. Religion comes first, morality is only a by-product. If you make the by-product into the goal of human character, you will create such a troubled, miserable humanity – and for such a good cause. You are bringing the cart before the bullocks – neither the bullocks can move, nor the cart can move; both are stuck.

. How can a man be truthful if he does not know what truth is? How can a man be honest if he does not know even who he is? How can a man be compassionate if he does not know the source of love within himself? From where will he get the compassion? All that he can do in the name of morality is to become a hypocrite, a pretender. And there is nothing more ugly than to be a hypocrite. He can pretend, he can try hard, but everything will remain superficial and skin-deep. Just scratch him a little bit, and you will find all the animal instincts fully alive, ready to take revenge whenever they can get the opportunity.

. Putting morality before religion is one of the greatest crimes that religions have committed against humanity.

. The very idea brings a repressed human being. And a repressed human being is sick, psychologically split, constantly in a fight with himself, trying to do things which he does not want to do.

. Morality should be very relaxed and easy – just like your shadow; you don’t have to drag it with you, it simply comes on its own. But this has not happened; what has happened is a psychologically sick humanity. Everybody is tense, because whatever you are doing there is a conflict about whether it is right or wrong. Your nature goes in one direction; your conditioning goes just in the opposite direction, and a house divided cannot stand for long. So everybody is somehow pulling himself together; otherwise the danger is always there, just by your side, of having a nervous breakdown.

. I do not teach morality at all. Morality should come on its own accord. I teach you directly the experience of your own being. As you become more and more silent, serene, calm and quiet, as you start understanding you own consciousness, as your inner being becomes more and more centered, your actions will reflect morality. It will not be something that you decide to do; it will be something as natural as roses on a rose bush. It is not that the rose bush is doing great austerities, and fasting, and praying to God, and disciplining itself according to the Ten Commandments; the rose bush is doing nothing. The rose bush has just to be healthy, nourished, and the flowers will come in their own time, with great beauty, effortlessly.

. A morality that comes with effort is immoral. A morality that comes without effort is the only morality there is.

. That’s why I don’t talk about morality at all, because it is morality that has created so many problems for humanity – about everything. They have given you ready-made ideas about what is right, what is wrong. In life, ready-made ideas don’t work, because life goes on changing, just like a river – taking new turns, moving into new territories… from the mountains to the valleys, from the valleys to the plains, from the plains to the ocean.

. Heraclitus is right when he says, “You cannot step in the same river twice,” because it is always flowing. The second time you step in, it is different water. I agree with Heraclitus so much that I say unto you, you cannot step in the same river even once – because when your feet are touching its surface, the water underneath is flowing; as your feet are going deeper, the water on the surface is flowing; and by the time you have touched the bottom, so much water has gone… it is not the same water, that your step can not be said to be entering into the same river.

. Life is just like the river – a flux. And you are all carrying fixed dogmas. You always find yourself unfit, because if you follow your dogmas, you have to go against life; if you follow life, you have to go against your dogmas.

. Hence my whole effort is to make your morality spontaneous. You should be conscious and alert, and respond to every situation with absolute consciousness. Then whatever you do is right. It is not a question of actions being right or wrong, it is a question of consciousness – whether you are doing it consciously or unconsciously like a robot.

. My whole philosophy is based on growing your consciousness higher, deeper, to the point when there is no unconsciousness inside you; you have become a pillar of light. In this light, in this clarity, to do anything wrong becomes impossible. It is not that you have to avoid doing it; even if you want to do it, you cannot. And in this consciousness, whatsoever you do becomes a blessing.

. Your action out of consciousness is moral, out of unconsciousness is immoral… it may be the same action.

. I am reminded of an old story: A king was getting old, and he told his only son, who was going to succeed him, “Before I die you have to learn the art of morality, because a king has to be a model for everyone else in the kingdom; nothing should go wrong in your actions. So I am sending you today to my old master. I am old, he is even older than me, so don’t waste time. Learn everything intensely, totally, without wasting a single moment.”

. The prince went to the master and he was surprised – surprised by the fact that the master was a master of archery: “And what has archery to do with morality? Has my father gone senile?” But he had come to the mountains, so he thought, “It is better to see the old man at least once.”

. He went in. The old man was immensely beautiful and graceful, surrounded by an aura of silence and peace. He had been thinking he was going to meet a warrior, an archer, but here was a sage. He was getting even more puzzled. He asked the old man, “Are you the master archer?” He said, “You are right.”

. The prince said, “I have been sent by my father, the king, who is your disciple, to learn morality from you. I cannot see any connection at all between morality and archery.” The old man laughed and he said, “Soon you will see.”

. The prince said, “I am in a hurry. My father is old, and before he dies I want to fulfill his desire.” The master said, “Then get lost, because these things cannot be learned in a hurry. Patience, infinite patience is the very foundation of learning any art, whether it is archery or it is morality.”

. Looking at the old man’s eyes the prince remained, and he said, “When are my lessons going to start?” The old man said, “Just now they have started. Patience is your first lesson. And about the second lesson I should make you aware. The second lesson is that you will be cleaning the floors, cleaning in the garden, collecting the old leaves, throwing them out. Be very careful, because I may hit you with a wooden sword at any moment. Although it is wooden, it hits really hard. It has given many people fractures.”

. The prince said, “But I have come here to learn morality, not to get fractures!” The old man said, “That will come in its own time, this is only the beginning.” Puzzled, confused… but he knew his father, that if he went back empty-handed the old man would be really enraged. He had to learn. On both sides two mad, old people…. “And this man is trying to teach me morality by hitting me! But let us see what happens.”

. And the master started hitting him. He would be washing the floor, and suddenly a hit would come. He would be cleaning the path in the garden, and suddenly a hit would come. But he became surprised, within a week, that a certain intuition was arising in him. Even before the old man had approached him, he would jump out of his way. Whatever he was doing, some part of his consciousness was continuously alert the old man, where he was. And the old man used to walk so silently that it was almost impossible to remain conscious. But he started being conscious, because getting so many hits, his whole body was hurting.

. It continued for one month. But in one month he became so capable that the old man was no longer able to hit him. The old man said, “You are really the son of your father. He was also very keen, intense, and total in learning; it won’t take much time. Your first lesson is finished today, because for twenty-four hours I have been trying to hit you, but you have been found always alert, and saved yourself.

. “From tomorrow morning you will have to be more alert, because the wooden sword will be replaced by a real sword. The wooden sword at the most could have given you a fracture, but the real sword may even cut off your head. So more awareness will be needed.”

. But this one month had been of such great learning… he was never aware that inside him there was so much possibility of intuitive awareness. He was trained, well-trained intellectually, but he had no idea of any intuitiveness. And he was not afraid even of the real sword, because he said, “It is the same. If you cannot hit me with the wooden sword, you cannot hit me with the real sword either. It makes no difference to me.”

. For one month the old man was trying in every possible way to hit him with the real sword, and naturally the prince became more and more alert – had to become, there was no other alternative.

. And one complete month passed, and the old man could not even touch him. He was very happy, and he said, “I am immensely satisfied. Now the third lesson. Up to now I was hitting you only while you were awake. From this evening, remember that in the night when you are asleep I may hit you at any time. Again it will start with the wooden sword.”

. The prince became a little worried – awake it was one thing, but when you are asleep? But these two months had given him tremendous respect, trust in the old man and his art, and also a confidence about his own intuition. And he thought, “If he says it, then perhaps intuition never sleeps.”

. And that proved to be the truth. The body sleeps, the mind sleeps, but the intuition is always awake; its very nature is awareness, but we never look at it He had to look, he had to remain alert, even asleep.

. The old man started hitting him, and a few times he got really bad hits. But he was grateful, not angry, because after each hit he was becoming more and more alert, even in sleep – just like a small flame, something remained alive in him, alert and watchful. And just in one month he was again able to protect himself even in his sleep. As the old man would come close, very silently, making no noise, no footstep sounds, the young man would jump up out of his bed. He may have been fast asleep, but something remained awake.

. And in the next lesson the real sword in appeared his sleep. The next morning the old man said, “Now the last lesson – I will be hitting you with a real sword. And you know my sword, just a single hit and you are finished. You have to gather all your consciousness.” The young man was a little worried, a little afraid, because the game was becoming more and more dangerous.

. In the early morning sun the old man was reading a book, sitting under a tree in the rising sun, and the young man was gathering the old leaves from the garden. Suddenly a thought came to him, “This old man has been hitting me for months; it will be a great idea… I should try to hit him and see whether he is alert or not.”

. And he was just twenty or twenty-five feet away, when he was just thinking this in his mind – he had not done anything yet – and the old man said, “Boy, I am very old, and your teaching is not finished yet. Don’t have such ideas.” The prince could not believe it. He came and touched his feet, and said, “Forgive me, but I had not done anything, I was only thinking… just an idea.”

. The old man said, “When you become fully alert even the sound of your thoughts is heard. It is the question of awareness. You don’t have to do anything, you just think and I will know. And soon you will become capable of the same – just a little more patience .”

. And soon the day came when he started suddenly becoming aware that the old man was thinking of hitting him… for no reason. The old man was sitting reading his book, but the idea came so clearly that he went to the master, and said, “So you are going to hit me again? Just a few seconds before I heard the idea.” The master said, “You are right, I was just thinking to finish the page and come. Now there is no need for you to be here. I know your father is old and is waiting for you.”

. But the young man said, “What happened about morality?” The old man said, ”Forget all about it.

. A man who is so alert can only be moral. He cannot harm anybody, he cannot steal, he cannot be unkind, cruel; he will be naturally loving and compassionate. You forget all about morality!”

. This awareness is what I call religiousness. The prince went back. The father was waiting and waiting, and he said, “Have you learned the whole art of archery?” The young man said, ”You sent me to learn the art of morality. From where have you got the idea of archery?” The king said, ”I sent you to learn morality, archery was only a device.”

. There are many devices, many ways and methods of meditation to create awareness, to wake up your sleeping intuition. And once it is awake, then there is no need to tell you what is good, what is moral, what is bad, what is immoral; your awareness will be decisive on its own. And it will be spontaneous, fresh and young, and always to the point, because all principles become dead. And if you try to fit your life according to principles, you also become dead.

. That’s what has happened to Christians, to Hindus, to Mohammedans, to Jainas, to all the people around the world – they are living according to dead principles. And those dead principles don’t fit with the reality – they cannot fit. Only a spontaneous consciousness…. The difference is something like this: you have a photograph of yourself of the last year, or maybe of your childhood, and if you don’t know that it is your picture of your childhood, you may not even recognize it – because you have changed so much. That picture is dead, it is not growing; you are growing.

. Morality is like photographs. Religion is like a mirror. If a child is facing it, it reflects the child; if an old man is facing it, it reflects the old man. It is always spontaneous, in the moment, responding to reality. A conscious human being is just like a mirror – he reflects reality and responds accordingly. His response is moral.

. So I am changing the whole emphasis from action to awareness.

. And if more and more people can become aware, the world will be a totally different place. A man of awareness will not go to war. Although religious scriptures say that to sacrifice yourself for your nation, for your religion is virtuous, a man of consciousness cannot follow that dead idea. To him, the nation itself is an immoral idea, because it divides humanity – and war is certainly immoral. You may find good names, good words – sometimes it is religion, sometimes it is political ideology, sometimes it is Christianity, sometimes it is communism – good ideas, but the reality is turning human beings into butchers.

. You are killing people whom you have never even met. And you know perfectly well that just as you have left a wife behind, crying, who will be waiting for you, just as you have left your old mother and father back at home, hoping that their son comes back alive, just as you have left small children… the man you are killing has also a wife, has also children, has also an old father and mother. And he has done no harm to you; neither have you done any harm to him.

. If the world becomes a little more conscious, soldiers will throw away their arms and hug each other, sit down together under a tree and gossip. The politicians cannot force all the armies to kill, to murder. Neither can the popes, the religious leaders convince anybody that for God’s sake you have to kill. Strange… because God has created everybody. Whomsoever you are killing, you are killing God’s creation. If it is true that God created the world, then there should be no war – it is one family; there should be no nations.

. These are immoral things: the nations, the religions, anything that discriminates against people and creates conflict.

. A man of awareness will not be greedy, because he will be able to see that his greed will create poverty; and the people who will be starving and dying through poverty are his brothers and sisters. It does not matter whether they live in Ethiopia or in India; it does not matter whether their skin is white or black.

. Authentic morality is a by-product of consciousness. And the art of consciousness is religion. There is no Hindu religion, there is no Christian religion, there is no Mohammedan religion; there is only one religion, and that is the religion of consciousness – becoming so aware, so enlightened and awakened, that you have eyes to see clearly and can respond according to that clarity.

. A man of consciousness cannot be deceived by words. Mohammedans say that if you die in a religious war… how can there be a religious war? War is basically irreligious. But Christians, Mohammedans, and all other religions say that if you die in a religious war, your reward will be great in the other world. For this immoral act of killing people, you will be rewarded. But beautiful words “religious war”, cover it up.

. A man of awareness sees deeply and penetratingly through your words. Neither your God can deceive him, nor your holy books can deceive him, nor your nations, nor your politicians. He lives according to his consciousness. He has an individuality, a very crystal clear individuality – a pure mirror, unclouded by anything, with no dust covering it.

"Authentic morality is a by-product of consciousness. And the art of consciousness is religion. There is no Hindu religion, there is no Christian religion, there is no Mohammedan religion; there is only one religion, and that is the religion of consciousness – becoming so aware, so enlightened and awakened, that you have eyes to see clearly and can respond according to that clarity."

Just beautiful.

Religion comes first, morality is only a by-product. — Anand-Haqq

Eusociality (of a eusocial species like humans) comes first, religion is only a by-product. :eyes:

The core of eusociality is empathy (reinforced by natality) which is also the pre-cognitive, or instinctual, basis of morality. No sustainable group, no religion. Proof: there are countless non-religious groups; there aren't any group-free (i.e. private) religions. QED.

As someone who believes in God I can honestly say yes you can justify morality without religion.

But you have to be accountable to your own decisions on what you perceive as morality.

And that is the difference between atheism and religion practitioner.

Those who practice religion don’t want to be accountable and those who don’t believe may perceive that accountability is not present or non existent.

So for morality to work properly you need to be accountable to someone or something.

how it’s okay for morality to be subjective — Franz Liszt

The subjective is the route how the objective comes to us. In the anthropic principle, what is out there and what is in our heads exist at the same time.

It has "evolved", that's why I don't claim to be one by their newfangled definition. Also, what is grouped as evolution has changed (and most "evolution-ists" are uneasy with that).

My 2 cents - there is no objective morality, but it might be beneficial for a society to act as if there is, since it makes people predictable, provides social cohesion, etc.
About where morality comes from, I would say mostly from our "will to power", our instincts choose a version of morality that gives us the best chances to winning. A strong person would use strength to expand his power, while a weak one would go for whining and appeals to morality.

My 2 cents - there is no objective morality ... — stoicHoneyBadger

Certainly there is no universally agree-upon morality, just like it's not universally agreed-upon that the Earth is not flat and yet the Earth is objectively round. In this case, if "there is no objective morality, tell me what this (link is below) defense of ethical naturalism gets wrong. Much obliged.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/505773

Rather than waste time breaking our heads whether morality is objective, we should, I suggest, focus on its objective as in its aim/goal. We want a harmonious society, peace, zero crime, happiness for all, and so on. How could we make that happen? This, I feel, is a more productive line of inquiry although, I must add, this approach to right and wrong would have the additional benefit of making morality objective too.

We want a harmonious society, peace, zero crime, happiness for all, and so on. — TheMadFool

What is harmonious? Living in harmony? Singing all the same song in harmony? No fights? No war? I'm not talking about the modern high-tec war in which whole cities can be blown away in a wink, but war between groups from which both parties emerge better although maybe at the cost of lifes, but who says human life is that important? Because god created it!

Is crime really that bad? Depends.

Happiness for all? What is happiness?

Etcetera. You can counter that what you wrote in your comment is commonly understood. Everybody knows what peace is. That's why people of Afghanistan (a country unknown by most people before the U.S. entered there to give the Mudjahedin a hand and some Stingers in their Jihad against the former USSR, thereby laying the foundations for the war on terror) support the taliban and not want the tali to be banned.

That may be (the) "objective" of politics. The "objective" of objective morality is, on the other hand, 'to intrinsically reduce the miseries of self by extrinsically reducing the miseries of others'. I try not to conflate politics with morality in order to make it easier to 'morally critique policy' as well as 'politically mediate moral disagreements'.

About where morality comes from, I would say mostly from our "will to power", our instincts choose a version of morality that gives us the best chances to winning. A strong person would use strength to expand his power, while a weak one would go for whining and appeals to morality. — stoicHoneyBadger

I'm a strong guy and women like me but I would' t even seriously think about using my strength and good looks to expand my power.

(No irony here...)

What is harmonious? Living in harmony? Singing all the same song in harmony? No fights? No war? I'm not talking about the modern high-tec war in which whole cities can be blown away in a wink, but war between groups from which both parties emerge better although maybe at the cost of lifes, but who says human life is that important? Because god created it!

Is crime really that bad? Depends.

Happiness for all? What is happiness?

Etcetera. You can counter that what you wrote in your comment is commonly understood. Everybody knows what peace is. That's why people of Afghanistan, a country unknown by most people before the U.S. entered there to give the Mudjahedin a hand and some Stingers in their Jihad against the former USSR, thereby laying the foundations for the war on terror. — Robotictac

Harmony, socially, means everybody getting along with each other. Simple. I don't see the difficulty in grasping that concept in the setting of a group/community of indivduals. It, as far as I can tell, includes but is not limited to zero suffering of the kind intentionally inflicted by one individual/group on another.

Happiness is a state of mental and physical well-being, one we all, without exception, aspire to. You're overthinking it. Part of doing philosophy is to know when to stop philosophizing, right?

The gist of my post is, in the simplest sense, understanding the need for morality, which should be uniform across peoples, puts moral theories on a solid, universal foundation, the net result being objective moral codes - if we all want the same thing and we're all alike, we should converge on the same means (ethical codes) to get that which we want, no? That's, in my book, objective morality.

That is "objective" of politics. The "objective" of objective morality is, on the other hand, 'intrinsically reducing the miseries of self by extrinsically reducing miseries of others'. I try not to conflate politics with morality in order to make it easier to morally critique policy and politically mediate moral disagreements. — 180 Proof

Firstly, I don't quite get your point. Secondly, it doesn't look like there's a clear a boundary between politics and ethics although the past American president (Donald Trump) puts that idea into question.

Harmony, socially, means everybody getting along with each other. — TheMadFool

What do you mean by getting along?

What do you mean by getting along? — Robotictac

If you have to ask that question, maybe I should be getting along.

Earth is not flat and yet the Earth is objectively round. In this case, if "there is no objective morality, tell me what this (link is below) defense of ethical naturalism gets wrong. — 180 Proof

I would argue that scientific and moral truth are very much different things. Everybody can look at the earth's shadow on the moon and determine that it is round.

Yet we don't have such tools to reach a conclusion on what is an objective moral truth. I would argue it depends on perspective, a wolf wants to eat the bunny, so it goes with the "nature favors the strong" morality. The bunny doesn't want to be eaten, yet it is too weak to win in an open combat, so it with go with more of a Christian morality, making up an afterlife, where it will have green meadows, but the bad wolf would be frying on a pan. :D

That's why people of Afghanistan (a country unknown by most people before the U.S. entered there to give the Mudjahedin a hand and some Stingers in their Jihad against the former USSR, thereby laying the foundations for the war on terror) support the taliban and not want the tali to be banned. — Robotictac

Whether Afghans support Taliban is a very questionable proposition.

The "objective" of objective morality is, on the other hand, 'to intrinsically reduce the miseries of self by extrinsically reducing the miseries of others' — 180 Proof

Why do you think it is objective?

I'm a strong guy and women like me but I would' t even seriously think about using my strength and good looks to expand my power.

(No irony here...) — Robotictac

Why not?

Morality needs no justification, but you can justify it without religion. However, you can't justify religion without morality. Religion is dope to help some cope.

We want a harmonious society, peace, zero crime, happiness for all, and so on. — TheMadFool

I would say that people are build to overcome problems and once you present them with a society that does not have real problems, they would make up problems, be it climate change or systemic racism, to freak out about.

:roll: Read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Politics.

Apparently you've responded to a post (with a link to another post) you haven't bothered to read.

Ditto.

Apparently you've responded to post (with a link to another post) you haven't bothered to read. — 180 Proof

To be honest I didn't really understand it. )

Religion is dope to help some cope. — James Riley

Nicely put! :up:

:roll: Read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Politics. — 180 Proof

:ok:

However, you can't justify religion without morality. Religion is dope to help some cope — James Riley

I believe in gods who created the world. But I don't get my morals or ethical systems or my rights and wrings from them. I just tell them to FO and stroll along happily. Maybe I am an exception...

I'm a strong guy and women like me but I would' t even seriously think about using my strength and good looks to expand my power.

(No irony here...)
— Robotictac

Why not? — stoicHoneyBadger

Because I love people.

What do you mean by getting along?
— Robotictac

If you have to ask that question, maybe I should be getting along. — TheMadFool

That's no answer. What means getting along? No quareling or fighting? Why not? It's nice to fight once in a while.

That's no answer. What means getting along? No quareling or fighting? Why not? It's nice to fight once in a while. — Inplainsight

You're committing the status quo fallacy.