The Golden Rule

RE: The Golden Rule

Can I add one in Principled?

Bide the Wiccan Rede ye must,
In perfect love and perfect trust
Eight words the Wiccan Rede fulfils
An ye harm none do what ye will.

Different Wiccans translate this to mean different things (in a similar way that different Christian denominations translate the bible) but to me it means that live your life as you will but that every action you make has an impact on something or someone else. Think before you act and accept the consequences of those actions.

BB

Lyssa

RE: The Golden Rule

Thanks Lyssa, that's great and it's been added!

Judy

RE: The Golden Rule

Thanks Judy!

I found this article on the Golden Rule today and thought it might make a nice addition to this thread. It also brings out how to deal with the reverse side of the coin:

[url]A simple (but golden) rule[/url]
But what about the exact opposite of good will: indifference, rudeness, disdain, lack of concern for others, cruelty? What about road rage, abuse, violence in families, schools—even churches? How do we react in these situations?

Well, none of these should be ignored. But when we encounter them, we can't allow ourselves to be pulled into reciprocal bad behavior. Practicing the Golden Rule can provide the opportunity to turn things around. Why? Because it is based on a spiritual stance that refuses to accept that ungodlike behavior—that anger, frustration and hate are normal. The Golden Rule provides the opportunity for us to treat everyone with the same respect and dignity we expect and want for ourselves. It supports the desire to live a more unselfish and loving life.

Love and peace,

Judy

A very large part of buddhist practice is based on the principles of developing our ability to experience empathetic compassion and empathetic loving kindness to all including those we dislike, fear or are critical of.

from a buddhist point of view this is, in fact, enlightened self interest. because who would wish to experience the pain of harbouring anger in their heart? who would wish to cultivate bitterness in their heart. who would wish to be ruled by fear?

the historical buddha famously said in the twin verses:

"hate is never conquered by hate.
hate is overcome by love.
this is an eternal law."

from a buddhist point of view banishing poisonous emotions by replacing them with emotions of compassionate understanding and loving kindness not only brings merit which will fuel the seeker's efforts to become enlightened it will bring experiences of happiness and joy and lay down the foundation for good health and good fortune.

again, from the opening of the twin verses:

"what we are is the result of what we have thought."

would it be interesting to look at how different belief systems look at this principle of developing beneficial loving experiences and how those effect the health and fortune of the practitioner or follower of that system?

and invitation to all...

I just saw this thread and it seems to bear out the reply to a suggestion for a Satanism forum. As Crowley had it, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" All the examples above bear out the opposing difference.

V

The basis of the golden rule in Sanatana Dharma (usually, but incorrectly referred to as Hinduism) is utter simplicity itself.

There is no "other".

There is only one.

Most Upanishads as well as the Brahma Sutras amply expound this concept.

Therefore, it is impossible in Sanatana Dharma to do unto "others"!

Incidentally, the one includes all sentient beings.

Regards.

Prashna

No longer getting notification of old threads I've only just realised that this has been added to.

"hate is never conquered by hate.
hate is overcome by love.
this is an eternal law."

I love that Norbu!

Yes, V, how different the Golden Rule (in all religions and enlightened philosophies) is to the egocentric "Do what thou wilt..." The Nazis did that, as did others. Shudder.

Hi Prashna, thanks for your offering. It's true, but I must admit that a thread on the Golden Rule is meant to be relating to the human condition and how to interact with one another (a bit hard when we don't exist!)! :021:

Grand abstract statements aren't easily understood (and even less demonstrated) by most people. Mary Baker Eddy says something very similar: "There is no such thing as mortality, nor are there properly any mortal beings, because being is immortal, like Deity,--or, rather, being and Deity are inseparable." (Science and Health p 554) I can just about understand that on an intellectual level, but it's impossible on a human one.

But, she also wrote these words, which are much easier to relate to – after all, the Golden Rule is all about loving our neighbour

“I make strong demands on love, call for active witnesses to prove it, and noble sacrifices and grand achievements as its results……… Love cannot be a mere abstraction, or goodness without activity and power. As a human quality, the glorious significance of affection is more than words: it is the tender, unselfish deed done in secret; the silent, ceaseless prayer; the self-forgetful heart that overflows; the veiled form stealing on an errand of mercy…..” Miscellaneous Writings p 250

and they in turn mirror the wonderful words of St Paul:

I Corinthians 13:1-3 - If I speak with the eloquence of men and of angels, but have no love, I become no more than blaring brass or crashing cymbal. If I have the gift of foretelling the future and hold in my mind not only all human knowledge but the very secrets of God, and if I also have that absolute faith which can move mountains, but have no love, I amount to nothing at all. If I dispose of all that I possess, yes, even if I give my own body to be burned, but have no love, I achieve precisely nothing. (Phillips NT)
Love and peace,

Judy

Have just added another saying above:

from the religious tradition of the Yoruba people of Nigeria.
Someone going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird
should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts’

The end of all knowledge
is love

Sai Baba

Ouch, oakapple. LOL, I suppose I'm the one to say it. 🙂

We all agree with the words. And maybe it doesn't matter who says them, if they're true. (I'd say there's more to it.) But the person you quote from has been oft-discussed on HP! And also when I was in India this year, by Indians. He's considered there to be a charlatan-trickster.

TBH I wouldn't eat breakfast first if I knew I had to look at his photo later in the day. I'm kidding, but you see my point.

And I've done it again! That person is - "another thread topic". 🙂

V

Hi v,

Thanks for the info on Sathya Sai Baba...I must admit I didn't know he was regarded in this way....only that he announced he was a living Saint... built a huge ashram at Puttaparthi, and has set up many, Schools, Universities and Hospitals.....Not bad for a charlatan....eh

Take away his miracles, including ; feeding large numbers of people and raising the dead, your then left with his spoken word;

.He says ' Be your own Guru; Your own teacher.You have the lamp within you. Light it and march on without fear '

' Love All, Serve All.'

Sai Baba

Oakapple xx

Hi oakapple,

Yes, I'm not an expert on this subject. But he's been caught on camera I believe using sleight of hand. There are many accusations of sexual molestation by him (I'm not sure of any proof), and also murders at his personal quarters. The Indian police have seemed IMO reluctant to follow leads in these murders as they like the money he does indeed dispense.

I recall reading a non-HP forum thread once in which former members said there was talk of SB importing cheap watches etc. Then when you think he's manifested an expensive watch for you from thin air, you get back home to the USA, say, and find it's a fake.

There are probably people on HP who know more about this than myself.

Shakespeare wrote, "Thou mayest smile, and smile, and be a villain."

V

Take away his miracles, including ; feeding large numbers of people and raising the dead,

Hi again oakapple,

That's all new to me. Perhaps you could specifically reference these happenings as I like to be open-minded? But it could be a new thread so as not to side-track this one, if you wish to do so?

V 🙂

Hi V.

I only know what I have read about Sai Baba...you would know much more than I about these matters, having been to India and lived with these spiritual type leaders.

I'm affraid I only practice my spirituality here in the UK . Although we are considering a trip to India. I also believe Carl Jung when he said;

' I don't just believe in God '...' I know there is a God '...i'm not really concerned with propounding a philosophy that may be believed or doubted....

I just walk quietly....on my spiritual journey gathering knowledge as I go.

Much Love

Oakapple xx

I'm affraid I only practice my spirituality here in the UK .

I don't see any problem with that. 🙂 Each day is what we make of it. I'll be seeing India again but frankly, for me, the idea that going there instantly puts you into a spiritual environment is far from true. It's crowded! (And most people as in any nation are 'mundane'.) Most spiritual practices I find I can do better here in the UK, but that's another subject.

V

Please don't believe all the negativity you hear about Sathya Sai Baba, venetian.

Originally Posted by oakapple [url][/url]
...his miracles, including ; feeding large numbers of people and raising the dead

Originally Posted by venetian [url][/url]
That's all new to me. Perhaps you could specifically reference these happenings as I like to be open-minded?

I have a little experience of Sai Baba's miracles venetian, and wouldn't dismiss them.

Hey guys,

May I suggest a new Sai Baba thread as this one is supposed to be about the Golden Rule as seen from the perspective of all the world's different religions and faith systems.

Thanks!

Love and peace,

Judy

I thought the same, Judy. Sorry.
Another Golden Rule - stick to the thread topic.

Knuckles duly rapped. Actually, one can just do an HP search on SB, and most of what may be said pro and contra has been done here I suppose .... 🙂

Maybe you should add to this Wiki article, Principled *grins* it seems a tad lacking!

🙂 I looked up the link. A tad lacking indeed! But I didn't even dare look at the discussion page. Wiki can be a minefield when subjects such as religion come in. Karl Popper has a point, but slightly too cerebral? Why complicate the simple?

V

Hi Lavender Rose - oh dear, I see what you mean - there is a section on Islam though!

I agree V, that Wikipedia can be a minefield! It was a good idea to start with, but letting people edit their own encyclopedia doesn't always work! I know that academics are very concerned that years of research into a subject is being ignored and superseded by people's personal opinions on just about every topic imaginable. We all know that the "experts" are not always right, but they are not always wrong either!

Well, back to W's page on the Golden Rule - I see it may be deleted as it is one of the longest on the site. I had a quick look at the topics of the discussion and think this is the reason - it's tragic - what should be uniting religion is dividing it.

[url]Request for Comment: Golden/Silver Rules Distinction[/url]

Statements by editors previously involved in dispute

Well, I think that this thread on HP has done just that without too much of a digression! :p I see it as a celebration of one thing (and there are others) that all belief systems have in common. It is that simple.

Love and peace,

Judy

I agree with your closing comments, Judy.

When I looked at the link, the main page, it wasn't long at all. Not having seen the discussion, that may because people just keep going in there are deleting sections.

Not to digress from the Golden Rule, but as an example of what Wikipedia can become at its worst, a friend has tried to rope me in to help him with a section. I'd like to, and meant to help him maybe twice a week, but haven't had time. (If you edit more often you can get their version of moderated.) Anyway, he found that a semi-religious entry had been "taken over" by atheist critics and a homosexual (not to be anti-gay, but in this topic it was plain silly). So it just becomes a battlefield: two or many sides rope in friends to keep changing the entry back and forth. Unlike most encyclopedias, it can change on an entry daily! But innocent readers are unaware of the idealistic battle in the background.

You'll find this probably with The Golden Rule. "Is any religion the first to proclaim it?" And atheist philosophers will want their say - which always means deleting what's already there. And so on.

But the dilemma is, as my friend pointed out, for many subjects, including the ones of his interest, [COLOR="RoyalBlue"]it's the primary resource people go to now for information on those topics. So it's important: a battle for human minds, if you will. He takes time daily to change entries back again - and he is a world expert.

So again it's a dilemma. On the Golden Rule it may already be peoples' primary resource. But if one gets involved, you'll be at it for the rest of your life, on that one topic. Perhaps people will all realise this, and Wikipedia fall in status. The internet sure is vibrant and ever-changing.

V

Hi Prashna, thanks for your offering. It's true, but I must admit that a thread on the Golden Rule is meant to be relating to the human condition and how to interact with one another (a bit hard when we don't exist!)! :021:

Grand abstract statements aren't easily understood (and even less demonstrated) by most people. Mary Baker Eddy says something very similar: "There is no such thing as mortality, nor are there properly any mortal beings, because being is immortal, like Deity,--or, rather, being and Deity are inseparable." (Science and Health p 554) I can just about understand that on an intellectual level, but it's impossible on a human one.

But, she also wrote these words, which are much easier to relate to – after all, the Golden Rule is all about loving our neighbour

Judy

Thank you Judy,

for your comments, which are very true indeed.

Since the mahAbhArata is really an epic poem, perhaps one could see whether the geetA, for example, has anything similar. And indeed, it has:

Srimat-bhAgabat geetA - 12:13-14

advestA sarbabhutAnAm, maitrah karuna eba cha |
___ nirmamo nirahankArah sama duksha-sukhah kshamee ||

santushtah satatam yogi, yatAtmA drihrhah-nishchayah |
___ mayarpita - manobudhirjo, madbhaktah sa me priyah ||

I would translate it thus:

Friendly and without malice, compassionate to all sentient beings |
___ Selfless and without pride, forgiving and equi-tempered (*1)

Ever-content, disciplined and unwaveringly principled |
___ devoted is that yogin, and dear to me ||

(Note *1 : unaffected by good fortune or misfortune)

Regards.

Prashna

*snip*
But the dilemma is, as my friend pointed out, for many subjects, including the ones of his interest, it's the primary resource people go to now for information on those topics. So it's important: a battle for human minds, if you will. He takes time daily to change entries back again - and he is a world expert.

So again it's a dilemma. On the Golden Rule it may already be peoples' primary resource. But if one gets involved, you'll be at it for the rest of your life, on that one topic. Perhaps people will all realise this, and Wikipedia fall in status. The internet sure is vibrant and ever-changing.

V

Anything on the internet should be used with caution and as if you were reading a newspaper, because it is always biased (speaking as someone who writes interactive web sites for a living!) We should read with open minds and sift it against what we already know to be true. This is what we are doing with these discussions on HP, and so I threw it in as a discussion point!!

But so many people will take newspapers and the internet as authorities on any subject and Wikipedia as the authority that in some of the courses I've done, we were told not to use it unless we could attribute the writer!!

I understood this well as I'm sure all of us did from Prashna:

There is no "other".

There is only one.

Most Upanishads as well as the Brahma Sutras amply expound this concept.

Therefore, it is impossible in Sanatana Dharma to do unto "others"!

Incidentally, the one includes all sentient beings.

One probably could also, like the Golden Rule almost, find equivalents in most other religions. I certainly know most mystics have said the same, and still do today.

So this is really the underpinning and rationale behind the Golden Rule. If the above were not true, we needn't necessarily "do unto others as ... " for as different beings, perhaps we are better than them, and deserve more?

This of course is part of the 'human condition', that we (and especially the non-spiritual) can indeed feel separate, so it's the basis of all thieving, crime, anger, war, etc. And that's why the Golden Rule is important: is reaches people where just about everyone is. Even those who can quote and know verses such as Prashna quotes, probably won't always act that way.

But it's the rationale behind the Rule all the same. I like to think of all this as though we are all fingers, but can only perceive that. How ridiculous that one fingure should argue with or steal from another!! With illumination the fingers suddenly "see" that they are actually just different parts of a hand.

V

But so many people will take newspapers and the internet as authorities on any subject and Wikipedia as the authority that in some of the courses I've done, we were told not to use it unless we could attribute the writer!!

Yes; it's just a practical point that so far, I think I'm right in saying, most people do passively assume that Wiki is simply a great, free, online encyclopedia. Assuming objectivity.

Oh, and I'm not really "up" on the ins and outs of how Wiki works yet. But since my post above I just heard that if a subject is continually contested, eventually a solution for the entry can be arrived at by administration, and an Administrator (think "Mod") can "Protect" the entry. I assume that means it's frozen?

V

I would translate it thus:

Friendly and without malice, compassionate to all sentient beings |
___ Selfless and without pride, forgiving and equi-tempered (*1)

Ever-content, disciplined and unwaveringly principled |
___ devoted is that yogin, and dear to me ||

(Note *1 : unaffected by good fortune or misfortune)

Regards.

Prashna

Thank you Prashna, those words are beautiful and true indeed!

Love and peace,

Judy