Right/wrong, good/bad, positive/negative, etc

[Rocky Lionmouth]

But death is still a part of the shifts and turns. Death may be final or not, but three things are sure in life as humans know it:

Birth, sickness, death. Immortality (imhauo) is moving beyond death. Death is present even when you talk about not dying.

 

I'm reading Ilyas post as a mild version of death is bad and therefore what leads to death is harmful, am i right?

 

Or do you mean more like: dont hurry towards the next stage if you still have a distance to go?

 

(Im not saying afterlife is a thing, idk and info is inconclusive for me as of yet )

[Stosh]

But death is still a part of the shifts and turns. Death may be final or not, but three things are sure in life as humans know it:

Birth, sickness, death. Immortality (imhauo) is moving beyond death. Death is present even when you talk about not dying.

I'm reading Ilyas post as a mild version of death is bad and therefore what leads to death is harmful, am i right?

Or do you mean more like: dont hurry towards the next stage if you still have a distance to go?

(Im not saying afterlife is a thing, idk and info is inconclusive for me as of yet )

Me??

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Me??

Oh, nah, sorry Stosh for the confusion, i was half-responding to Ilyas post and half just putting a thought out there.

[[email protected]]

If you are sure you will have any kind of life, then may be death is not an evil to you. Again, lets suppose that after death there are several options:

- no life at all, then from my point death is an absolute evil

- life in worse conditions (hell, ghost etc), then death seems also evil to me

- life in some analogue quality or better (human, gods etc), then death is not an evil or at least not an absolute evil.

But how can someone know for sure what point he might reach after death??? Here we come to Taoist approach that it is preferable at least to try to do something in this life in terms of development... Otherwise we can have an unpredictable final.

And from this point of view I think that everything that can lead to death has an evil nature.

Rgrds, Ilya

[Stosh]

If you are sure you will have any kind of life, then may be death is not an evil to you. Again, lets suppose that after death there are several options:

- no life at all, then from my point death is an absolute evil

- life in worse conditions (hell, ghost etc), then death seems also evil to me

- life in some analogue quality or better (human, gods etc), then death is not an evil or at least not an absolute evil.

But how can someone know for sure what point he might reach after death??? Here we come to Taoist approach that it is preferable at least to try to do something in this life in terms of development... Otherwise we can have an unpredictable final.

And from this point of view I think that everything that can lead to death has an evil nature.

Rgrds, Ilya

Ok thanks , I'd like to follow up that , with the ol' , If by time machine , you had the opportunity to kill Hitler beforehand , knowing only what you know now , is it a Karmic bad thing, or other evil ,  to do so, so you dont ,,, Or do you do it ? There will be follow up if you take this bait  Im still maneuvering . 

Edited March 2, 2017 by Stosh

[silent thunder]

This conversation has been reminding me of the story of the compassionate monk.

 

A monk and his brother monk were traveling by ship.  The ship was beset by pirates, who began stealing and the monks sat there unfussed.  Then the pirates shifted and decided to kill everyone on the ship. 

 

So the compassionate monk stood up and in swift order, killed all the pirates.

 

His brother was horrified and asked him what about his vow of compassion?

 

"I was compassionate brother.  I have the skills to deal with this karmic debt, they do not.  I have prevented them from lifetimes of debt with my compassion."

 

Now I have no idea whether or not he was right or wrong.  Only that from his perspective, he acted authentically to his core.

 

How we view the world is dependent on how we view the world. 

 

Right/Wrong can be fluid.  They are not necessarily fixed.

[cold]

All roads lead to situational ethics.

Lesser of two evils?

Dependent upon whether one is the aggressor or aggrieved.

 

I would hold that anyone who holds anything as an absolute truth is wrong.

With one exception.

Of course!

[Mig]

why everything has to be binary? Right or wrong is very subjective. I think there is both right in wrong and wrong in right. Dichotomies are limited at a certain point then there is grey zone and each language has its strategy to distinguish right or wrong.

[Stosh]

The floor recognizes the honorable representative from the Great State of Nirvana , SilentThunder et al,  who appear to make a motion that the Monk may choose to assertively act in a way which precipitates the least negative Karmic ramifications. Introducing a grey zone of subjective valuation to an assertion that karmic good and bad are fixed realities. 

(Ordinarily , where I come from , we call that doing right thing.)  

But going another step down the road, Originally , the monks did not attempt to thwart a robbery , Therefore they at least could be considered to have weighed the situation , to effect the least Karmic bad ,, and so to them unanimously ,committing a robbery is less bad,  than thwarting one. And Monks doing killing , is not as bad as the ignorant doing killing.

Is this Not the reasonable assessment ?

[Rara]

The idea that causing suffering is wrong is a universally accepted concept overall. You can't go to far wrong by not killing/harming.

 

We can't manage it completely though... if the harm is indirect then it's ok apparently We can "feel bad" but forget about it pretty easily.

 

The phone that I type this on has been made in extremely bad working conditions, so media over here has led me to believe. Therefore, should I refuse to by such things? I've tried being more "moral" and it just drives me mad. And it's so exhausting and harmful to one's self.

 

The detail is that the Taoist understands it differently. Return to the source and by nature, you won't do harm anyway.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Rara

[Rara]

PS If we don't perceive things as harmful, then we're all good.

 

We can lead by example here. Others will probably see us as insensitive though, but I guess that's their problem?

[Stosh]

Well Rara, from my angle theres good reasons to do things that get considered bad. This view has always been held. Thats why people can consider themselves to be on the side of rightness while hammering their enemies.
The capacity to empathize puts a person in a difficult spot. So from my perspective , I consider wrongness is a subjective thing that we make complex and vague judgements about, especially because we cant see all the ramifications which radiate out from that point. Kindness too can result in disasters. Its only from a very short sighted position that good and bad seem obvious. Its a salve for the conscience ,to restrict responsibility to the immediate and known.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Stosh

[[email protected]]

Ok thanks , I'd like to follow up that , with the ol' , If by time machine , you had the opportunity to kill Hitler beforehand , knowing only what you know now , is it a Karmic bad thing, or other evil , to do so, so you dont ,,, Or do you do it ? There will be follow up if you take this bait Im still maneuvering .

The case with Hitler is incorrect because my grandparents met each other in that war and if I could kill Hitler then I would not exist, therefore could not write my previous post and you would not ask me about this. :)

Looking seriously at the question o harm, I do believe that everything happening does not have an absolute polar good/bad scale, and that is why wa are not able to say smth for sure. This means that whatever I say (or anyone says) about karma and afterlife perspectives can be true or not. That is why I better agree with Taoism that one should develop his spirit and body in this particular life, because his expectations of the future can be just illusions.

Rgrds, Ilya

[Rara]

Well Rara, from my angle theres good reasons to do things that get considered bad. This view has always been held. Thats why people can consider themselves to be on the side of rightness while hammering their enemies.

The capacity to empathize puts a person in a difficult spot. So from my perspective , I consider wrongness is a subjective thing that we make compled and vague judgements about, especially because we cant see all the ramifications which radiate out from that point. Kindness too can result in disasters. Its only from a very short sighted position that good and bad seem obvious. Its a salve for the conscience ,to restrict responsibility to the immediate and known.

Yes I agree. But what if you never had enemies to hammer?

 

Let's not forget about the "ruthless sage". I agree, empathy and kindness can be a killer and as I've learnt over the years since being on this forum, there's kind then there's being a doormat. It's taken, what, 6 or 7 years but I think I've got the idea now haha.

 

These days, "just doing" seems to cause no complaint or conflict. It's hard to get in people's way if you're not seen.

 

But I remember one of the Wudang masters on a vid on Youtube saying that if someone hits you, why absorb their suffering by hitting back? I work to maintain this philosophy now. And with that, I've started to train Kung Fu again. Just like that - learning the art with no intention of ever using it. For me, that is the Way...

[Rara]

The case with Hitler is incorrect because my grandparents met each other in that war and if I could kill Hitler then I would not exist, therefore could not write my previous post and you would not ask me about this. :)

Looking seriously at the question o harm, I do believe that everything happening does not have an absolute polar good/bad scale, and that is why wa are not able to say smth for sure. This means that whatever I say (or anyone says) about karma and afterlife perspectives can be true or not. That is why I better agree with Taoism that one should develop his spirit and body in this particular life, because his expectations of the future can be just illusions.

Rgrds, Ilya

Very good way of putting it

[liminal_luke]

It`s pretty hard to get around making decisions.  We`re naturally going to be in favor of some things, and opposed to others.  Much time is spent debating these decisions.  Is it OK to watch porn?  To charge money for spiritual teachings?  To eat meat?

 

Oftentimes how we answer isn`t nearly as important as our grip strength.  How tightly do we hold on to our opinions?  It`s possible to hold an absolute conviction -- for instance, " I will not watch porn" -- without using megatons of emotional concrete to hold the conviction in place. Usually that`s not what we do though.  Usually we tighten around our beliefs -- and that tightening can lead to difficulties.  

 

To me, that`s the trap of being staunchly against things, say porn, since we`ve  been talking about that.  We may have every reason in the world to believe that it`s wrong, but if we constrict around that position our belief will only hurt us.

 

Of course we can also constrict around wanting something, and that`s called addiction.  Either way, there`s a loss of freedom.  

Edited March 3, 2017 by liminal_luke

[Mig]

Very interesting.

I feel good or bad, it doesn't exist. Yes, it does exist as in manifests, but at the end there is no good vs evil.

Humans are born with true nature, what is that true nature? For example as child you have morals, you can feel shame,

you instinctly know the difference between good or bad. Some more then others, but we all know when we do something wrong. Go against these, you become what you eat sort to speak, "deviating" from the way.

A child having morals? All I know about children is "I want, I want " they don't have morals, they learned them from adults. My bad I disagree so am I right or wrong?

[Brian]

It`s pretty hard to get around making decisions.  We`re naturally going to be in favor of some things, and opposed to others.  Much time is spent debating these decisions.  Is it OK to watch porn?  To charge money for spiritual teachings?  To eat meat?

 

Oftentimes how we answer isn`t nearly as important as our grip strength.  How tightly do we hold on to our opinions?  It`s possible to hold an absolute conviction -- for instance, " I will not watch porn" -- without using megatons of emotional concrete to hold the conviction in place. Usually that`s not what we do though.  Usually we tighten around our beliefs -- and that tightening can lead to difficulties.  

 

To me, that`s the trap of being staunchly against things, say porn, since we`ve  been talking about that.  We may have every reason in the world to believe that it`s wrong, but if we constrict around that position our belief will only hurt us.

 

Of course we can also constrict around wanting something, and that`s called addiction.  Either way, there`s a loss of freedom.

Indeed! One of the great risks of attachment is loss of freedom.

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Mig seems to hold a similar view of kids as mine

 

But theres the conundrum, you differentiate right from wrong in actions and this instinctive recognition cant spring from nowhere.

 

A kid is innocent yes, but in such a way that they could kill and harm without even realizing the effect and implication of their actions.

The smallest of children have no clue how to distinguish themselves from others, they fear people stop to exist when they cant be seen, they scream and yell over everything/nothing and cant portion and conserve their energy.

They suck at everything.

Whats speaks for them is that they work relentlessly to gain mastery over what they're stuck with: i.e. their body and refine their interaction with the world. They're helpless and completely depend on others while at the same time being selfish and ignorant.

 

So we help them and we do for them and teach them with endless patience and their minds and awareness grow and encompass more, but they still cant understand what they lack or have since they dont see the difference unless its evident. The more they have the less they treasure it.

Their interactions shape and trach them until they start to get a sense of how stuff kinda connects together. Many grownups cant accept interdependance and the fact that everything is connected, fleeting and in motion.

Blame and insecurity comes from not seeing the reality and dealing with it as best fits and benefits. Maybe. I'm being hars and pushing a point far to make it evident so yeah, punch of salt perhaps is needed

Edited March 3, 2017 by Rocky Lionmouth

[silent thunder]

That's not my experience with kids.

 

At least not a good portion of them.  They are, much like the adults, just trying to find a way through life without encountering too much harm, yet they seem to possess a natural ability which adults have had forcibly modified out of them... the ability to let go, just about anywhere and play.  Or just be and explore. 

 

What I find so admirable in children, is their natural affinity for shuffling off trauma and hardship and finding themselves playing in the midst of a midden heap, while the adults around them fret and whoa their setting.

 

The beauty of the ignorance of 'not knowing that they should suffer more'. 

I never suffered the winters as a child, because it was just the way the world was...  when my nostrils froze shut waiting for the bus, I didn't cry, I pushed on my nostrils and marveled at the funny feeling.