morality without virtue?

genkaku

Just a thought: When it comes to leading a peaceful and happy life, the only expedient option is morality without virtue.

What do you think?

MamaLotus

Genkaku, could you explain why you say that? I am not sure I get it....

genkaku

@mamalotus -- Let us suppose (just on a guess) that Mother Teresa, a woman praised by many and revered by some, conducted her acts in helping the downtrodden out of some moral imperative. If she, herself, had allowed herself to imagine her acts were as virtuous as her devotees asserted, what would be the effect on her actual efforts. My guess is that she would have become distracted from doing her best work.

Or, to take a less freighted example, suppose that a very good tennis player were having a very good day on the court. What would be the outcome of his imagining, "I really am playing very good tennis?" Wouldn't this distract him and undermine the very good tennis he was actually playing?

Virtue is conceived based on a past that cannot be grasped. It may be inspiring to those who applaud it. It may also be a good pointer towards a moral present. But it can also confound and drag down what otherwise might be a peaceful and moral act.

I just think it is something to be mindful of.

Dakini

I still don't understand your question, gen. Why would virtue be distracting? Could you define "morality" and "virtue" as you see them in the context of this discussion?

SherabDorje

I get the impression @genkaku means that the person that acts in accordance with morality does not really consider it virtuous, but just the right thing to do, and thinking the egoic thought that it's somehow virtuous could actually reduce the effectiveness of acting in accordance with morality.

MamaLotus

Is the problem really coming from having "virtue" or from having "ego"?

genkaku

Is the problem really coming from having "virtue" or from having "ego"?

And the difference is...?

ownerof1000oddsocks

When we care more about the winning than the fight this can certainly hamper our efforts.

In a do-gooding sense, this would mean acting without praise. Behaving without some invisible person back slapping us for our efforts.

Having an air of righteousness can lead to people seeing their own actions as being superior to others- acting out of divine necessity. I suppose the super-ego comes from having a social conscience. We hope that heaven smiles on our efforts, that our parents and friends chests are puffed up with pride...

but when we fail instead we are filled with self loathing. The whole winner/loser mentality is fraught with trouble.

Is my aim true?

genkaku

My Zen teacher once told me, "In the beginning, hope and belief are necessary. After four or five years (of practice), they are not so necessary."

Virtue is a wonderful designation for that which encourages us to revise our unexamined and sometimes painful habits. It presents us with road signs for a more clear-headed and peaceful life. Our praise of virtue puts fire in our bellies -- "I can do better." Belief and hope burn bright in the realms of virtue. In ordinary terms, no one would fault the advisories of virtue.

But with experience, with the practice of what was once described or lauded as virtue, it is just the ordinary way of things. The Four Noble Truths or The Eightfold Path, for example, no longer stand as beacons on the road ahead. They are just what makes sense ... in the same way that pounding a nail with a hammer makes more sense than pounding it with a screwdriver. Corrective measures are built in ... when you make a mistake, when you stray or wobble, just correct it to the best of your ability. It's just what you do, not what you hope or believe.