absolute vs relative morality

[Guest Haridas]

What is relative morality?  It means basing your morals on what those around you are doing.  E.g. everyone else drinks (alcohol) so why shouldn't I drink?  Everyone else lies and steals should why shouldn't I? Mindless conformity.

And what is absolute morality?  Morality that is timeless, that your inner conscience tells you (and common sense) is right, and that is often expressed by higher principles.  E.g.  Drinking alcohol is immoral.  Lying is wrong.  Stealing is wrong.  And even if 99% of the people around me may engage in these things, I won't, on this basis.  This is intelligence based on individuality.

The point in this post is that I think too many people have fallen into a mindset of relative morality.  

[Guest Jacfsing2]

Morality is subjective, the reason something is right or wrong is because Vaheguru made it wrong, so morality isn't higher than Vaheguru, but rather lower. 

Is Robin Hood, (if he existed), a hero or a criminal? 

There is absolutely no such thing as objective morality in any eastern philospphy, it is only a product of Judea-Christian beliefs.

[Guest Haridas]

Hi

I'm not sure I understand your point.  Yes He is higher than morals, but He is higher than us also.  Are you trying to say morality is irrelevant?  I do not see how anyone with a familiarity with SGGS and Dasam Bani could state that view.  All the good virtues (gunas) are His and by partaking in them that is a way or worshipping Him and liberating ourselves. (btw I personally don't like to brazenly write Gurmantra/Naam, so I refer to Him as He, just a personal thing hope you don't mind).  You can find so many Saloks in Nitnem that show them.

You sound like someone who actively engages in dishonesty and thinks it is justified.  Thats the only reason I can think that someone would support such a view as yours.

The example of Robin Hood is not complicated.  Stealing is wrong.  Sharing with the poor is good.  Were they starving?  Ok then, I understand stealing, but that doesn't make it 'right'.  Also they could have done it the most ethical way possible.  Who knows, a high class bhagat probably would rather depend on God or starve to death, then steal.  But the point I am making is personal morality, not about sitting in judgement of others.  I.e. it is for Robing Hood to reflect on his own behaviour.  (Also, all this is assuming that what we even know about him is true.  The historical records are sparse, from what I understand).

You put the example of Einstein on the thread I made about honesty, (but i could not respond because the admin. moved it).  Firstly, just because Einstein had great scientific insight, that doesn't make him an authority on morality.  That is fallacious reasoning.  Secondly, what actually happened is that he regretted signing a petition for the US government to create an atomic bomb, because he thought Germany were actively trying to make one.  He later learnt that this was wrong, hence regretted petitioning the government.  He did not regret his research, only his political actions.   Maybe if you had more respect for truthfulness you would  not get your facts so mixed up?

As for Judea-Christian beliefs, I would say the 10 commandments are very agreeable as a guideline for a devotee of God, and the seven deadly sins.  Jesus's utmost commandment was to love God with everything you have.  That is not 'subjective', that is kind of the point (in bhakti).

I think every eastern dharam has some kind of morality.  

[Guest Questioner]

Is laughing absolute morality or relative morality

[Guest Jacfsing2]

On 9/10/2017 at 7:23 AM, Guest Haridas said:

I think every eastern dharam has some kind of morality.  

This one statement just proves you should know before commenting on such complex topics.

[Balkaar]

I do not believe in an absolute morality, dharam is not the same for each and every individual. This is not to say that dharam does not exist, only that it doesn't exist in a monolithic form. 

This concept is reflected very well in the life of the Mahapurakh Sant Baba Thakur Singh, 14th jathedar of Damdami Taksaal. Babaji was a strict vegetarian like all members of Taksaal, so for him eating meat was a great sin. However when he visited the chaunis (encampments) of Nihang Singhs around Chowk Mehta he would often bring offerings of goats to be jhatkaa'd by the nihangs and later consumed. Because eating meat was not a great paap for them as it was for babaji, rather it was their tradition and he respected that the role they were given by the Almighty was different from his own.  Satguru's Hukam affects each person differently. 

Eastern dharams tend not to impose moral codes on the whole of humankind, as though such codes apply to everybody. Yes there are certain basic guiding principles of human morality - don't murder, don't rape, but most sane people don't really need to be told not to do these things by a religion because they feel an inherent revulsion towards them. However beyond this things can get quite flexible. Some people are meant to be householders and provide for a family, whilst others are meant to be celibates and devote their lives and all their energy to Akaal Purakh and Seva of the Panth. If God creates someone with the intention that they will become a warrior, battle becomes dharam for this person, a righteous deed. If however God creates a man and by his hukam determines that this man is to be peaceful saint, battle is adharam for him, not righteous. This is why different sampardas/jathebandiaan exist in Sikhi. Guru Ji is not/was not anti-samparda or anti-jathebandi, if they were, they wouldn't have created or blessed so many of them themselves.

I don't know if what I'm saying is right, but this is the conclusion I have arrived at from my study of Sikhi. Others will have arrived at different conclusions, and good thing too -  Sikhi is a garden full of many diverse flowers.  I do not believe Guru Ji aspired to make all Sikhs, or all people,  identical in their religious outlook and practice. 

[Guest Dhan]

On 09/09/2017 at 4:17 PM, Guest Haridas said:

What is relative morality?  It means basing your morals on what those around you are doing.  E.g. everyone else drinks (alcohol) so why shouldn't I drink?  Everyone else lies and steals should why shouldn't I? Mindless conformity.

And what is absolute morality?  Morality that is timeless, that your inner conscience tells you (and common sense) is right, and that is often expressed by higher principles.  E.g.  Drinking alcohol is immoral.  Lying is wrong.  Stealing is wrong.  And even if 99% of the people around me may engage in these things, I won't, on this basis.  This is intelligence based on individuality.

The point in this post is that I think too many people have fallen into a mindset of relative morality.  

Great points