-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Dharma or Moksha?
- Thread starter Poeticus
- Start date
Fireside_Hindu
Jai Lakshmi Maa
Since I cannot know for certain what happens to me after my body's death (I believe certain things, but I do not know them) all I can do is make each action and thought a Dharmic one, uplift others and try and leave the world better than I found it. Therefore, for me, Dharma is more important.
:camp:
:camp:
Sb1995
Om Sai Ram
This, it takes many lifetimes to achieve moksha so might as well work by Dharmic law and Dharmic actions
Viraja
Jaya Jagannatha!
Dharma is important but it should be carried out in an effort to pursue moksha, as dharma without moksha is delusional. (this is what I heard from a lecture). Our ego can very easily become deluded by the 'I the doer' ahamkara that it is important to pursue moksha by subduing to god first and then all activities of dharma be carried out with the sense that 'I am only his/her instrument in doing this, it is he/she who has given me this opportunity'. 
ratikala
Istha gosthi
namaskaram maitra varuni ji :namaste
Dharma , ..... we should carry out our dharma as devotion without even thought of our own Moksha .
in some respects yes , in that a guru will or can , give up his own moksha and return for the sake of his devotees .
मैत्रावरुणिः;3480708 said:
Dharma , ..... we should carry out our dharma as devotion without even thought of our own Moksha .
in some respects yes , in that a guru will or can , give up his own moksha and return for the sake of his devotees .
conventionaly yes , if we live our lives fullfilling our dharma as an offering to the lord then moksha will follow .
Poeticus
| abhyAvartin |
Which one is the sun and which one is the sunlight?
Namaste
The very word "more" in the subjective world of the "toad living in the well" analogy (who doesn't see the "entirety", in an analogy where the toad in his well has never seen the ocean but has only heard a description of it), is often and typically a canary in the coal mine, the word "more" is used as part of, and sure sign of, an agenda.
I am not saying the OP has an agenda, the OP does not in this case. I am talking about how these comparisons are introduced into symantecs as "aha!" moments and not the first time as so, but actually are sort of like magic card tricks performed in the past and which often do have agendas.
For example, two adventurers enter a lost cave and inside are some silver coins, a beautiful wooden mandolin, an ivory box, a 24 carat golden peacock the size of half a man, and a brass battle axe.
Both adventurers could have shared the treasures jointly, of course that would have required them to sell (give up) all the treasures and then split the profits, or instead divy up the items between each other then and there.
One of the adventurers however is selfish and greedy, full of self importance and thinks the other adventurer is too stupid to wisely spend the value of such treasures (at least that is the excuse in his own head to justify ripping off the other - in fact both adventurers are rather stupid but sort of lucky because they were told by their barber while they were having their hair oiled, "You know, the old hermit who hangs out in the spooky tiger jungle says there's treasure hidden out there!").
So the greedy trickster adventurer and the other half wit are standing in awe looking at the treasures, and then they look at each other.
The trickster adventurer gets an idea, and before one or the other leap and grab at the treasurers, he says to the other, "Let's each take one item at a time... you go first. Which is worth more drachmas, the golden peacock or that brass battle axe?"
Of course, that was part of the trick, the agenda, to frame the question in terms of what is worth "more" in money, the golden peacock or the battle axe. In truth, what is worth more depends on where you are at the moment and your own personal circumstances.
The trickster who was about to kill his half-wit friend and then take all the treasure knew very well that for his agenda to suceed, he couldn't allow his friend to grab that battle axe first.
"I'll take that peacock!" says his friend with a happy smile and proceeds to try and pick it up.
And then the trickster says in a soft voice, "And I will take the battle axe".
And then turns and strikes the back of the neck of his friend with the axe.
The peacock falls from his friends hands, and of all things the heavy peacock tail breaks off. Also now there is a slippery pool of blood on the floor, as the trickster tries to pick up all the items by himself to carry out while slipping on blood.
Had his friend still been alive, perhaps carrying all those treasures together would have been somewhat possible, but now it was very complicated, certainly the trickster had no intention of leaving one treasure behind.
So he ripped his shirt off, and tied the peacock tail to his back. He hung the mandolin to his side, it would swing back and forth and make "bling" noise as it banged on his knees. He opened the ivory box lid and wore the box on his head like a hat. Then stuffing the coins in his pocket which jiggled with noise, and clenching the battle axe in his teeth which hurt, he bends over and picks up the somewhat heavy golden peacock body in his arms, steps out of the cave and heads back into the jungle, making slow progress and a lot of noise.
Mosquitos then start to attack his bear chest, shoulders and arms, and his exposed back as soon as he steps into the jungle.
The mandolin kept going "bling! bling!". The coins "jiggle, jiggle". Sometimes he would moan holding the battle axe in his teeth, his back also hurt. He would repeatly almost trip, and would swear mubbling curses between his teeth.
The tiger noticed him right away. The battle axe in his teeth were of no use as the tiger came up from behind.
"More" depends on what currency you use or what scale you have, or where you are at the time, what decisions you make, and who you are willing to work with.
Sometime between the Vedas and the Bhagavad Gita, the word Dharma came to be known by some to mean duty. Before that, it sort of meant to be the clockwork of the revolving universe, sort of natural law like physics. To rishis it was like the higher ethics and not man made laws and norms. Some called it religion. Moksha meant you don't have any "laws" for you, but also some said it means merging into the Divine and not just freedom from all laws including natural and spiritual, and some said it means realizing what is permanent is real and true and what is temporary is unreal and false. Some commentators said both are important, the eternal dharma is only that which is permanent and thus real and not the cycle of birth and death, and stepping into that is moksha. Some said giving sacrifice is the true dharma, and sacrificing your own self is moksha.
And some later said, caste is your duty and is Dharmashastra, caste is your duty and your path to the golden peacock.
Where this is really all going depends on what you think the words means, depends on who is talking and why, and if it is a "more" question or a "why" question, and what word comes after "more", and is there a trickster involved.
I am driving to L.A. What I do along the drive can make a difference whether I get there or not. There is more than one way, one road, to get there. Some scenic road, another has lots of petrol stations, one is a direct route through the desert but I better make sure I have a full tank of gas and cell phone service in the desert. I will be driving in a car that I need to get inside of. So it probably would be wise to check the tires, oil, make sure it is in good shape for the long drive. But wait. Did I make sure I own my own car before I leave, or did I give the pink slip to my "friend" who then signed the pink over to himself and is now telling me where I can or cannot drive his car? Don't want to get pulled over by the police.
What is more important to my vacation? I don't know. It's sort of all important, and depends. Maybe my vacation isn't getting to the hotel in L.A., but a nice drive. Maybe is the hotel. Or maybe it is getting in the car again after getting to the hotel and driving someplace else like Disneyland. Or avoiding Disneyland entirely, and sitting on the beach at Santa Monica. But what if I left my bathing suit at home? What's more important, the bathing suit sold to me by the guy at the register in Walmart, or Santa Monica beach? Should I forever be thankful to the clerk at Walmart for making my vacation a success? What is more important, my admission ticket to Disneyland, or Disneyland itself, or Walt Disney who made Disneyland, or the rides in Disneyland, or the $5 dollar soda drink in Disneyland on a hot 92 degrees day in L.A. in Disneyland, or Mickey Mouse? Is one before the other, not necessarily, or all equal?
Why is the guy in Disneyland sitting behind that "Disneyland Resorts" booth asking me what is more important, this one vacation or all future vacations and happiness for me and my family with membership in the Disney Resorts Travel Club?
All I want to do is have fun. Am I selfish for going on a vacation?
Sorry, I am a rascal Saiva and I can't help myself from doing this.
What is more important? The joke itself, or laughing at the joke? Why does my "duty" always according to "Mr. Jones" entail being the servant of the guy named "Mr. Jones" or else I am "bad" and won't "go to heaven"? Why was Mr. Jones born (or reborn) in this same place as me, and why does he think because he sits behind the ticket booth at the Disneyland gate that he is "special"? Can Mr. Jones charge me more to enter than say, that fat guy standing behind me in line? Does my ticket entitle me to ride on all the rides, or am I excluded from some of them because I am not special? Does the ticket guarantee I get to ride on all the rides, or which one's I ride on depends on my willingness to stand in very long lines in 92 degrees and how fast I run from one tu another and if I can hit the "fast pass" machines before Johnny finishes eating that hotdog, and if I pass out before the park closes. If I don't make it to all the rides, do I get a ticket refund?
What if it starts to rain? What is more important, the Dumbo ride or an umbrella? And will an umbrella be allowed on the Dumbo ride? Folded or unfolded?
Sorry, I know it is a serious question, just want to point out that words are stranger than known, and there are different times and places and people behind them. Why am I asking all these questions when I haven't had breakfast yet?
Please continue, sorry.
Om Namah Sivaya
The very word "more" in the subjective world of the "toad living in the well" analogy (who doesn't see the "entirety", in an analogy where the toad in his well has never seen the ocean but has only heard a description of it), is often and typically a canary in the coal mine, the word "more" is used as part of, and sure sign of, an agenda.
I am not saying the OP has an agenda, the OP does not in this case. I am talking about how these comparisons are introduced into symantecs as "aha!" moments and not the first time as so, but actually are sort of like magic card tricks performed in the past and which often do have agendas.
For example, two adventurers enter a lost cave and inside are some silver coins, a beautiful wooden mandolin, an ivory box, a 24 carat golden peacock the size of half a man, and a brass battle axe.
Both adventurers could have shared the treasures jointly, of course that would have required them to sell (give up) all the treasures and then split the profits, or instead divy up the items between each other then and there.
One of the adventurers however is selfish and greedy, full of self importance and thinks the other adventurer is too stupid to wisely spend the value of such treasures (at least that is the excuse in his own head to justify ripping off the other - in fact both adventurers are rather stupid but sort of lucky because they were told by their barber while they were having their hair oiled, "You know, the old hermit who hangs out in the spooky tiger jungle says there's treasure hidden out there!").
So the greedy trickster adventurer and the other half wit are standing in awe looking at the treasures, and then they look at each other.
The trickster adventurer gets an idea, and before one or the other leap and grab at the treasurers, he says to the other, "Let's each take one item at a time... you go first. Which is worth more drachmas, the golden peacock or that brass battle axe?"
Of course, that was part of the trick, the agenda, to frame the question in terms of what is worth "more" in money, the golden peacock or the battle axe. In truth, what is worth more depends on where you are at the moment and your own personal circumstances.
The trickster who was about to kill his half-wit friend and then take all the treasure knew very well that for his agenda to suceed, he couldn't allow his friend to grab that battle axe first.
"I'll take that peacock!" says his friend with a happy smile and proceeds to try and pick it up.
And then the trickster says in a soft voice, "And I will take the battle axe".
And then turns and strikes the back of the neck of his friend with the axe.
The peacock falls from his friends hands, and of all things the heavy peacock tail breaks off. Also now there is a slippery pool of blood on the floor, as the trickster tries to pick up all the items by himself to carry out while slipping on blood.
Had his friend still been alive, perhaps carrying all those treasures together would have been somewhat possible, but now it was very complicated, certainly the trickster had no intention of leaving one treasure behind.
So he ripped his shirt off, and tied the peacock tail to his back. He hung the mandolin to his side, it would swing back and forth and make "bling" noise as it banged on his knees. He opened the ivory box lid and wore the box on his head like a hat. Then stuffing the coins in his pocket which jiggled with noise, and clenching the battle axe in his teeth which hurt, he bends over and picks up the somewhat heavy golden peacock body in his arms, steps out of the cave and heads back into the jungle, making slow progress and a lot of noise.
Mosquitos then start to attack his bear chest, shoulders and arms, and his exposed back as soon as he steps into the jungle.
The mandolin kept going "bling! bling!". The coins "jiggle, jiggle". Sometimes he would moan holding the battle axe in his teeth, his back also hurt. He would repeatly almost trip, and would swear mubbling curses between his teeth.
The tiger noticed him right away. The battle axe in his teeth were of no use as the tiger came up from behind.
"More" depends on what currency you use or what scale you have, or where you are at the time, what decisions you make, and who you are willing to work with.
Sometime between the Vedas and the Bhagavad Gita, the word Dharma came to be known by some to mean duty. Before that, it sort of meant to be the clockwork of the revolving universe, sort of natural law like physics. To rishis it was like the higher ethics and not man made laws and norms. Some called it religion. Moksha meant you don't have any "laws" for you, but also some said it means merging into the Divine and not just freedom from all laws including natural and spiritual, and some said it means realizing what is permanent is real and true and what is temporary is unreal and false. Some commentators said both are important, the eternal dharma is only that which is permanent and thus real and not the cycle of birth and death, and stepping into that is moksha. Some said giving sacrifice is the true dharma, and sacrificing your own self is moksha.
And some later said, caste is your duty and is Dharmashastra, caste is your duty and your path to the golden peacock.
Where this is really all going depends on what you think the words means, depends on who is talking and why, and if it is a "more" question or a "why" question, and what word comes after "more", and is there a trickster involved.
I am driving to L.A. What I do along the drive can make a difference whether I get there or not. There is more than one way, one road, to get there. Some scenic road, another has lots of petrol stations, one is a direct route through the desert but I better make sure I have a full tank of gas and cell phone service in the desert. I will be driving in a car that I need to get inside of. So it probably would be wise to check the tires, oil, make sure it is in good shape for the long drive. But wait. Did I make sure I own my own car before I leave, or did I give the pink slip to my "friend" who then signed the pink over to himself and is now telling me where I can or cannot drive his car? Don't want to get pulled over by the police.
What is more important to my vacation? I don't know. It's sort of all important, and depends. Maybe my vacation isn't getting to the hotel in L.A., but a nice drive. Maybe is the hotel. Or maybe it is getting in the car again after getting to the hotel and driving someplace else like Disneyland. Or avoiding Disneyland entirely, and sitting on the beach at Santa Monica. But what if I left my bathing suit at home? What's more important, the bathing suit sold to me by the guy at the register in Walmart, or Santa Monica beach? Should I forever be thankful to the clerk at Walmart for making my vacation a success? What is more important, my admission ticket to Disneyland, or Disneyland itself, or Walt Disney who made Disneyland, or the rides in Disneyland, or the $5 dollar soda drink in Disneyland on a hot 92 degrees day in L.A. in Disneyland, or Mickey Mouse? Is one before the other, not necessarily, or all equal?
Why is the guy in Disneyland sitting behind that "Disneyland Resorts" booth asking me what is more important, this one vacation or all future vacations and happiness for me and my family with membership in the Disney Resorts Travel Club?
All I want to do is have fun. Am I selfish for going on a vacation?
Sorry, I am a rascal Saiva and I can't help myself from doing this.
What is more important? The joke itself, or laughing at the joke? Why does my "duty" always according to "Mr. Jones" entail being the servant of the guy named "Mr. Jones" or else I am "bad" and won't "go to heaven"? Why was Mr. Jones born (or reborn) in this same place as me, and why does he think because he sits behind the ticket booth at the Disneyland gate that he is "special"? Can Mr. Jones charge me more to enter than say, that fat guy standing behind me in line? Does my ticket entitle me to ride on all the rides, or am I excluded from some of them because I am not special? Does the ticket guarantee I get to ride on all the rides, or which one's I ride on depends on my willingness to stand in very long lines in 92 degrees and how fast I run from one tu another and if I can hit the "fast pass" machines before Johnny finishes eating that hotdog, and if I pass out before the park closes. If I don't make it to all the rides, do I get a ticket refund?
What if it starts to rain? What is more important, the Dumbo ride or an umbrella? And will an umbrella be allowed on the Dumbo ride? Folded or unfolded?
Sorry, I know it is a serious question, just want to point out that words are stranger than known, and there are different times and places and people behind them. Why am I asking all these questions when I haven't had breakfast yet?
Please continue, sorry.
Om Namah Sivaya
मैत्रावरुणिः;3480708 said:
Moksha is the goal. Dharma is the path to the goal.
Consider a golfer as an analogy. The goal is to win the tournament. But ask any golfer, and he'll tell you that all the while during the tournament his mind is entirely focused on the particular shot that he is facing in the moment. It takes 100% concentration to play each shot well. The moment he loses that focus, he hits shots like I hit ... into the bush, into the water, too high, too low, or a total miss of the ball.
Thinking about moksha is like the daydreamer who gets nothing done because he's thinking way way too far ahead. How many people dream of how they'll spend the winnings of a lottery before ever winning the lottery?
Thinking about moksha is like the daydreamer who gets nothing done because he's thinking way way too far ahead. How many people dream of how they'll spend the winnings of a lottery before ever winning the lottery?
Poeticus
| abhyAvartin |
This was the answer that I was looking for. Thank you. I think too many concentrate on the "salvation" aspect; many concentrate too much on the goal - wishing for their "fruits" to be rewarded to them.
What's interesting is that many keep thinking about the goal, the "fruits" - expecting some type of reward in the process.
This goes against the notion of doing something without thinking of its fruits or its results - in this case: moksha.
It seems you were one of the very few that actually understood this question. It was to see if many still keep thinking about salvation which isn't really a Hindu concept in terms of utmost importance. The shAstra-s speak of Dharma, Dharma, and Dharma as primeval.
And, for the Vaishnavas that answered that moksha is the most important - it seems Lord Shri Krishna disagrees as per GItA pramANa:
"BG 18.5: Acts of sacrifice, charity and penance are not to be given up; they must be performed. Indeed, sacrifice, charity and penance purify even the great souls.
(yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-karma
na tyājyaḿ kāryam eva tat
yajño dānaḿ tapaś caiva
pāvanāni manīṣiṇām)
BG 18.6: All these activities should be performed without attachment or any expectation of result. They should be performed as a matter of duty, O son of Pṛthā. That is My final opinion."
(etāny api tu karmāṇi
sańgaḿ tyaktvā phalāni ca
kartavyānīti me pārtha
niścitaḿ matam uttamam)
Viraja
Jaya Jagannatha!
मैत्रावरुणिः;3483257 said:
Working towards moksha is simply put 'Keeping god in your thoughts always'. It involves recognizing world as futile and thus encourages an aspirant not to pine for worldly things but to yearn only for the goal of god. It stresses 'renunciation'. Thus I differ from your opinion above that working towards moksha is similar to 'wanting some fruits of labour'.
With moksha as the goal, what is the process through with someone will attain it? Through 'Dharma'. However 'Dharma' alone without keeping in mind that one has to renounce the world ('moksha') is delusional as people may start thinking highly of themselves and their deeds. Thus, god has to be kept in one's mind always and dharma has to be done with the attitude of that opportunity to doing dharma is granted by god (which is what my answer had been).
What god says here is that duty or dharma has to be performed with the mind of renunciation, keeping god in one's mind and has to be performed without the conscience telling us that 'one's self is the doer of the good deed'. It has to be done with god in one's mind. That is all. This does not negate the importance of working towards 'moksha' which is 'god consciousness and working towards reaching god'.
PS: Without moksha being the goal, why would an aspirant ever want to read the BG and learn what god says about 'dharma'?
Last edited:
To learn that it may be a person's dharma to alleviate the suffering of others, for example; to learn what dharma is.
na kāmaye 'haḿ gatim īśvarāt parām
aṣṭarddhi-yuktām apunar-bhavaḿ vā
ārtiḿ prapadye 'khila-deha-bhājām
antaḥ-sthito yena bhavanty aduḥkhāḥ
"I do not pray to the Supreme Personality of Godhead for the eight perfections of mystic yoga, nor for salvation from repeated birth and death. I want only to stay among all the living entities and suffer all distresses on their behalf, so that they may be freed from suffering." Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 9 Chapter 21 Verse 12
Last edited:
Viraja
Jaya Jagannatha!
I'm telling you, Jai, a person may want to live on earth and take on others' suffering (for as long as possible) as you say, but even this man's ultimate goal will become moksha at some point, because living on earth is very tiresome and boring.