Virtue and vice ...

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


I have been thinking as if late on virtue and vice and their boundary/limit conditions; let me explain, and ask for your POV.

puṅya पुण्य - virtuous, right , meritorious
It seems if one has limited virtue (puṅya) it is due to being obedient to the rules. That is, if one refrains from certain actions
it is due to the consequences that can arise from breaking the rules that are established. It is not so much by one's
firm hold or conviction of a principle, but of the notion to avoid punishment.

Full virtue (puṅya) seems much different. The full blossom of puṅya comes with one knowing their inherent nature ( svarūpa&#185.
This nature is that of expansion of fullness of Being ( bhūman&#185. One is beyond limitations and rules.
Then one is absolutely natural, virtue is no effort. One's actions are in line with nature, with the rhythms of life on a universal scale.

pāpa पाप - sin , vice , crime
Hence with limited sin (pāpa)the rules are broken. These rules can be social, family, or śāstric in nature. One pays a price.

But what then is full sin (pāpa) ? It seems to me it must be the complete absorption (āveśa&#185 of the limited, of differences, of moha ( delusion) of 'me'.
That 'me' is the only thing there is.

Full virtue is the nature of the Self, full sin is the nature of moha ( delusion).

Yet here is a view I am entertaining: No matter how you apply yourself to limited virtue it will never deposit you into the realm of the Supreme,
of the Self. It will keep you compliant, out of trouble, and between the lines yet its power to uplift is minimal.

Why so? Perhaps we can review this in the next post. Yet I first thought to get your views on this matter.

praṇām
words

• bhūman - abundance , plenty, fullness
• āveśa - absorption of the faculties in one wish or idea; intentness , devotedness to an object
• svarūpa - one's own form or shape , the form or shape of ; in this conversation the form of the Self/ātman

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam Yajvan: Interesting. Your descriptions of limited versus full virtue brought my awareness back to classroom discussions on oddly enough, the breaking of laws, whether school rules (running in the hallways) or societal (speeding in traffic) laws.

There always seemed to be quite the disconnect between students who got it, and those who didn't. When asked why one shouldn't run in the hallways, those who didn't get it would just reply "so you don't get in trouble" whilst those who did would say "so you or someone else doesn't get injured." It is similar with speeding. My questions would be, "Why do some get it while others don't?" and "What can we do to enhance or enable the "don't get its" shift over to the "get its" side.

Only occasionally in my classroom discussions would I see a student have an 'Aha!" moment, and see it in a new light. There were many who were able to parrot what they were able to determine the teacher wanted to hear, but that's not the same.

Looking forward to other observations ...

Aum Namasivaya

[TheOne]

I agree with you yajvan but I don't think it's merely black and white. Like Lord Krsna said, there are three modes. Righteousness, Passion, and ignorance. I think the traditional "vices" such as lust, gambling, and other non-violent activities yet still not morally justifiable acts are in the passion section while killing, insulting, lying for benefit, and stealing are in the ignorance section.

[saidevo]

namaste everyone.

The very terms puNya, pApa and jnAna are indicative of their nature:

• The term puNya is from the dhAtu--root, puN. Now this term puN has two meanings, both of which apply to puNya: 1. to act piously or virtuously; 2. collect, accumulate.

• The term pApa is from the combination pa + Apa, where pa has two meanings: 1. drinking, quaffing; 2. protecting, guarding. Drinking is absorbing, and protecting is for continued enjoyment of what is protected. When these two are combined, one gets pApa.

• The term jnAna is from the dhAtu jnA which has the meanings: knowing, learning, becoming intelligent/wise.

It is easy to see the connection between these three terms:

• By acting virtuously and piously, one gets puNya accumulated, for a better afterlife and rebirth.

• By absorbing worldly pleasures and by enjoying and protecting worldly objects, one obtains pApa.

• puNya accumulates automatically, if one acts virtuously and piously; pApa is obtained by efforts. In other words, behaving virtuously and piously is the svAbhava--nature, of man, because it is what distinguishes him from an animal. But acting otherwise requires deliberate efforts, by which one obtains pApa. The irony of both is that being grounded in svAbha is hard, while going out of it is easy. This is because of avidyA--ignorance, or lack of real knowledge about the Self.

• jnAna--knowledge, is one that connects these two actions. But knowledge, contrary to popular belief, does not accumulate, only arrived at by trial and error, by hard learning and becoming wise. By trial and error, a person arrives at the real and lasting knowledge of the Self, by progressively giving up what is falsely learnt and equated with the Self.

[Sean]

Moral right action isn't calculable, or indeed there wouldn't have been 2500 years of useless Western ethical philosophy. There are no exhaustive guiding principles and what sometimes can seem like vice can become righteousness. Certainly numerous myths of the gods involve what in Christian terms for example may be dubious action, but which has an aesthetic logic. And aesthetics refers to the realm of the gunas, the silent movement of nature to which we need to be unaffectedly aligned...

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast� Sean,

Moral right action isn't calculable,

...but is possible and do-able. 'Calculable' depends on the conditions at hand. It does not come as ~standard equipment~ in ignorance, but is the very breath of one that is possessed of the Self.

Right action is at the core of the bhāgavad gītā.


praṇām

[Onkara]

Namast� Yajvan and all
The question which sprang to mind is why would one remain with 'limited virtue' (puṅya)? Given the logic of your explanation above it would make sense to take the step and move towards a state of full virtue.

Perhaps there has to be something greater than that which 'limited virtue' appears to offer? We need to feel we can let go of "right versus wrong" or "punishment versus reward" which comes with 'limited virtue' (puṅya), do we not?

If one does not know that greater cause intuitively, then can one come to know ones nature (svarūpa)?

[Believer]

I am thankful to both Yajvan and Saidevo for their above posts. During my younger days, many a times, I got discouraged by spiritual write-ups because of their lack of clarity to a newbie. I am pointing out the following examples, not as any negative comments, rather as how text could be made more reader friendly for younger audiences.

Full virtue (puṅya) seems much different. The full blossom of puṅya comes with one knowing their inherent nature ( svarūpa�).
This nature is that of expansion of fullness of Being ( bhūman�). One is beyond limitations and rules.

One is beyond limitations and rules = One's inherent actions coming from within are far superior than any external limitations and rules imposed by the society.

� jnAna--knowledge, is one that connects these two actions. But knowledge, contrary to popular belief, does not accumulate, only arrived at by trial and error, by hard learning and becoming wise.

does not accumulate = something like, 'does not come by itself'

� jnAna--knowledge, is one that connects these two actions. But knowledge, contrary to the popular belief, does not come by itself, but is only arrived at either by trial and error, or by hard learning; thereby making one wise.

Again, my only point is that to make the text reader friendly for younger audiences and to draw them towards the Hindu thought, it should be as fluid as possible.

Jai Sri ShivaVishnuKrishnaRama!
-

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast� Onkara

The question which sprang to mind is why would one remain with 'limited virtue' (puṅya)? Given the logic of your explanation above it would make sense to take the step and move towards a state of full virtue.

Just on this point, there are people that wish to just get by. Full virtue is the loss of the small self ( ego-centric). This takes intent. Hence some may think any one of these ideas :

• full virtue is not possible
• it is not attractive or appealing
• I cannot articulate it , hence I cannot get my mind around it.
• why bother ?
• where is the profit or ROI in it?
• etc.

These mind sets are of limited beings and content ( if that is the right word) with the present conditions.
praṇām

[Sean]

hariḥ oṁ

...but is possible and do-able. 'Calculable' depends on the conditions at hand. It does not come as ~standard equipment~ in ignorance, but is the very breath of one that is possessed of the Self.

Right action is at the core of the bhāgavad gītā.

Yes indeed- it's the calculating mind that causes Arjuna's suspension, indecision and inaction. He moves to a transcendent position and acts intuitively not intellectually.