Shantanu
Well-Known Member
An advaitin must survive and that means taking care of all sources of aggravation upon oneself, before these do one real harm to not be able to survive. It calls for preemptive action as ones dharma.
-
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!
Why?
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Not sure i understand.
So the agression you talk about is what the state do toward you?
But does not the anger arise within you? does not that mean you must fight the inner anger instead of fighting govermental offices?
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
I have no anger erupting inside of me: I just do my dharma as outlined by my reliance on Consciousness of the universe. This gets me on the right path to do absolutely what is necessary in the right time to be able to survive. There is only one objective: use ones intelligence and wisdom to thwart the attacks upon oneself in the most appropriate way so that the persecutors are unable to take any action against one. It has been like that for 20 years. I do not do Buddha morality. This is the only way to live for an advaitin.
Perhaps because "spiritual" people attempt do disassociate non spiritual people from morality or use it as a weapon against those of their own faith?
Moral value is the larger part of human (and many animals) life. No spirituality required to know what is right and what is wrong
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
ok
Then i understand a bit more
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
If I am hungry I eat anything that is on the table to eat.ok
As I see it, there's already entirely too much talk and thought. It's action, not talk or thought, that matters.
I think the words you're looking for are "I" and "me."
You do not speak for all advaitins. I don't presume to speak for you. Please don't presume to speak for me.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
An advaitin is a truth accommodator: are you one?
No, it's not.
An advaitin is one who has realized the Atman and has realized that Atman is the same as Brahman, and an advaitin seeks vidya to attain Moksha . Advaita makes no claim of "truth accommodation."
"The term Advaita refers to its idea that the true self, Atman, is the same as the highest metaphysical Reality (Brahman). The followers of this school are known as Advaita Vedantins, or just Advaitins,[3] and they seek spiritual liberation through acquiring vidyā, meaning knowledge,[4] of one's true identity as Atman, and the identity of Atman and Brahman.[5][6][7]"
Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia
As discussed previously when you called yourself an "Existential Buddhist," you don't get to hijack terms others use to identify their worldviews and twist their meanings to fit your own personal worldview. If you want to be a "truth accommodator," why not just label yourself "truth accommodator" instead of riffing off labels of others?
Since this is not a debate topic, and since I don't wish to derail @Amanaki's thread, I won't be replying to any rebuttals to this in this thread. If you wish discuss this further, please do so by creating a new thread in a debate area of the forum and I will be glad to discuss and debate this further.
Last edited:
PureX
Veteran Member
'Morality' is a derivative of ethics, and few people ever really consciously consider their own ethical imperatives. Generally, we subject everyone else to our own ethical standards, condemn or praise them accordingly, and then move on. It's all rather 'knee-jerk' an ego-driven. We rarely ever actually articulate our ethical imperatives, and even more rarely do we ever actually analyze them for reason.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
I have always been a satya-advaitist for years and used that label: I have just dropped the word satya from it as given after trying to see if there was any validity in Buddhism that I could relate to.
Hi Amanaki. Maybe things like morals are not controversial enough to debate over so there’s not much interest.
*smiles* "Satya" is Sanskrit for 'truth.' If you are going to be a "truth accommodator," perhaps dropping 'truth' from the label isn't ideal?
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
You are right: so I am back where I started with my philosophy of Truth accommodation in which God Consciousness and dharma figure intuitively. This is because I have found proof of the mechanism. I will retain advaita and revert to satya-advaita as my label so that I am free from criticism of using labels inappropriately.
dfnj
Well-Known Member
People obsessed with morality often tend to be the most immoral. Maybe people not obsessed with being moral is a good thing!
I kind of just live my life trying not to hurt anyone's spirit in the process. This way of being seems to work for me.
I encounter it quite often. If you don't, I have no idea why.
What does morality have to do with "spiritual life?"
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
I believe in the universality of virtues. I practice 160 virtues in my life. I find that one virtue leads to another. Even when i dont feel like practicing it, that is when i apply it the most. I find it brings me much joy and peace to do it.
I keep it very simple, morality does not have to be complex this way. I am most miserable when i am unable to do things, and then i lean on meditation, and mindfulness when suffering health crisis.
The focus is the virtue i apply. And virtue leads to other virtues.
I keep it very simple, morality does not have to be complex this way. I am most miserable when i am unable to do things, and then i lean on meditation, and mindfulness when suffering health crisis.
The focus is the virtue i apply. And virtue leads to other virtues.
I imagine that depends both on the tenets of the religion, and the rules of the state.
A simple example is that polygamy is illegal in my country.
@Amanaki, @Shantanu
We know from surveys of cultures around the world, and from behavior experiments with children including pre-verbal infants, that we're born with a set of evolved moral tendencies:
So thanks to those basics, and thanks also to our mirror neurons, which let us see things through the eyes of others, hence allow us empathy, we meet each other, regardless of our religion, with basically the same kit of moral tendencies.
(The rest of our morality comes from our upbringing, culture, education and experiences, hence can be much more various eg does it matter what you wear to court, at a wedding is there a bride-price, a dowry, or neither, do you hold your fork in your fingers or in your fist, is crime passionel a defense to murder &c.)
We know from surveys of cultures around the world, and from behavior experiments with children including pre-verbal infants, that we're born with a set of evolved moral tendencies:
child nurture and protection
dislike of the one who harms
fairness and reciprocity
group loyalty
respect for authority
a sense of self-worth or virtue through self-denial.
It will strike you that those are appropriate for gregarious mammals like us, who live in groups and benefit from group cooperation.dislike of the one who harms
fairness and reciprocity
group loyalty
respect for authority
a sense of self-worth or virtue through self-denial.
So thanks to those basics, and thanks also to our mirror neurons, which let us see things through the eyes of others, hence allow us empathy, we meet each other, regardless of our religion, with basically the same kit of moral tendencies.
(The rest of our morality comes from our upbringing, culture, education and experiences, hence can be much more various eg does it matter what you wear to court, at a wedding is there a bride-price, a dowry, or neither, do you hold your fork in your fingers or in your fist, is crime passionel a defense to murder &c.)