--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "peterklutz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -- snip -- > > > > > Nicely put. Any concept of "enlightened behavior" is > > > more a reflection of a cultural/psychological boundary > > > of the individual than some assessment of > > > enlightenment. By the way, I just realized, the term > > > "enlightened behavior" is an oxymoron. There is no > > > such thing as enlightened behavior. There's just > > > behavior, period. > > > > > In the BG MMY says at least two things that might be of guidance. > > The first is that an enlightened individual (another oxymoron..?) > > always acts to promote evolution. The second is that of the three > > gunas, enlightened people act under the influence of sattva. > > Even more key, it seems to me, is Krishna's > assertion, "Unfathomable is the course of action." > > If it's the case that we cannot know all the > ramifications of someone's behavior, as the > assertion implies, then we can't know whether a > given behavior does or does not promote evolution, > which means we cannot use behavior as a criterion > of enlightenment. > > For any act, even if it appears to be thoroughly > evil, it's possible to imagine a scenario in which > the act has evolution-promoting consequences, even > if they may come to fruition way down the line (and > vice-versa, of course, for an apparently good action). > > This does NOT mean that we should unquestioningly > accept the behavior of someone we assume is > enlightened in the belief that it ultimately has > to have evolutionary consequences--because we have > no way of knowing for sure if the person *is* > enlightened. > > So "Unfathomable is the course of action" cuts > both ways: we can't tell from behavior whether > someone is enlightened, and because we can't tell, > we can't assume the behavior is ultimately going to > have evolutionary consequences. > > In other words, assuming someone is enlightened > makes absolutely zero difference to how we should > regard his/her actions. We can only evaluate > his/her behavior the same way we evaluate anybody > else's. > > We can, however, keep in the back of the mind the > recognition that we *could* be wrong in our > evaluation. We just have no way of knowing.
Right on Judy, you know sometimes, in spite of all those thoughts running around in your head at random, you hit the nail right on the head, (but then a broken clock is right twice a day too). Gaday! Yu no whooo, (boooo!) halloween's coming where's Delia? ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
