[ramakrishna] Morality/Dharma

[Guest guest]

If i too could join in this discussion started by Anuragji...on Morality

 

If i might say so,..this message and the message of Mr Sreedhar Bharath are

both much stocked with wisdom. I would just like to add to it.

 

I agree that morality is relative. Morality is relative only because, as

Sreedhar points out, one culture's moral codes need not be considered in

the same light in another culture.It is also relative as Mr Kathirasan

points out that we live in a world of duality.

 

We therefore need to define morality...i may be wrong, but is not morality,

by definition any act or ideal that requires us to forget our individual

selves for the cause of humanity as a whole? Letting go of our individual

needs and identities for a larger cause, for the family of Mankind, would

and could be termed Universal Morality??

 

Seen in this light, Arjuna " sharing " Draupadi, if universally seen as him

giving up his individual 'right'to or " ownership " of Draupadi then it can be

considered a moral act universally.

 

It is also true as Mr Kathirasan says that by following a moral lifestyle,

it lends to purity of our minds to a satvic state. This is true as giving up

our individualities for a larger Cause, we can purify our minds. i tend to

agree wholeheartedly. But what of the lone poor beggar who steals a piece of

bread not to feed himself but to feed his 6 month old starving, famished

child only so that he may save the child's life. The beggar has not

committed a moral act, he has not stuck to Dharma, but he did it out of love

for his child.

 

It may be argued that it was not for him to look to saving his own child if

it meant stealing from another possession, even if that other was not left

wanting by the loss of a piece of bread.

Yet he was forgetting himself, for his child.

 

Dharma, and Karma are intricately linked and intertwined. The beggar,

despite having committed a crime even in his own eyes, must be prepared to

live up to the consequences of his act, either in this very life or in the

next. That attitude of surrender to the consequences of his act will also

determine the " relative quality of Dharma " For if morality itself is

relative and Dharma and morality are intertwined, then Dharma too is

relative.

We cannot seem to escape from the fact that we live in a Relative World.

 

It would be true to say that the poor beggar, if he really wished to stick

to pure Dharma, he would not have stolen the bread and might have suffered

seeing his own child slowly pass on. Either way if he has regrets lodged in

his mind,either because of stealing the bread or because of his child's

ultimate death, he has Karma left in this life to carry through.

 

Swami Vivekananda said, as we all know, that this world will be as

is...whatever we do the problems will remain. We can use this moral

gymnasium only to haul ourselves up to that state where we feel no regrets

and no joys, no pain and no pleasures. So when we " help " someone else, we

are in truth helping ourselves.

 

We can aim to be like Raama who banished Mother Seeta Devi to the forest,

because His Dharma of keeping His subjects happy and on the Right Path was

paramount to His Kingship. Raama knew of Seeta Devi's purity, yet he

banished Her because His subjects did not believe in Mother Seeta's purity.

And if they did not believe it, they were bound to stray...for there was

foment and discontent....there were elements within Raama's Kingdom that

were telling themselves, if Raama could put up with an impure wife, then why

can i not commit the same acts? To prevent the total breakdown of society,

Raama, with His heart broken, had to banish His wife. Dharma Incarnate!

There are so many instances of Raama acting in a way that personifies

Dharma!

 

And if we cannot be like Him, then of what use was His coming down to

instruct?

 

regards

js

 

>Namaste

>

>Morality is part of Dharma. It cannot be separated from it. And morality

>is also not absolute...it cannot be, as it deals with duality. Swami

>Vivekananda during his sojourn, met the tibetans and was totally shocked to

>find out that Tibetan women married 5 husbands, and that is their culture.

>This may be immoral in many cultures but not in Tibet. He was very shocked

>to know that.

>

>In Dharma, there are 2 kinds. One is common dharma (samanya) and the other

>specific Dharma (vishesha). Truthfulness, non-violence, non-stealing etc..

>are common dharma while the duty of a son, soldier, husband, wife or a king

>are specific dharma. By following Dharma, we attain purity of mind. Karma

>Yoga also helps us greatly in achieving this. What is meant by mental

>purity here is the quality of sattva (a composed mind). What we are aiming

>to achieve is also that? In Vivekachudamani, Shankara says that only a

>sattvic mind can contemplate on the Atman. Even the Katha Upanishad says

>this: 'he who has not renounced evil ways, who is not at peace, who cannot

>concentrate, WHOSE MIND IS NOT COMPOSED cannot reach the self, even by

>right

>knowledge.'

>

>Therefore, the practice of morality or to follow the path of dharma is to

>ultimately achieve this sattvic mind.

>

>Please correct me if I am wrong or if any of my statements make no sense.

>Thank you.

>

>Om Shanti

>Kathi

>

>

 

_______________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

 

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.