"Rules," "commandments," and other dictates from above are only for people lacking in the spiritual development to engage in self-realization on their own.
I don't think so. The bible is for everyone to read and follow, not just the ones who can't figure it out on their own. The commandments and rules in the bible is supposed to be for every single Christian on the planet, not just for a few of them. Otherwise, why bother even writing the thing?
Laws aren't there to make you a better person. They're there to make sure society keeps running smoothly. You can be a completely amoral and horrible bastard and still be completely within the bounds of the law. That's why we still have lawyers.
I never said that religion = christianity. I was specifically talking about the Christian faith and variants thereof. Sorry if I seemed to generalized and I apologize if I have offended anyone.
I do believe that laws also establish norms for behaviour, and by establishing boundaries, do tend to bring about something more than mere behavioural changes in people. Fake it till you make it, that sort of thing.
Really, just reacting to the glib, "Spiritual laws are for the weak" sentiment you posed earlier. Some people have made lifetime pursuits out of studying the law as written in the Old Testament, I think your statement could be seen as belittling this somewhat.
I do believe that laws also establish norms for behaviour, and by establishing boundaries, do tend to bring about something more than mere behavioural changes in people. Fake it till you make it, that sort of thing.
The laws don't establish the norms, they just reinforce the norms that motivated the establishment of the law to begin with. All the law does is puts force behind them. But at the end of the day I subscribe to the Kantian notion that the only thing that is unconditionally good is the good will. Actions are always short of the ideal and a theology that relies too heavily on rules kind of denies that.
Really, just reacting to the glib, "Spiritual laws are for the weak" sentiment you posed earlier. Some people have made lifetime pursuits out of studying the law as written in the Old Testament, I think your statement could be seen as belittling this somewhat.
There are lifetimes worth of scholarship on Wikipedia regarding the varieties of Pokemon. Time sunk into a project, however, does not imbue it with any level of spiritual or philosophical worth.
Regardless, the predominant Hindu idea about rigid mandates and commandments is that they are intended for people who aren't spiritually developed enough to understand the Dharma by themselves. So while a wise man will abstain from murder or theft because he realizes the unity underlying the universe and comprehends the self-defeating nature of such actions, the lesser man needs to be told plainly that they are bad and that he will face negative consequences for doing them.
So are you saying lawyers and politicians are wise and naturally understand all the underlying natures, and we don't? Because if so, I think most of them nowadays fail in that regards.
Actually I'd be implying the opposite about lawyers. Since they're completely wedded to the study and application of laws and rules they'd be less prone to understanding the philosophical nature of the universe.
Politicians are different. You can make the argument that most of them basically bring a lawyer's mentality to the legislator, but others approach issues as statesmen. Generally if you subscribe to the Weberian idea of politicians needing to be above ethical considerations you could argue that the best politicians ought to start approaching Nietzschian overman territory.
P.S. Fuck Nietzsche for having a name that's impossible to spell on the first try.
