The struggle to instill justice, honor, and morality within society has been occurring since the dawn of humankind. Whether man is innately evil or not has long been the subject of debate. The epic poem, the Mahabharata, explores this argument by examining treachery, family ties, and righteousness in the setting of an epic conflict between two royal families, the Pandavas and the Kauravas. Within the Mahabharata is the Bhagavad Gita. Spoken by Lord Krishna to Prince Arjuna, this holy narrative, Lord Krishna explains that one need not be afraid of destroying evil. The destruction of evil, Lord Krishna explains, is in itself virtuous because you are delivering justice to the wicked and reestablishing righteousness. There are numerous teachings in the Bhagavad Gita each with their own moral lessons. The following three teachings focus on Arjuna’s dejection and his moral dillema, followed by Lord Krishna’s response with the philosophy of the soul and spiritual discipline, and finally how the discipline of righteous action can allow an individual to obtain Moksha.
The first teaching of the Bhagavad Gita starts with Arjuna declaring his inability to take up arms against his kin. He states that there is no good in killing his family, teachers, and friends because regardless of their moral construct, these individuals all influenced his life in some way and Arjuna has maintained respect and love for them throughout his life. Blinded by their lust for the throne, the Duryodhan and Shakuni, Arjuna’s cousin and uncle, respectively, caused turmoil in the family ultimately resulting in the Kurukshetra war. The Pandavas were an Aryan dynasty that believed in honor, righteousness, and family over all other aspects of life. This made it extremel...
... middle of paper ...
...ttachment to the family that Arjuna is supposed to cut, only then will he gain the courage to take up arms against his teachers and cousins, follow his Dharma and restore righteousness to the world. If Arjuna fails to follow his Dharma and wage war against the karuvas, he would be abandoning his duty and allowing evil to reign over the land, something Lord Krishna does want to occur. Equally important to duty, is focusing on the action itself, in this case destroying evil. By focusing on the action and displacing all other outcomes, you become detacherd to failure and success. What Arjuna is fearful of are the outcomes of the war, the death of his family. As a result, Lord Krishna tells Arjuna to detach himself from the fruits of action and be intent on the action alone because only then will he be able to detach himself from the emotional ties he holds near to him.
...are confronted with the question of moral absolutes, we are forced to wonder when and to whom justice truly applies. Hopefully, we will look at our world and our ideas of right, wrong and retribution in different ways, ways that will enlighten and enrich our lives, and the those of the an audience of readers 2,000 years from now.
Morality derives from the Latin moralitas meaning, “manner, character, or proper behavior.” In light of this translation, the definition invites the question of what composes “proper behavior” and who defines morality through these behaviors, whether that be God, humanity, or an amalgamation of both. Socrates confronted the moral dilemma in his discourses millennia ago, Plato refined his concepts in his Republic, and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi would commit their life work to defining and applying the term to political reform. Finally, after so many years, Martin Luther King’s “A Letter from Birmingham Jail” reaches a consensus on the definition of morality, one that weighs the concepts of justice and injustice to describe morality as the
In conclusion we can say that consequentialism is flawed in the fact that the borders of a wrongdoing, to bring about a better good, are limitless. We can conclude that evil wrong doing can be construed as bringing about a better happiness for what the evil doer contrives to be for the better good of the people. For the most part we have seen that deontology’s view of good will in the individuals act can lead to moral justification. The captain and his men must make this moral decision to kill or not, if they do kill the Indians, their actions must be left to higher authority to deal with.
...w true moral behaviour is stamped out by the majority, who are all immoral and like to bully and kill the weak. In the end, there is no hope for true spiritual purity.
"From the Bhagavad-Gita." Prentice Hall Literature. Trans. Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood. Upper Saddle: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004. 182-89. Print.
Martin Luther King once said, “Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him”. Throughout history, people have committed numerous acts of crime from stealing to fighting, to war. These acts of violence had never done any good to mankind but had continuously harmed mankind. Mahatma Gandhi was a leader who had promoted and inspired people across the world to continue the acts of Ahimsa. Gandhi spread his acts of Ahimsa inspiring the American Civil Rights Movement, Nelson Mandela, and Harper Lee showing that Gandhi’s beliefs of non violence should be continued.
Yet another reason why Ashoka was ruthless was through he made people become his friends or they shall be killed (DocE). He says it in a nicer language like its not a big deal if he has to kill you if you don’t become his friend. Ashoka even refers to himself as “Beloved of the Gods” even when he would make people become his friends.
Every caste had a standard of what they were supposed to do. In the beginning of the Bhagavad Gita, there was a war going on where both opponents had members of the same family in their army. Arjuna was one of those members. When he arrived at the battlefield he realized that his family would be killing each other, he did not believe this to be right. Since Arjuna was born into “kshaktriya rajput” (caste of warriors), he was told by Kṛṣṇa to “not yield to this degrading impotence” (2.3). Because Arjuna was a warrior, it looked weak of him to allow himself to be attached to family ties over doing his warrior responsibilities. He was expected to “give up such petty weakness of heart and rise” as he was called the “chastiser of the enemy” (2.4). Arjuna disagreed with fighting against his family but according to his caste, he had to do what he was born to do; which was fight any enemy put in front of him. It was all based on
A large amount of ancient texts contain themes relating to violence, power, and war, while others, such as The Bhagavad Gita and Confucius’ Analects, focus on individual and collective development through a series of selfless acts. The two texts provide an in-depth system of duties and learning created to provide direction for the betterment of the self, as well as society as a whole. The Bhagavad Gita places a greater focus on the duties of individuals that must be fulfilled to achieve an enlightened state with the divine forces. Contradictory consequences are presented for those who choose to act in an egotistical manner and deny their duties. Confucius’ Analects, on the other hand, places its main focus on collective development and responsibility
Gandhi once said, “I have also seen children successfully surmounting the effects of an evil inheritance. That is due to purity being an inherent attribute of the soul”.
Last but not least, injustice does not provide the most good for the most number of people. Just acts spawn other just acts just like unjust acts spawn other unjust acts. If everyone behaved unjustly, mankind would return to a state of nature (everyone is for themselves) which would be very unprofitable for the unjust individual due to a decreased likelihood of survival. An action is clearly unprofitable for the unjust individual if it would eventually create a hostile environment for him. Hence, one should set an example for others by living a just life which would create a better environment for him as well as for others.
When anyone thinks of the word “evil” they do not think it is within themselves. In reality, without a structured and well-followed society, people are apt to follow their own corrupt desires and neglect the thought of consequence. In the allegory, Lord of the Flies, William Golding reveals that man’s selfishness and sinful nature will be unmasked when the structure of a society deteriorates.
...th intense compassion and love for the enemy and wait for the enemy to shoot him down. My contention is that war is impossible when every one follows the principle of “Love they neighbor…” and “service before self”. However, my ethical system does not propagate relinquishing one’s duty. It is possible to imagine a soldier fighting a war as a part of his duty, slaying his enemies even as he continues to love them. This was what Krishna preached in Bhagwadgita to his disciple Arjuna who was horrified at the sight of his kinsmen fighting on the enemy’s side.
The Bhagavad-Gita teaches many things, and amongst these, morality and moral law are developed for the Hindu religion. What Krishna, the primary Hindu god, declares in this somewhat epic poem to be the "basis of good in this world" (stanza 3, pg. 620 of text) is for people to take action. Action, as he goes on to state, is within the very nature of our beings to do. Krishna even states that "without action you even fail to sustain your own body" (stanza 8, pg. 620 of text). Thus, Krishna feels that action is very important and key. To take this concept as a relation to ethics, Krishna tells Arjuna, the warrior he is talking to in this poem, that "Action imprisons the world unless it is done as sacrifice; freed from attachment, Arjuna, perform action as sacrifice!" (stanza 9, pg. 620 of text). Thus, Krishna is prescribing that, in order for an action to be considered good, the good that he already declared to be the basis of all good in the world, one must detach himself from the action being performed and perform the action sacrificially. The detachment aspect is incredibly important to Krishna, for he proclaims that in "performing action with detachment, one achieves supreme good" (stanza 19, pg 620 of text). By doing this, Krishna believes that the world is preserved, for other people will follow the warrior's actions and imitate them in their own lives. A leader, such as a warrior or king, "sets the standard for the world to follow" (stanza 21, pg. 621 of text), as Krishna says and thus must take whatever action is necessary for the world to not be destroyed, to set examples of goodness and right in his own actions. By separating himself from these actions, thus becoming detached, he can achieve this. Another main reason that Krishna feels detachment is necessary is this: "You have a right to perform your prescribed duty, but you are not entitled to the fruits of action. Never consider yourself the cause of the results of your activities, and never be attached to not doing your duty." (Bhagavad-Gita 2.47). Thus, so long as one does not profit from his own actions, the action itself is good. And, this is Krishna's prescription for leading a life of morality and duty is the moral law to follow in order to achieve this.
Religious texts have been one of the main sources for laws and social customs since the conception of organized religion. Each religious text provides its followers with a code of conduct they are expected to apply to themselves, their actions, and their institutions. This code of conduct applies to the individual, as well as to the government and society to within which the people exist, and ultimately defines what a "just society" is in the context of that religion. Using stories and proverbs this code of conduct, and thus "just society", is not only set, but also shown in examples. In The Bible, the essence of a "just society" is laid out within passages that serve as "the laws", including Deuteronomy, and the Psalms, and in the stories, such as the stories of Job, David, Samuel, and the Family of Adam. The actions and nature of God in these stories are meant to be an example of the values and personality favored by God. In these passages, a structure for a just society is presented, and the values and examples, which are to be referred to and followed in the creation of this "just society", are discussed. However, even within these passages, there are discrepancies between the structure of the ideal "just society" and its values, and the following of these examples by the stories presented in The Bible. One of the most noticeable of these is the difference between the presentation of the ideal "just society" and values that are supposed to be implemented by the people, and the actual justice and values presented in the stories. This is particularly pertaining to the stories of the rulers appointed by God, and the vengeful nature of God himself presented in these stories.