not be

possible in an ordinary marriage. I also try to counteract the ills

of society by doing part-time work in the social sector. Altogether I

feel that the situation is conducive to spiritual endeavour, because

I have freedom and no one is going to stop me. Had I been born some

years earlier, or in the wrong country, I might have been sucked up

by the average life and not gotten on the path.

 

Two of my closest friends have suffered so much, one from being in

love, the other in his partnership, that both have become religious

as a result. Indeed one famous yogi advised marriage, in order to

attain detachment.

 

Hendrik

[Guest guest]

Namaste everyone,

 

I was away for some time, and I really missed all these lovely

discussions. I'd like to add my 2 cents and also ask a few questions.

 

Angie said that in India, parents choose the spouse for their

children, and this is wrong and the boy or the girl must have the

right to choose his/her partner.

My question is , ' Who chooses the partner. Do we or our parents

really choose?"

It is agreed that we do not choose our parents, brothers, sisters,

children, nationality, our color, looks, race, height, etc. All these

things are predestined.

Similarly for our children, the parents are also already predestined.

If I and my partner have to be the parents of our children, isn't it

already predestined that I marry my partner ?

Are we really choosing here, or is it an illusion of choosing?"

 

The second thing is about divorce. There were beautiful arguments on

both the sides of the coin. Yes I agree with Angie that living with

spouse who drinks and beats his wife every night is really painful.

The battered wife may be better of divorcing such a one.

I also agree with the others about the divinity of marriage.

But considering the above situation of the battered wife, will

divorce be a right thing to do. Will it conform to our scriptures ?

 

Haven't there been instances of separation in our scriptures, though

they were not officially called a divorce. for eg. In the Ramayana,

there was a citizen of Ayodhya, whose wife cheated on him. When he

discovered this infidelity, he separated from his wife. This was the

basis of sending Sita to the forest while she was pregnant.

 

Aren't there other instances in our scriptures, where the woman

returns to her father's house, as the husband wasn't good ? There is

also an instance of a man being illtreated by his wife, and when the

famous Tamil Saint 'Ovaiyar' visited his house, she noticed how much

he was illtreated. She hinted that it is better to live away from

such a demoness woman. Taking the hint, the husband renounced the

world, left his wife, and joined Ovaiyar as her disciple.'

 

At the same time there are also wives like Kannagi, who were

extremely devoted to their husbands. Kannagi even took her husband to

the brothel.

 

In our scriptures, you find dessertion / separation from the spouse,

when the spouse has done some wrong, even though it was not

officially called a 'divorce'. There are also instances, where the

wives stayed with their husband and tolerated all their tortures.

 

So is divorce really against our scriptures , or does it conform to

our scriptures? If there is true torture being experienced by one of

the spouses isn't it better to divorce and continue with the sadhna.

or should one just silently endure the tortures and continue on the

path of sadhna ?

 

Am looking forward to your valuable replies.

Hari Aum !!!

[Guest guest]

Hello SVC,

I am a simple man who decides "right"/"wrong" based on common sence,

and the "intention" of the scriptures. I am trying to earn your two

cents, as follows;-

 

1. You are philosophysing your answer to Angie. Simple answer would

be...Yes ! Now marriageble persons must choose their partner, and if

there is sufficient good will and understanding in the family,they

would seek the counscelling of the elders. This is the case for

the "present day Indian"

2. There are ample passages in our "smritis" for seperation. Since

the marriages have been classified into seven catagories, likewise

code of conduct both for husband and wife is well illustrated. One

can easily know them from any riligious minister who chants Vedic

mantras of marriage.. seven wows.

 

I have to add that your both qustions have more socio-economic

bearings, than spiritual

Love..and welcome

Satish

[Guest guest]

Can you tell me what is the text that deals with these passages and

what are the seven categories?

 

If you could give a simply version of that here that will be a great

intro.

 

Thanks

 

Uma

 

 

, safar_x <no_reply> wrote:

 

> 2. There are ample passages in our "smritis" for seperation. Since

> the marriages have been classified into seven catagories,

[Guest guest]

Hi Svcs

 

Good to see you have found time to join us here.

 

The answers to the questions you have posed hinge on our view of

Free Will.

 

As discussed before, the issue of how much responsibility do we

really have over our lives elicits a variety of views. On one

extreme are those who say we are total puppets of our past (karma)

including our thinking patterns (vasanas/ samskaras). On the other

extreme we have the feeling that we have total control, provided we

exercise the presence of divinity within us. We also have those of

us who believe in the middle ground that we have the free will to

make choices about our present thoughts and actions, which may

modify, if not totally neutralize one's karmic baggage.

 

You have rightly presented that what is now called divorce has

always been there albeit in a different form. No one can, and has

asked anyone to continue to live under abuse, whatever the form may

be, physical or emotional. In fact it is not only against the law of

humanity in general, but it toally runs against the thinking

of "That thou art" which is the underpinning of Sanatan Dharama.

 

Also, as you have also said, the marraige decisions are not

necessarily ours no matter who chose the partners. The relationships

chosen by the karmic law are those with whom one has issues to

neutralize and, more than likely an understanding was made between

the souls before taking birth about the roles they are to play. What

else but the attachments of the closest relationships, namely

parents, spouse, children can force one to learn and make the

greatest changes within ourselves. One can walk away from a job,

colleage, friend but it is certainly not that simple to do so from

our closest ones.

 

However two similar situations may not indicate similar spiritual

dynamics. In one instance of spouse abuse, it may be that the abusee

is having to experience what they themselves have dealt out in

earlier lifetime. In another instance a spouse may have to develop

the sense of self - yes - the little self from which one has to

catapult on to the Higher Self. The dynamic Rajo guna of the ego

self has to be developed first before it has the strength to go

further. In yet another instance of marital strife, the two may have

an understanding to push each other into higher levels of

consciousness. For eg.

 

"For you to learn faith, determination and balance I will play the

role of the antagonist in your evolution".

 

"I will not assist you in your endeavours to help you get over your

extreme dependance, so you develop your internal strenghts!".

 

"I will continue to place obstacles in your journey so that you are

able to build determination towards your path".

 

"I will, through love and tolerance, show you the path of spiritual

evolution".

 

Both sides of the relationship participates in such a agreement, the

abused and the abusee and each have their own karma to neutralise

through the experience.

 

Problem is how to know what is one's role in a relationship. Should

one stay in a relationship because it may be part of the

neutralizing porcess? If one chooses to leave, is it because they

understand and has made some changes or is one merely running away

from making important changes in their thinking?

 

This is where Saadhna comes into the picture. Saadhna literally

means intense study or practice, and including both spiritual and

other field of interest/work. Whether we are conscious of it or not,

we are in practice. How one lives is a practice (practical

application) of one's principles based on whatever philosophy/path

is important to them and various paths offer guidance in different

ways. In fact because sanatan dharma (dhri= that which holds

together) is a philosophy of life, it is applicable to ALL aspects

of living and it is incorrect to separate spiritual life from

material life. This misconception is perhaps the reason why we have

so many great "scholars", who choose to live their lives so diferent

from the words they speak!

 

The various aspects of the foundation of a house has to be strong

before one can build a mansion. No matter what, one has to

neutralize all their karmic debts sometime or the other and grihasti

(householder) life provides one of the best places to do so!

 

_/\_ Tat twam asi

 

Uma

[Guest guest]

> Problem is how to know what is one's role in a relationship. Should

> one stay in a relationship because it may be part of the

> neutralizing porcess? If one chooses to leave, is it because they

> understand and has made some changes or is one merely running away

> from making important changes in their thinking?

>

 

Namaste Uma,

 

Thank you for your wonderful answer. You have indeed given various

perspectives. One could be a part of the neutralising process or one

could be just working out the old debt ( sanchita karma which is now

prarabdha karma).

 

I also agree that spiritual life is intertwined with the material

life and that they are inseparable, though we may realise it or not.

 

However this does not answer the basic question put forth by angie,

me and the others.

If we take Angie's example, where the wife is beaten by her drunk

husband everyday, or is abused emotionally, should she just continue

on her sadhna living with this abusing man, saying to herself, that

these obstacles are just a way to strengthen my determination?

 

Or should she walk out, and be free of all obstacles, so that she can

endeavour her sadhna peacefully. Will it conform to our Sanatana

Dharma ?

For after all the purpose of Life is to realise the Self. And on

realising the Self, all karma vanishes. Just like how the ice melts

when the sun rises, so too all karma vanishes when the Sun of

Wisdom / knowledge rises.

 

All our karmas hold good for this material life only. Just as all the

laws of the dream world hold good only for the dream world, and are

no longer valid the moment we get up. So too all our karmas and laws

are valid only as long as identify to this material life. The moment

we wake up, no matter what karma is left, they all vanish, for we are

out, the moment we wake up.

 

So our focus should be on attaining that State ofFreedom. With this

in mind, what would be best for the emotionally or physically

battered wife to do?

 

Hari Aum !!!

[Guest guest]

Obviously I haven't been able to explain myself clearly. I said -

 

>>This is where Saadhna comes into the picture. ..... How one lives

is a practice (practical application) of one's principles based on

whatever philosophy/path is important to them and various paths

>>>>offer guidance in different ways.

/message/5802

 

One gets one's answer through one's spiritual practice. If one is

practising what one speaks the answer becomes clear. More

importantly one answer is NEVER applicable to all.

 

In GENERAL, if a person is being physically and mentally abused, it

is totally appropriate to leave to protect oneself. No scriptures

exist anywhere that ask one to stay in such situations. However,

leaving is not a simple act and requires both strenght of ego (self

respect)and external support, though many when pushed to extremes

have left even without it. Staying with an abusive spouse is NOT

sadhna. Calling it Saadhna has been used as an excuse to force women

to stay in abusive circumstances; as a cover for the insecurity of

making that tough decision to leave and take responsibility for ones

self or may simply be a lack of understanding one's Dharma.

 

This situation is similar to any other situation one's karma may set

up. If one's family is being mugged and an attempt is being made on

their life, sadhna doesn't mean sitting back and saying "this is my

karma, so go ahead and kill us"!!! If one's karma is to experience

poverty and starvation, sadhna doesn't mean letting family starve

without making the effort to find food. The story of Valmiki

illustrates it well. When Dacoit Ratnakar attempts to excuse his

dacoity saying he is stealing to provide for his family, he is

clearly told that it is his DUTY to provide; how he does it

determines his karmic consequences. It is one's karma to experience

an event, but the choice is left open as to how it is handled.

 

Most common reasons for continuing in such relationships is economic

and emotional dependance. Also often there is a bond between the

two, which holds them together in the unhealthy relationship - A

dependant insecure individual with another insecure individual who

expresses it through controlling behavior.

 

This guidance can be received through one's sadhna be it puja, or

meditation. Saadhna leads to circumstances that bring about the

changes. As ego strengthens, one becomes

more confident in their own guidance, one's intention becomes

clearer, appropriate people show up, information becomes available,

opportunities open up. Sadhna ensures that it is the behavior that

is being comdemned not the individual. The abusee is able to leave

without any malice or hatred against the individual. Only in such

circumstances is the karma neutralized.

 

What is always important is taking right action for the given

circumstances, without attachment to the outcome, and without any

anger or hatred towards the attacker, keeping one's mind focused on

the ultimate goal.

 

Tough call .. but no one said working karma out is easy!

 

_/\_ Tat twam asi

 

Uma

 

, s_v_c_s <no_reply> wrote:

 

> However this does not answer the basic question put forth by

angie, me and the others.

> If we take Angie's example, where the wife is beaten by her drunk

> husband everyday, or is abused emotionally, should she just

continue on her sadhna living with this abusing man, saying to

herself, that these obstacles are just a way to strengthen my

determination? Or should she walk out, and be free of all obstacles,

so that she can endeavour her sadhna peacefully. Will it conform to

our Sanatana Dharma ?