Practicing morality

[innerspace_cadet]

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey.

 

That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts.

 

How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

[dwai]

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey.

 

That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts.

 

How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

 

The practice of Yama and Niyama is not a moral code of conduct per se. They are put together to minimize your energy dissipation. If you think of it from an energy expenditure perspective, all those "rules" that we are asked to follow, tend to allow least expenditure of energy, even if it might seem like they are a lot more energy intensive than the alternative (to not follow those rules). In the long term, they will strengthen your will, your prana and your intellect.

 

If someone is a heroin addict and is trying to practice yoga, that is by itself a great first step. The deeper the practice develops, the more natural is the aversion to all those things that the Sutras suggest avoiding. That is because the Satva guna (of the Three Gunas of Rajas, Tamas and Satva) increases...so all those things that introduce or increase Rajas and Tamas become natural aversions. In Taoist terms, as the balance increases (Taiji is achieved), the tendency to go out of balance reduces (Satva can be considered to be the Taiji equillibrium state, with Rajas being Yang and Tamas being Yin).

Edited June 17, 2010 by dwai

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey.

 

That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts.

 

How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

 

I remember reading Path notes by Glenn Morris and from what he says the whole moral code part is unnecessary and is actually the wrong way round. As in, first the energy kicks off and then you gradually become like that. And what has happened is religion has taken the actions and character of masters and tried to make it into a set of rules that may, perhaps, get you there. According to Mr. Morris it won't, only energy practice/meditation will.

 

 

The practice of Yama and Niyama is not a moral code of conduct per se. They are put together to minimize your energy dissipation.

 

I think that's the nail on the head right there.

[goldisheavy]

Meditation is like patience. Do only good people benefit from patience? An honest answer, I think, is no. A thief benefits from patience as much as a generous person. If you are a patient thief, you'll stake the place out and enter only when no one is there. If you're impatient, you may enter only to be shot dead by the owner or guard. What about modesty? Again, a criminal will benefit from modesty as much as a good person. A lot of times criminals get caught when they brag to the wrong person or in the wrong place about their exploits. If a criminal were modest, one might not get caught.

 

So it's clear to me that virtues help everyone, good and bad people. And I think the same is true with meditation. I would even say that if something only helps sometimes or only a certain set of people, then it's not a virtue.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Something that Dr. Baolin Wu wrote in his book "Qigong for Total Wellness" is that perfection and unity is the goal that one strives for- NOT a prerequisite to start practice. You might have all kinds of problems prior to practice, and it is THROUGH the practice that you are able to let go of the problems, and move further along the path to being a more balanced being.

 

So there's something to keep in mind.

 

Plus everything that everyone else has said so far is true, I think. Adopting many of these practices prevents dissipation of energy, and helps you channel your energy to productive means. And to that end, you should be channeling energy TOWARDS a PRODUCTIVE goal, rather than trying to NOT DO some BAD GOAL.

 

Trying to "not do" something, in my experience, only keeps the focus on that something. Best to direct the focus to something else, have the energy go there, and the "rules" will happen on their own accord.

Edited June 17, 2010 by Sloppy Zhang

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

Meditation is like patience. Do only good people benefit from patience? An honest answer, I think, is no. A thief benefits from patience as much as a generous person. If you are a patient thief, you'll stake the place out and enter only when no one is there. If you're impatient, you may enter only to be shot dead by the owner or guard. What about modesty? Again, a criminal will benefit from modesty as much as a good person. A lot of times criminals get caught when they brag to the wrong person or in the wrong place about their exploits. If a criminal were modest, one might not get caught.

 

So it's clear to me that virtues help everyone, good and bad people. And I think the same is true with meditation. I would even say that if something only helps sometimes or only a certain set of people, then it's not a virtue.

 

Great analogy.

[de_paradise]

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey.

 

That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts.

 

How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

 

In this case it would be better to take the Ericksonian, gradual approach from addiction to stronger morality. Thats to say, if this person can fight off the urge for one day to take drugs, and subsitute the behavior with doing something good, like picking up garbage in the public park, for free, for no reason. Then perhaps little by little, the person can understand that it is possible to beat the addiction for longer periods of time.

 

Drug addiction is inherently egotistical behavior (seeking pleasure for oneself) But morality is based on the opposite type of behavior, doing something for other's good.

 

The reason why morality can be considered a spiritual method, is that it reverses the ego flow of me me me, and when you do this, and are in this state of give give give, your qi starts to flow greatly and your energy body opens up and advances.

 

So you can practise this all the time, regardless of how much you meditate, and it will benefit you.

 

What I do is reproduce the give give give type of feelings state during my meditations to amplify their results. *a secret of meditational success

 

If you leave the rule and structure kind of approach to one side, and look at this process as tendancy and energy flow, its much less confusing. You can meditate at any time as well as do kind things at any time. These are mere formulas to push away from the ego towards self-less and huge energy flows, of the ego-less state known as enlightenment.

Edited June 17, 2010 by de_paradise

[goldisheavy]

Drug addiction is inherently egotistical behavior (seeking pleasure for oneself) But morality is based on the opposite type of behavior, doing something for other's good.

 

I think this is completely wrong. Morality is egoistic as well as anything is. When I help people, I receive pleasure from it. If it didn't feel good for me to help, I wouldn't be doing it at all, even if other people demanded it.

 

Everything is selfish from top to bottom, all the way to enlightenment. Wanting to have more wisdom is selfish. Why should you have more wisdom than someone else? Wanting to have more patience is selfish. Why should you be better than someone else? Etc. Everything is selfish.

 

The difference between what we call immoral and what we call moral is not ego vs others, but it is this: how do you see yourself? A moral person sees oneself in everything and everyone, and thus, naturally, to benefit oneself, a moral person benefits everything and everyone. An immoral person sees a sharp distinction and a boundary between oneself and everything and everyone else. When an immoral person seeks benefit, it is often not in the form of an overall improvement, but rather a shift from some people to oneself, from some other places to one's own place. A moral person is not happy to just shift from one person to another, but rather wants an overall improvement.

 

But both moral and immoral person are selfish. Moral selfishness is simply a more encompassing, a more inclusive and more evolved kind of selfishness. I would say that a moral person's ego is much larger than an immoral person. An immoral person think he/she's only a body and that's it. A moral persons sees oneself reflected in the whole universe and sees the entire universe as oneself.

Edited June 17, 2010 by goldisheavy

[de_paradise]

I think this is completely wrong. Morality is egoistic as well as anything is. When I help people, I receive pleasure from it. If it didn't feel good for me to help, I wouldn't be doing it at all, even if other people demanded it.

 

Everything is selfish from top to bottom, all the way to enlightenment. Wanting to have more wisdom is selfish. Why should you have more wisdom than someone else? Wanting to have more patience is selfish. Why should you be better than someone else? Etc. Everything is selfish.

 

The difference between what we call immoral and what we call moral is not ego vs others, but it is this: how do you see yourself? A moral person sees oneself in everything and everyone, and thus, naturally, to benefit oneself, a moral person benefits everything and everyone. An immoral person sees a sharp distinction and a boundary between oneself and everything and everyone else. When an immoral person seeks benefit, it is often not in the form of an overall improvement, but rather a shift from some people to oneself, from some other places to one's own place. A moral person is not happy to just shift from one person to another, but rather wants an overall improvement.

wh

But both moral and immoral person are selfish. Moral selfishness is simply a more encompassing, a more inclusive and more evolved kind of selfishness. I would say that a moral person's ego is much larger than an immoral person. An immoral person think he/she's only a body and that's it. A moral persons sees oneself reflected in the whole universe and sees the entire universe as oneself.

ec

 

Doing good things feel good because of the energy flows, its a payoff sure. It also helps liberate. In this way it looks paradoxical. In this thread, I am trying to offer useful advice and not complicate or philosphize. People who want to make spiritual progress can focus on what helps. You can try it or not, I have this experience to offer. Please hit someone else with your wonderful philosophy GIH (ie.dont respond because I wont), I took many Uni courses in ethics, it all seems to irrelevant now that I see the simplicity of the order of things by experiential knowlege.

[goldisheavy]

ec

 

Doing good things feel good because of the energy flows, its a payoff sure. It also helps liberate. In this way it looks paradoxical. In this thread, I am trying to offer useful advice and not complicate or philosphize. People who want to make spiritual progress can focus on what helps. You can try it or not, I have this experience to offer. Please hit someone else with your wonderful philosophy GIH (ie.dont respond because I wont), I took many Uni courses in ethics, it all seems to irrelevant now that I see the simplicity of the order of things by experiential knowlege.

 

That's generosity in practice. Usually people who talk about making ego smaller or even removing it are the biggest assholes. You are demonstrating it.

[ralis]

Morality, created by religions, is nothing more than crowd control. The religious moralists appeal to the universal or absolute higher cause and if one doesn't sacrifice to their higher cause, then one is immoral. The emotional root of this manipulation is fear and guilt. Sheep will respond well when fear is used.

 

 

ralis

[Marblehead]

Sheep will respond well when fear is used.

ralis

 

 

I wasn't going to post in this thread but I just have to tell you that this gave me a good belly laugh.

 

Peace & Love!

[Sloppy Zhang]

I wasn't going to post in this thread but I just have to tell you that this gave me a good belly laugh.

 

Peace & Love!

 

As the saying goes:

 

It's funny because it's true.

 

[Aetherous]

Meditation gives you a taste of inner peace. It's easier to get over addictions when you've experienced that.

 

No one is perfect and I kind of agree with ralis...it seems a lot of traditions use morality as a way to keep you on the outside.

[NeiChuan]

Meditation gives you a taste of inner peace. It's easier to get over addictions when you've experienced that.

 

No one is perfect and I kind of agree with ralis...it seems a lot of traditions use morality as a way to keep you on the outside.

 

Hm yeah I agree with ralis to a degree too.

[nac]

Morality, created by religions, is nothing more than crowd control. The religious moralists appeal to the universal or absolute higher cause and if one doesn't sacrifice to their higher cause, then one is immoral. The emotional root of this manipulation is fear and guilt. Sheep will respond well when fear is used.

Don't forget the three jewels. It's because of this attitude that I never consider myself a full-fledged Taoist.

 

PS. OTOH, I'm not in favor of strict, over-generalized morality either, like: never kill, no exceptions. There's little meaning and no depth in such systems.

Edited June 18, 2010 by nac

[Spectrum]

Fasting. I'm addicted to air water clothing food shelter and sex. Whenever I fast from any of these I experience a profound sense of connection to a source of energy from outside the boundaries of any one of these survival nessecities, yet all of which draw and nourish.

 

Indeed part of the Art of Life is closing the windows doors to the house, and knowing when to open 'the hatch'

Edited June 18, 2010 by Spectrum

[goldisheavy]

Morality, created by religions, is nothing more than crowd control. The religious moralists appeal to the universal or absolute higher cause and if one doesn't sacrifice to their higher cause, then one is immoral. The emotional root of this manipulation is fear and guilt. Sheep will respond well when fear is used.

 

 

ralis

 

I emphatically agree with this. Religion very often carries within it an enormous perversion of morality.

 

And yet, real morality does exist, don't you think? Real morality is not what the Bible "commands."

Edited June 18, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Starjumper]

And yet, real morality does exist, don't you think? Real morality is not what the Bible "commands."

What you probably mean by real morality is in Taoism called Te, which I translate as ethics (not ethical rules but internally validated ethics). Ethics is a game, a game which never ends and no one is perfect.

 

And yes, putting morality first, the way religion does, is backwards; and yet only those who naturally truly wish the best for others are shown the 'way'.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Starjumper7

[Gerard]

...That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts...

 

You'll be hurting yourself. How could you possibly travel if the car (body) you are travelling with is malfunctioning?

 

How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

 

Morality is just a natural aspect of the purification process, because this is simply what you are doing when you cultivate your spirit: You are slowly liberating yourself from all the layers that cover your spirit but in the meantime you need to look after the vehicle. I know it looks like a catch-22 thing, but the further you progress the clearer things become.