|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Forget the commandments... follow the observances!
TO FOLLOW TEN GREAT HINDU OBSERVANCES
* Patience, firmness and stability (Dhruti)
* Forgiveness (Kshama)
* Self-control and contentment (Dama)
* Not to steal or conceal, or be selfish (Asteya)
* Cleanliness, purity and honesty (Saucham)
* Control over senses and sexual energy (Indriya Nigraha)
* Right knowledge of the scripture (Dhee)
* Material and spiritual knowledge or study (Vidya)
* Truth (Satya)
* Absence of anger (Akrodha)
These, by far, exceed the Ten Commandments in my opinion. That's not to say that they're not somewhat complimentary.
* Patience, firmness and stability (Dhruti)
* Forgiveness (Kshama)
* Self-control and contentment (Dama)
* Not to steal or conceal, or be selfish (Asteya)
* Cleanliness, purity and honesty (Saucham)
* Control over senses and sexual energy (Indriya Nigraha)
* Right knowledge of the scripture (Dhee)
* Material and spiritual knowledge or study (Vidya)
* Truth (Satya)
* Absence of anger (Akrodha)
These, by far, exceed the Ten Commandments in my opinion. That's not to say that they're not somewhat complimentary.
I wouldn't say that I have any specific set of guidelines by which I live my life. I was raised Christian, but I agree with you that the Ten Commandments aren't the definition of good character. They are more laws to govern society than guidelines for a good and moral life.
I do however often look back to Kant's moral philosophy when thinking about moral conundrums. His formal ethics have been summed up as the "golden rule plus." Our goal as humans is to be fully human and free, and to do so we must treat all other humans as free human beings. We must not manipulate them or let ourselves be controlled by external forces. You might say that the ultimate virtues are "choice" (the choice to act morally) and "respect" (for others' humanity). It is not, for me, a complete and rigorous code of conduct. However, it provides a starting point for considering any moral proposition.
One thing I thought was interesting about the Observances listed below, and how they differ from the Ten Commandments, is the different conceptions of property. You can see this in how "steal" is used. In the Ten Commandments, "thou shalt not steal" and you also shouldn't covet what other people own exclusively. There is a conception of property as private, belonging to your neighbor and not your community. In the Observances you quoted, you are not to steal but also you are not to conceal or be selfish. Although it leaves room for a modicum of private property, it implies that property is more communal than private (since you shouldn't take too much or conceal items from others). You can find this sentiment elsewhere in Christian theology, but it is conspicuously absent from the Ten Commandments.
- Walkere
I do however often look back to Kant's moral philosophy when thinking about moral conundrums. His formal ethics have been summed up as the "golden rule plus." Our goal as humans is to be fully human and free, and to do so we must treat all other humans as free human beings. We must not manipulate them or let ourselves be controlled by external forces. You might say that the ultimate virtues are "choice" (the choice to act morally) and "respect" (for others' humanity). It is not, for me, a complete and rigorous code of conduct. However, it provides a starting point for considering any moral proposition.
One thing I thought was interesting about the Observances listed below, and how they differ from the Ten Commandments, is the different conceptions of property. You can see this in how "steal" is used. In the Ten Commandments, "thou shalt not steal" and you also shouldn't covet what other people own exclusively. There is a conception of property as private, belonging to your neighbor and not your community. In the Observances you quoted, you are not to steal but also you are not to conceal or be selfish. Although it leaves room for a modicum of private property, it implies that property is more communal than private (since you shouldn't take too much or conceal items from others). You can find this sentiment elsewhere in Christian theology, but it is conspicuously absent from the Ten Commandments.
- Walkere
| SlowWalkere wrote: |
| You might say that the ultimate virtues are "choice" (the choice to act morally) and "respect" (for others' humanity). It is not, for me, a complete and rigorous code of conduct. However, it provides a starting point for considering any moral proposition. |
"Moral" is not a very good term to use, because everyone's perception of "morality" is based on culture and many other variables. "Morality" often compromises "respect" and complete "freedom" ... especially in this day and age.
So who defines morality? What is morality? Why do you find it essential along with "respect" (about which I whole-heartedly agree with you) ...
Yes, morality is a very confusing term. In fact I think there's a long thread going on about it right now, but I'll throw out my opinions here.
When most people think of morality, they think of it in one of two ways - divine law or convention. It is a code of conduct by which you must abide if you are to be "good." Divine law is either defined by God (if you choose to believe that far up the food chain) or by the high priests in our world. A perfect example is the Ten Commandments. Conventional morality is a bit more difficult to pin down and define who exactly defines it, but it is related to standing laws and the mores of society. What the larger society thinks is good, which is probably influenced by what the ruling elite think is good, is good and vice versa for bad. This is somewhat comparably to what Nietzsche called the "slave morality."
I think of morality in a much more personal, perhaps spiritual sense. Nietzsche's categories are useful here. If we succumb unthinkingly to external definitions of morality, we are mere slaves. We can consider such things in our decisions, but we must come to an internal discovery of what is "good" instead of having someone/something else define it for us. Herein lies the element of choice. If we choose to consider the right or wrong nature of an action and act based on that internal discussion, we are making a moral decision and acting in a moral way (even if we act in a "Bad" way, in Nietzsche's terms).
The reason I place importance on morality (or the moral choice, to be more specific), is because this is what differentiates us from animals. Several arguments for what differentiates humans from animals have been made before, but they're not all convincing. For example, Des Cartes argued (in Discourse on Method) that humans can think critically. Yet, some animals and machines exhibit problem solving skills. The ability to make a moral choice is what elevates us out of the realm of necessity and distinguishes us as fully human.
- Walkere
When most people think of morality, they think of it in one of two ways - divine law or convention. It is a code of conduct by which you must abide if you are to be "good." Divine law is either defined by God (if you choose to believe that far up the food chain) or by the high priests in our world. A perfect example is the Ten Commandments. Conventional morality is a bit more difficult to pin down and define who exactly defines it, but it is related to standing laws and the mores of society. What the larger society thinks is good, which is probably influenced by what the ruling elite think is good, is good and vice versa for bad. This is somewhat comparably to what Nietzsche called the "slave morality."
I think of morality in a much more personal, perhaps spiritual sense. Nietzsche's categories are useful here. If we succumb unthinkingly to external definitions of morality, we are mere slaves. We can consider such things in our decisions, but we must come to an internal discovery of what is "good" instead of having someone/something else define it for us. Herein lies the element of choice. If we choose to consider the right or wrong nature of an action and act based on that internal discussion, we are making a moral decision and acting in a moral way (even if we act in a "Bad" way, in Nietzsche's terms).
The reason I place importance on morality (or the moral choice, to be more specific), is because this is what differentiates us from animals. Several arguments for what differentiates humans from animals have been made before, but they're not all convincing. For example, Des Cartes argued (in Discourse on Method) that humans can think critically. Yet, some animals and machines exhibit problem solving skills. The ability to make a moral choice is what elevates us out of the realm of necessity and distinguishes us as fully human.
- Walkere
 |