Is Living "Righteously" Valuable In and Of Itself -- Regardless of Whether it Leads to Rewards?

[Sunstone]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

 

[Kirran]

Might I venture that righteousness, as you define it here, could be seen as spiritual salvation inandof itself?

 

[sealchan]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

One form of righteousness could be defined also Douglas Hofstadter as always choosing what is fair and optimal for everyone regardless of the likelihood that others may take advantage of this. At least the first time around...after that one should practice tit for tat in response to others taking advantage of your morality.

Being a rational species capable of seeing the big picture beyond one's own particular interest it is always the case that one can potentially see the benefit of righteousness so long as one can strive for a better world where everyone considers in some measure the needs and rights of everyone else.

But if one measures a particular event and one's personal gain or loss then certainly one will suffer for righteousness.

 

[Nakosis]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

No because I think we risk fooling ourselves into thinking we know what that "righteous" relationship should be.

And, self criticism when we find ourself not living up to that expectation we place on ourselves.

Better IMO to learn how to accept yourself for who you are. All the faults and sins and stupid impulses that are part of existing.

Make peace with that reality. The benefit being you can stop wasting time trying to make yourself into a "better" person and simply enjoy the experience of life. Whatever that happens to be for you.

This life maybe all we have so why waste it trying to be something you are not?

 

[Shushersbedamned]

That's not righteous as I accept the term. But I think being righteous is a virtue and virtue is the most valuable thing in itself. No matter what the reward I could not live my life being something that is not righteous.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

This life maybe all we have so why waste it trying to be something you are not?

why waste it imagining you cannot be more than what you are?

 

[Nakosis]

why waste it imagining you cannot be more than what you are?

I don't waste any time with that either. I just accept the reality of life as it presents itself to me.

 

[sun rise]

To me, a righteous life is trying to live up to one's best understanding of ethics/morals. From my perspective, expecting a reward is like saying to God "I'll be good if you give me a 'cookie'". Personally trying to be kinder etc is its own reward.

 

[PureX]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

They aren't separate states that can then be compared. To struggle against my own nature would be as much a part of my nature as struggling to align with it. They are the same struggle, and they are both my nature. There is no "wrong" relationship with God. God is the source, sustenance and purpose of all that is. There is no state of being apart from God.

 

[Brickjectivity]

My understanding of this is directly affected by 20th century Physics. Each life is permanent and can be beautiful or horrible and is a painting that is never erased. Many civilizations of the past do not understand this and urge the individual to spend their lives on common large projects and completely erase themselves. Individual virtue matters.

 

[Quintessence]

That sense of righteousness begs the question of what the "right relationship" to the gods is. I'm not a big fan of right/wrong language, so I couldn't even begin to answer that question. I would reframe it to asking what it means to cultivate a "proper relationship" or an "appropriate relationship" with a deity. What that looks like will vary widely depending on the values of the devotee and the deity in question. It's not much different than human relationships really. Sometimes the proper relationship to a particular human is to not have much of a relationship with them at all; it's the same with the gods.

Cultivating proper or appropriate relationships with the gods is sort of the core of traditions like mine, so of course I'm going to say that has value in of itself. Paganisms are generally not about rewards and salvation promises, but living life fully and meaningfully in the now. Relationships with other beings forms a very large portion of life's meaningfulness for any human, so finding appropriate relationships is central.

 

[Vee]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

If you look at what God instructed humans to act like, according to the Bible, you'll see that those rules are all to our own benefit, not only as individuals but as a society. If we follow those principles, everyone wins.
For example, the Bible says not to kill, not to covet what doesn't belong to us, not to commit adultery, to treat others the way we want to be treated, just to name a few. If everyone did that, many of our problems wouldn't exist.
So, yes, being righteous is worth it for people who respect others and above all, respect themselves. Plus, is there anything better than living with a clear conscience?

 

[LuisDantas]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

No, not by that understanding of righteousness.

By most others, sure. But not that. It is far better to simply pursue ethical behavior.

 

[Jumi]

My attitude reminds me of the old Persian prayer about righteousness done for sake of righteousness being the best righteousness.

 

[Akivah]

My attitude reminds me of the old Persian prayer about righteousness done for sake of righteousness being the best righteousness.

That's just as Judaism understands it as well. Be righteous for the sake of righteousness, not for the expectation of a reward. Also, the reward for doing a mitzvah is the opportunity to do another mitzvah.

 

[Sanzbir]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

Nice question.

The more I think about it the more complicated the answer becomes.

I could say on one hand "yes", because the reward for righteousness is the natural consequence of being righteous (using the above definitions for that). The reward gained is merely the effect of being righteous. But I could say "no" because having righteousness is the reward for being righteous...

To crib a bit of Ghizali's Alchemy of Happiness, it's like a doctor telling you to do "this or that" to gain a positive effect on your health. Following the advice given and gaining the positive effect is not a reward given by the doctor for obeying him, but is merely the natural consequence of following that doctor's advice. And neglecting the advice and not getting the positive effect is not the doctor inflicting punishment against you.

So overall I'm not sure whether or not this question can be properly answered, because the reward is righteousness itself, so I don't think you can actually divorce the idea of righteousness from the reward/consequence of righteousness. It's sort of like asking "Is getting $20 beneficial even if you aren't getting $20??"

 

[Milton Platt]

Back the Paleolithic when I was taking my first courses in Comparative Religious Studies at university, one of my professors mentioned that "righteousness" in the Bible meant something along the lines of "to be in the right relationship to God". In that sense of "righteousness", would you say that living righteously is valuable in and of itself, regardless of whether or not it leads to some reward, such as material gain or spiritual salvation? Why or why not?

Perhaps, if one can first demonstrate the existence of a god. did your professor pick a particular one and support his choice with sound evidence?

 

[Sunstone]

Perhaps, if one can first demonstrate the existence of a god. did your professor pick a particular one and support his choice with sound evidence?

Are you kidding? He was a professor of Comparative Religious Studies. They never tell you their personal beliefs. Why should they? I think you have missed the point: He was stating how the ancient Hebrews viewed righteousness, not what he thought of righteousness.

 

[Milton Platt]

Are you kidding? He was a professor of Comparative Religious Studies. They never tell you their personal beliefs. Why should they? I think you have missed the point: He was stating how the ancient Hebrews viewed righteousness, not what he thought of righteousness.

True 'nuff, Sunstone........

So, yes, it meant something to the Hebrews in that particular place and time. They believed in that particular god.