Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Dharma in the mahabharata
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Dharma in the mahabharata
Hindu thought sharply contrasts Western thought. A central theme in the Hindu religion is following one's dharma, which is an individual's "spiritual duty" (McCrae October 30 2003). This duty is "not bounded by a law code, and there is not one path to salvation" (McCrae October 30, 2003). Because there is no law code, morality is ambiguous. Its definition is unique to each individual. In The Mahabharata, fate (which works interchangeably with dharma) presides over what is traditionally right.
Yudhisthira performs avariciously in the dice games under the rationale of fate. In the Mahabharata, fate is often predicted as it is in the dice games. Sakuni predicts, "If he is invited to a game, he will not be able to resist" (Narasimhan 48). Yudhisthira gambles all his possessions away to the cheating Sakuni, but he knows he is "submitting to the will of fate and the will of the Creator" (Narasimhan 50). The consequences of the games, exile, is usually not considered beneficial, but Dhartarastra "considers them [Pandavas] to be more powerful know then ever before because of their practice of asceticism" (Narasimhan 66). This shine a positive light on the Pandavas exile, which was a consequence of Yudhisthira's irrational gambling.
War becomes inevitable through fate.
From the beginning of humankind, people have constantly had to deal with inner battles. Many of these issues cease to exist as time goes on, while new ones arise to take their place. There is one issue, however, that has remained consistent throughout time – morality. For centuries, humans have fought against the outside world and themselves to keep their morals properly aligned. The issue of morality is so dominant that it is still plays a vital role in today’s society. This can be seen in wars, law systems, codes of conduct, and religious texts. An example of a religious text where this can be seen is in pages 185 - 188 of the Bhagavad Gita, where Krishna, also referred to as “The Blessed One”, guides Arjuna through his inner struggles between
Consequences are inevitable. A decision made today will have consequences that can last years or even a lifetime. Both Gilgamesh and Enkidu made choices that changed their lives forever. Consequences can be both positive and negative, but each is equally long lasting.
For many years now, people have always wondered what ethical principle is the right one to follow. These individuals are all seeking the answer to the question that the ethical principles are trying to clarify: What defines moral behavior? The Divine Command Theory and the theories of cultural relativism are two principles of many out there that provide us with explanations on what our ethical decisions are based on and what we consider to be our moral compass in life. Even though these two theories make well-supported arguments on why they are the right principle to follow, it is hard to pinpoint which one should guide our choices because of the wide array of ethical systems. Therefore, what is morally right or wrong differs greatly depending
Moral relativism maintains that objective moral truth does not exist, and there need not be any contradiction in saying a single action is both moral and immoral depending on the relative vantage point of the judge. Moral relativism, by denying the existence of any absolute moral truths, both allows for differing moral opinions to exist and withholds assent to any moral position even if universally or nearly universally shared. Strictly speaking, moral relativism and only evaluates an action’s moral worth in the context of a particular group or perspective. The basic logical formulation for the moral relativist position states that different societies have empirically different moral codes that govern each respective society, and because there does not exist an objective moral standard of judgment, no society’s moral code possesses any special status or maintains any moral superiority over any other society’s moral code. The moral relativist concludes that cultures cannot evaluate or criticize other cultural perspectives in the absence of any objective standard of morality, essentially leveling all moral systems and limiting their scope to within a given society.
The idea of fate has baffled mankind for centuries. Can humans control what happens to them, or is everyone placed in a predestined world designed by a higher power? The Epic of Gilgamesh and Oedipus The King highlight on the notion that no matter what, people cannot control what is destined to occur. Interestingly enough, many other distantly connected cultures had, and have similar gods or goddesses who play a role in the fate of individuals. Oedipus, King of Thebes, was told by the Oracle at Delphi that he would one day kill his father and marry his mother. Determined not to let this prophecy verify his fears, Oedipus does all in his power to prevent this from happening, yet fails. Similarly, Gilgamesh, king of Uruk, attempts to obtain immortality, but fails as well. Gilgamesh's and Oedipus's intense fear and ignorance cause them to try to interfere with their fates, leading to their failures and realization of the futility of trying to control destiny.
When one thinks about morals, he or she often find himself in difficulty. It is a fact that morals are mostly passed from one generation to another. However, we all face challenges when trying to understand whether they are all accurate or not. To start with, Morals are those values that normally protect life and always respectful of the dual life value of individual and others. Therefore, Morals are those rules that normally govern actions that re wrong or right. We know that morals may be for all people in the society or individual beliefs in the society. Some of the great morals include freedom, charity, truth, honesty and patience and all of them have a common goal. It is a fact that when they function well in the society, they end up protecting and enhancing life. These morals need to be examined always to make sure that they are performing their mission of protecting life. As a matter of fact, morals are derived from the government and society, self and religion. When morals are derived from the government and society, they tend to change as the morals and laws of the society changes. An example of the changes is seen in the cases of marriage versus individuals living together. It is true that in the past generation, it was quite rare to see any couple living together without having any legal matrimonial ceremony. However, this
This mode is moral relativism which says that “the view that moral or ethical statements, which vary from person to person, are all equally valid and no one’s opinion of “right and wrong” is really better than any other"(“Moral Relativism”). Moral subjectivity gives an individual the freedom to determine for himself what is right and what is wrong. Based on this, individuals determine for themselves what is good and what is evil. What a person might see as immoral, others may see as being completely ordain. Moral subjectivity is a result of a person’s background. Morality changes according to the time period, culture, religion, and level of education of each person. For example, for a person living in the 21st century in the United States it is morally right to approve same-sex marriage. On the other hand, for another individual, who perhaps, lived in the 20th century in Argentina, where the official state religion was Roman Catholicism, approving same-sex marriage can be seen as being immoral. The difference in principles and thoughts arises from the fact that the two individuals lived in different countries in different time periods. As each individual has a different perception of what is right or wrong, good and evil cease to exist as such. Human nature at its rawest contains evil. People are born with evil, and are raised to become righteous human beings. In religious beliefs, every
Allow me to begin my exposition by diving deep into one of the most misunderstood cultures in the modern world; a culture of ancient wisdom and colorful tradition; the culture of Hinduism in India. At first glace, the Hindu society, one finds a very structured way of life; a social system in which individuals are divided into distinct, close knit communities. This type of hierarchical division is known as a caste system. With its roots in the religion of Hinduism, those Hindu and non-Hindu alike are affected by the social power of the Indian structure. Generally speaking, there exist four major divisions in caste. In each division, individuals are assigned certain duties in society. The word dharma is used to describe one’s social duties. One is only allowed to perform those duties assigned to him/her by one’s particular caste. In religious terms each caste is called a Varna. The highest level of the hierarchy contains those of the highest education. All the spiritual leaders, tea...
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.
Eastern philosophy is based upon religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, Sikhism, Jainism, Taoism, and Confucianism (Hagin 1). The core values of these religions have many similarities. Judgment comes from measurement of good works against bad. Morality and ethics are stressed as more important than belief in a specific doctrine. Most eastern religions believe in the ideas of karma and reincarnation. Karma is the force that determines the cycle of reincarnation based on the individual’s works (2). Buddhists specifically follow a moral code called the Eightfold Path. It consists of right seeing, resolve, word, action, means of existe...
Every individual is taught what is right and what is wrong from a young age. It becomes innate of people to know how to react in situations of killings, injuries, sicknesses, and more. Humans have naturally developed a sense of morality, the “beliefs about right and wrong actions and good and bad persons or character,” (Vaughn 123). There are general issues such as genocide, which is deemed immoral by all; however, there are other issues as simple as etiquette, which are seen as right by one culture, but wrong and offense by another. Thus, morals and ethics can vary among regions and cultures known as cultural relativism.
However, there is a "moral lawgiver" who governs the earth and the universe. His law that we have written in our heart is our compass to live and cannot be redefined regardless of cultural diversity.
Cultural relativism is the idea that moral and ethical systems varying from culture to culture, are all equally credible and no one system is morally greater than any other. Cultural relativism is based on the concept that there is no “ultimate” standard of good and evil, so the judgement of what is seen as moral, or immoral, is simply a product of one’s society and/or culture. The general consensus of this view is that there is no ethical position that may be considered “right” or “wrong” in terms of society and culture (Cultural Relativism). In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is not an adequate view of morality by providing evidence of its most common logical problems and faulty reasoning.
The practices of many cultures are varied from one another, considering we live in a diverse environment. For example, some cultures may be viewed as similar in comparison while others may have significant differences. The concept of Cultural Relativism can be best viewed as our ideas, morals, and decisions being dependent on the individual itself and how we have been culturally influenced. This leads to many conflict in where it prompts us to believe there is no objectivity when it comes to morality. Some questions pertaining to Cultural Relativism may consists of, “Are there universal truths of morality?” “Can we judge
Hinduism is regarded as the world’s oldest organized religion, but it’s also a way of life for much of India and Nepal. Unlike other religions, Hinduism allows and encourages multiple paths to the divine. There is no single founder and no single scripture, but is rather a conglomerate of diverse beliefs and traditions. They are often understood to be different means to reach a common end. But this acceptance of variety makes it difficult to identify religious tenets that are specifically Hindu. Still, there are some basic principles common to Hinduism that are essential to one's approach to life.