when your target is itself a heighly selfish activity because you are doing it for yourself not for others. like you can contribute something for your brothers, or anybody.....by doing selfish activities....in stead of doing for yourself (ie for gaining moksha by doing selfless activities). what is better in these two. gaining mokhsa for yourself or doing something for others. and why please justify also?
2007-01-03 21:53:04 · 10 answers · asked by KrishanRam(Jitendra k) 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The ancient scriptures and the seers tried to explain the meaning of moksha by depicting an example. When it comes to assuming that a tiny small crystal of salt which is driven by a determined yarning to leap in to the depthless ocean very much aware about the consequence , and this dissolution in to the water in order to lose self identity is the sole object emphasized here. I think it is clearly no use imposing selfish attributes to the singular goal of losing the very self itself.
2007-01-04 00:48:14 · answer #1 · answered by akshay s 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your interpretation itself wrong. I also feel you have not understood what is MOKSHA.
What is 'Moksha'? It is giving up of the 'Anatma', the unreal. Suppose you want a glass of fruit juice, unless you throw away the water already in the glass, you cannot pour juice in to the glass. Similarly, unless you give up worldly desires, 'Atmabhava' (spirituality) cannot take root in you. When you spend your hours immersed in thoughts about God, you become free from evil ways. You will not be tempted to abuse others or harm them in any way. You begin to live in Love, accepting all events as His gifts. Then your home verily becomes heaven on Earth; the joy that bubbles in your heart is the symbol of Vaikunta (abode of Lord Vishnu); the earnestness and care that you evince in your work will symbolise Kailasha (the abode of Lord Shiva). -SRI SATYA SAI BABA -
Attaining Moksha is not for any selfish goal or target. If you do not gain moksha your thinking will be evil and it will harm others. Not harming others itself a great achievement-
2007-01-03 22:17:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You do not get 'moksha' simply by doing selfless activities. You get 'moksha' by doing the right thing. In the struggle for life we have to be selfish. Everyminute we live and breathe, we deprive hundred and thousands of insects, flies, germs, bacterias, viruses etc. of life. Even Krishna urged the pandavas to battle and kill their cousins, because it was the right thing. Gaining 'moksha' is the right thing, whether selfish or selfless. You don't have to do anything for others, they can do it for themselves.
2007-01-03 23:34:16 · answer #3 · answered by wizard of the East 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a family a single person of that nature is more than enough ,Automatically ,not only his family but also the 3 generations past and 3 generations of future will get moksha.
2007-01-03 22:06:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You've misunderstood the whole point.
You get moksha when you are truthful, follow the right path and selfless. But, if you are truthful, follow the right path and be selfless ONLY because you want "moksha" then you WONT get moksha.
I hope you understand what I am saying.
2007-01-04 01:22:19 · answer #5 · answered by Sunrise 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
hi Dear! gaining Moksha for oneself is not selfish ,as the only way to get it -is living a selfless life, that means doing right things for others, leading a simple and satisfied life, not doing anything for your selfish gains. and I assure u this is not at all easy to think in this way,( leave aside following it).the word is small, but it has a big meaning.
and who told u that it does not include any good ( but right) thing for ur own family or ur own people. the very practice of it includes kindness, affection,sympathy, helpfulness: but not apathy towards the problems of ur own people. but the main thing is the problem u want to solve and the way u want to use to solve it. Please read the following instance. may be it help in solving ur confusion.e.g. if u are a follower of the dictum--Truth and non-violence. but u have to tell a lie to save ur brother for a certain kind of punishment.
o.k.
u tell the lie and save ur brother. but don't u think the moment u save him, u also show him a path full of wrong doings. b'coz now he knows that he will be saved by hook or by crook. now he is,in a way, free to do worse things in life. now YOU think whether u hv saved him or marred him.
a life of spirituality is not easy to follow as it includes ignoring the trivial, false and temporary for the things that are grat, true and permanent.
2007-01-03 22:29:44 · answer #6 · answered by siya 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i won't be able to truly talk for others yet i understand that for the period of the previous I had an quite selfless nature yet this would additionally bring about diverse issues interior of your self that are perplexing to clean up. i think of whats significant is to discover a point of stability between the two, some thing that I nonetheless conflict with.
2016-10-29 23:21:01 · answer #7 · answered by bonanno 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of sociological studies that look at the real reasons people do altruistic acts. I figure even if it is for self interest, the good action still has a positive effect.
2007-01-03 22:05:22 · answer #8 · answered by I'll Take That One! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
really its just an issue of the concept of wether altruism exists or not.
I think its possible to do selfless things, with a truly selfless mindset. but of course you can't do it with the intent to do it...
its a complex pseudo-paradox.
I think its a matter of being honest about the motivations. are you doing it for the benefit, or are you doing it for the sake of it?
2007-01-03 22:03:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fugettaboutit ... . ... . 'moksha' ?? NO
JESUS ?? YES .
Simple .. . . Badda Bing.. . ..Badda boom
2007-01-03 21:59:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋