LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

On one side he hears the old doctrines of this or that mere matter of form of observance, dogmatic and unreasonable, which his soul rejects as outgrown and inadequate for its present needs. On the other hand, he hears the new doctrine of "All is Good” being preached vigorously, often by those who have not the slightest conception of the real meaning of the words—and this new doctrine is not satisfactory to the average student, for his conscience tells him that certain courses of conduct are “right” and others “wrong” (although often he is not able to tell just why he so considers them). And so the student is apt to become quite puzzled.

      To add to his confusion, he recognizes the fact that what may seem “right” to him, is utterly incomprehensible to some men of his acquaintance who are not so far advanced spiritually—they are not able to grasp his high standard and ideals. He also notices that some of the things that, 'even to him, seem the natural and right things for these undeveloped men to do (that is, seem better than other things they have been doing) would be “wrong” for him, the advanced man, to do, because they would mean going backward. Among other things, he sees these undeveloped men being influenced to "right” doing, and deterred from “wrong” doing, by promises of reward and threats of punishment, which appear most unworthy and selfish to those who believe m doing right for right’s sake. And yet, he is forced to see that these people apparently need some such artificial stimulus and deterrent, for they are incapable of grasping the higher ideals of ethics.

      These, and countless other questions, arise to perplex the student, and to make him feel that the old foundations have slipped from under his feet, and no other safe foothold has presented itself to view. We think that this little lesson on that phase of the Yogi Philosophy which is called ‘Dharma," will help him to find his )—will aid in pointing out the path that he has lost sight of, momentarily, by reason of the thick growth of underbrush which covers the particular spot now being traveled by him. The subject is too large to cover in the space before us, but we hope to be able to point out a few general principles, which may be taken up by the student, and followed out to their logical conclusion.

      Let us take a brief view of the general question of Ethics, and some of the theories regarding the same. Ethics is defined as "The Science of Conduct,” and it treats of the desire to render harmonious the relationship of a man and his fellows. There are three theories of Ethics among Western people, known as follows: (1) The theory of Revelation; (2) The Theory of Intuition; and, (3) The theory of Utility. As a rule, the advocate of any one of these three systems claims his particular system to be the only true one, and the other two to he errors. The Yogi Philosophy recognizes truth in each and all of the three systems, and gives each its place in what it calls “Dharma.” In order to get a clearer idea of Dharma, we must take a brief look at each of these three systems, taken separately.

      The system of Ethics based upon the Theory of Revelation, holds that the only basis for morality and right-conduct is Divine Revelation, coming through prophets, priests and teachers, called by many names. The laws given out by the s having been received by them from God, have been accepted, more or less submissively, by all races in certain stages of their development, although the conception of the God, who had given out these laws, differed very materially. These laws so far as their great underlying principles were concerned, resembled each other very much, although they differed widely in detail, and minor laws and precepts. The great religious books of all races contain a more or less complete code of ethics, which the people are enjoined to obey implicitly without regard to reason or their own opinions, these codes, however, being subject to the interpretation of the highest religious authorities of the race. Each race regards the precepts of its religious hooks, as interpreted by its priests, as supreme authority, and, of course, view the similar claims of other races as spurious. The majority of these religions have split up into sects and denominations, each having its favored interpretation of the sacred teachings, but all rely on the original revelation as the only truth concerning ethics. And then, again, each race has modified its original conception of the revealed teachings, fitting their ideas to the constantly changing requirements of the age. As a race evolves its wants and needs change, and its sacred teachings are twisted and bent to fit the changed conditions. The priests, in such cases, say that God undoubtedly meant “this and that,” instead of “thus and so” as their fathers had supposed. So that after a time the authority of the code of ethics rests largely upon the interpretation of priests and teachers, rather than upon the words of the supposed Divine revelation itself. followers of the other two schools of ethics object that if Deity had intended to promulgate a code of ethics—a rule of conduct—applicable to all men in all time, He would have worded it so clearly that it could not be misunderstood even by the mast ignorant, wisdom would have enabled Him to have foreseen the growing needs of the people, and consequently would have provided for such needs, either in the original revelation itself, or in “supplements" thereto. We will consider the advantages and advantages of this theory later on in this lesson. The second system of ethics advances the theory that Man knows right and wrong intuitively—that Deity imparts to each man, through his conscience, an instinctive knowledge of good and evil, that he may govern himself accordingly. This school urges that men must refer the details of his conduct to his own conscience. It overlooks the fact that the consciences of no wo people are exactly alike, and that such a theory implies that there may be as many different standards of morality and conduct as there are people, and that the statement "My conscience approves of it” would preclude any argument as to ethics. As to what conscience is, the writers differ. Some say that it is the higher portion of the mind speaking to man. Some say that it is merely the subconscious mind repeating what has been suggested into it, and that consciences grow with experience and change with environment. Some claim that it is the voice of God speaking to the soul. Others have still other explanations and theories. shall consider this theory at greater length a little further on in this lesson.

      The third system of ethics rests upon the theory of utility, or what is known as utilitarianism which latter word is defined "the ctrine that virtue founded on utility," or “the doctrine that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the aim of all social and political institutions.”—(Webster.) This is the theory upon which human law is supposed to be based. Blackstone, the great expounder of the English Law, states that human laws are upon “the law of nature,' which law of nature he tells us are based upon the laws of God—eternal immutable laws of good and evil—which the Creator causes become evident to Man by means of human reason. Blackstone goes on to say that 'This law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God Himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other; no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and each of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.” All this sounds beautifully simple, and one is led to wonder how it is that civilized life is not heaven on earth, until hc remembers the state of modern law-making and law-administering, which, however, is an improvement on that of former days. It seems so easy to speak of the “law of nature,” but so difficult to apply that law to details of life, and to administer it. Blackstone, himself, recognizes this fact, and says: "If our reason were always clear and perfect, the task would be pleasant and easy; we should need no other guide but this: But every man finds the contrary in his own experience; that his reason is corrupt, and his understanding full of ignorance and error.” The man who has had much experience in courts and the processes of “justice” will be apt to agree with the great English lawyer, in his last quoted remarks. While it is true that the laws of a nation represent the average of its best conceptions of ethics, still the conceptions change more rapidly than the law, and the latter is always a little "behind the times' as compared with public opnion and conception of right and wrong. And many are the loop—holes of man-made laws, and the shrewd law-breaker may safely commit almost any of the great offenses against the current conceptions of morality, providing he does it cleverly enough. Some men have a code of ethics of their own, which holds that no “wrong” is committed providing no law is technically broken, and so they scheme and plan, aided by “able counsel,” to attain their ends without violating the letter of the law. This danger being avoided, their consciences are easy. This is a very easy and simple theory of conduct, for those who can live under it. Justinian, the great Roman law-giver, reduced the whole doctrine of human law to three general precepts, as follows: "Live honestly; Hurt nobody; and Render to every one his due.” This is a simple

Скачать книгу