credibility - leading a ethical life

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, Chandran, Nanda (NBC) wrote:

> I read G Murthy's post with great interest.
>
> But I don't agree that one who preserves the word is no nearer to the
> truth than a common criminal. What's it that we seek? Truth. When one
> goes all lengths to preserve his word, he's indirectly preserving the
> truth. This act also indirectly affects one's mind, helps shape his
> morals and his conscience etc. If we're unable to understand the lower
> truths, how can we ever hope to understand the highest? I personally
> don't believe that anybody, however intelligent, can attain jnana just
> by reading metaphysical works. As Shankara and Gaudapada state in the
> introductions of their works, the requisites of the aspirant : pure of
> mind, devoid of ego, full control of the senses. This can be achieved
> bit by bit, with us exerting vigilance on our actions in our everyday
> life. For if one doesn't have these requisite qualities, he will never
> be able to completely understand and implement the teachings in his
> life.
>

As much faith and interest I have the conduct prescribed by our shastras I
have to admit it is of no help in acheiving Moksha.  That is simply not
the Advaita view.  At best it can help cultivate the qualities you mention
but that's it.   They are still very important because most people will
fall short of the mark Shankaracharya sets.

> S.Radhakrishnan in Dhammapada says, Buddha considered the law of Dharma
> as God and insight into it as Enlightment. Lately I've realized that I
> would gladly trade whatever little intellect I have for natural goodness
> of heart.

Radhakrishnan was not a Buddhist so his interpretations are suspect to
begin with but it is clear that for Buddhists Dharma meant something other
than what it does for us.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>