The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
Serious Discussions about Life
moremojo:
--- Quote from: injest on October 08, 2007, 10:37:36 pm ---Scott,
If I were to subscribe to it....I would be absolved of all 'sin' or crimes because the 'victims' wanted to be victims. So how can you justify putting anyone in jail?
If I believed that other people that are in worse circumstances than I am in CHOOSE their circumstance then what right have I got to aid them? In fact if I use and abuse them I am being helpful....since it is in fact what they wanted. A step further down the road you lay out....If I abuse WORSE then I am hastening them on their fun journey. So dont' just rape....mutilate! I am doing what she wants.
Your philosophy seems too close to the patriarchal standard we have just pulled ourselves away from.
--- End quote ---
No, nothing to do with patriarchy here. You ask some very cogent questions that I still grapple with. If we will our destinies into being, should we never appeal to a sense of morality, seeing morality as a relative and unstable thing that doesn't even hold up in the mirror of Eternity? I don't think this is at all the most constructive approach we can take.
I think morality is here precisely so we can engage one another in a moral sense. Morality helps us choose who we want to be in a particular moment. And morality is measured, I think, by the degree of joy or suffering that we see around us. Something that causes the most pleasure to the most people, or alternatively something that causes the least harm to the least number of people, can be seen as Good. Conversely, something that does the most harm to the greatest number of people may be defined as Bad or Evil. By knowing the difference between Good and Evil, we are better able to craft our path, our destiny to a greater degree of nuance and refinement, just as the painter who can choose between this color and that color has a greater choice about what kind of picture she wants to create.
Should we never grieve? Should we never feel angry? Should we never seek to punish the transgressor and protect the victim? No, not at all. We should feel our feelings...that's precisely why we have them. We are in this contextual field for a reason, and that is to experience...ALL of It. Experience sadness, loss, love, joy, anger, quiescence, resignation...the whole spectrum of human feeling. Yes, send someone to jail who transgresses your law...if they end up there, their Soul was calling them to that experience, just as your Soul is calling you into the experience of Jailer. But when the jail has crumbled to dust, along with the laws that put it up in the first place, remember that Prisoner and Jailer were merely roles that you played...they do not define Who You Really Are.
Do keep in mind that I am only expounding my own speculations here. I am not the repository of all the answers. But the philosophy I present here is one that I find both interesting and personally appealing. You are free to consider it and reject it as you see fit. But I wish to emphasize that this approach is not patriarchal in the least...I find the Judeo-Christian tradition, with its emphasis on sin and retribution, much more deserving of that appellation.
moremojo:
I have to say that, upon reflection, I think my reasons for citing the Judeo-Christian tradition as patriarchal had nothing to do with logical reasoning. I do believe that the Judeo-Christian tradition is imbued with patriarchal values, but its emphasis on sin and retribution (with the added nuance, within the Christian religion, of redemption) has nothing to do with this. The patriarchal values of this tradition are reflected in its myths and in the structure of its organized religions.
moremojo:
One very important element within my attempts to explicate in this thread the monistic flavor of Kashmir Saivism (as I understand it) that I've neglected is the emphasis within this religion on recognition. Succinctly, this tradition states that God and the individual Consciousness are One and the Same (ergo, we create all that we experience, for God, the creative agent of the universe, is absolutely identical with Us), and that the key to enlightenment is the recognition and direct experience of this Reality.
How can this recognition be attained? In any number of ways. Abhinavagupta, the great synthesizer of Kashmir Saivism, advocated ritual behavior that would shock the participant into such awareness. Many of these rituals were deliberately devised to transgress the taboos of his particular culture (with its empasis on ritual purity), to remind the participant that God is within all things, and that there is nothing that is not holy. But there are as many paths to recognition as there are human beings to experience it. Meeting an old friend is one possible portal into this experience, as is the aesthetic experience of appreciating a work of art, music, or literature. Abhinavagupta was a compassionate figure (in a similar way, to my mind, as Lucretius was) and sought to free his fellow beings from the bondage of illusion, even though his methods might seem shocking or scandalous. The sense of heartlessness that I know many must see in my comments in this thread only seem so because they go against the "bad faith" that our culture has instilled in us. As Gangaji once said, "Love is ruthless." Love takes no prisoners...because Love is Free! It is in grappling with such apparent paradox that we begin to approach Divine Truth.
Daniel:
Scott, while I can appreciate your knowledge and understanding of spirituality, I don't think these discussions were ever meant to be this... heavy. If it becomes too heavy, it becomes less possible for others to engage in it, since they might be confused or not as well versed in religious and spiritual philosophies than we might be... Let's see if we can keep it a little lighter so that everyone can participate, if we can.
ifyoucantfixit:
I find these kinds of activities, somewhat meandering...It is so much like free associating.
You can feel and think whatever you like to do..Its all ok...But at the risk of sounding way too
simplifying,,what does it do for the regular man in the end...
It is over so many peoples head, and does it serve any purpose other than to the one doing the espousing...
I personally would like to see something that would encompass the greater majority of
people and let them understand ,,, and participate....JMO
Ok maybe that makes me stupid, i will own that.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version