Of course. But this has to be taken in the right sense. For a person like me, of course I need to follow morals. This is because I lack the spiritual practice and experience that the gurus have, hence I could very well be on slippery ground currently while proclaiming this -- for example, I still have attachment to the world, I use technology, I value my own survival, and all this is bondage and delusion; even though I can admit of many facts by virtue of my analytical inquiries, it does not permit me to call myself a guru, because I do not have authentic experience, but only knowledge from literature and my own thinking.
Alexander Pope, in his Essay on Man (1774) tells us very succinctly: *'All nature is but art, unknown to thee; * *all chance, direction which thou canst not see;** * *all discord, harmony, not understood;** * *all partial evil, universal good;** * *all chaos, reason which thou canst not see;** * *One truth we know there is - whatever is, is right'.* ** If you have faith in the Bhagavad Gita, here are two quotes: 5.18: Sages see with an equal eye the learned and cultured Brahmin, the cow, the elephant, the dog, the outcaste. [think of the Brahmin as equivalent to Celtic Druids] 6.9: He who is equal in soul to friend and enemy and to neutral and indifferent, also to sinner and saint, he excels. As for the question, "if everything is right in its place, why even bother changing it?", the answer is simple, that to change it is also what is right, ergo, I bother to change it. Akshay On 20/01/2008, Heather Perella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Akshay, > > > > > [Pirsig quoted in Caryl's blog] > "From the perspective of a subject-object science, the > world is a completely purposeless, valueless place. > There is no point in anything. Nothing is right and > nothing is wrong. Everything just functions, like > machinery. There is nothing wrong with being lazy, > nothing morally wrong with lying, with theft, with > suicide, with murder, with genocide. There is nothing > morally wrong because there are no morals, just > functions." > > > > SA: Akshay, maybe you could help clear something > up for me that I heard while in the university in a > Oriental Philosophy of Religion course. The professor > said he had met some guru's of India philosophy, I > don't know of what school, that proclaimed that at a > certain 'stage' of understanding, everything is good > or another way of putting it is 'nothing is wrong'. > Guru's at this 'stage' didn't profess and didn't live > morals. They did whatever they wanted to and felt it > was ok. I read how you mentioned that a murderer is > G-d. Up above is a quote where s/o > reasoning/intellectualizing states "...there are no > morals, just functions." Are you, as well, professing > this? Please explain this. > > > woods, > SA > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Be a better friend, newshound, and > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
