Examples of conflicting Ethics or Moralities in ancient texts

A Cup Of Tea

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,313
Reaction score
580
Points
108
I'm writing an academic essay on the conflict between ethics and morality in Sophocles Antigone. I would like to give it a wider perspective then simply Greek by quoting ancient civilizations from different parts of the world.

I have a very cursory understanding of Hinduism but I would like to take this opportunity to deepen it. I do, unfortunately, have a limited amount of time and no clue where to start.

Is there a kind and knowledgeable soul out there that can point to specific chapters of texts that could be of interest to me? I would be very grateful.
 
I'm writing an academic essay on the conflict between ethics and morality in Sophocles Antigone. I would like to give it a wider perspective then simply Greek by quoting ancient civilizations from different parts of the world.

I have a very cursory understanding of Hinduism but I would like to take this opportunity to deepen it. I do, unfortunately, have a limited amount of time and no clue where to start.

Is there a kind and knowledgeable soul out there that can point to specific chapters of texts that could be of interest to me? I would be very grateful.

You will get a lot of examples in Mahabharata and with very interesting dialogues about morality and ethics and what should have been the right conduct of people in specific circumstances.

21. He (the Adhvaryu) then makes him enter the hall. Let him not eat (the flesh) of either the cow or the ox; for the cow and the ox doubtless support everything here on earth. The gods spake, 'Verily, the cow and the ox support everything here: come, let us bestow on the cow and the ox whatever vigour belongs to other species 1!' Accordingly they bestowed on the cow and the ox whatever vigour belonged to other species (of animals); and therefore the cow and the ox eat most. Hence, were one to eat (the flesh) of an ox or a cow, there would be, as it were, an eating of everything, or, as it were, a going on to the end (or, to destruction). Such a one indeed would be likely to be born (again) as a strange being, (as one of whom there is) evil report, such as 'he has expelled an embryo from a woman,' 'he has committed a sin 2;' let him therefore not eat (the flesh) of the cow and the ox. Nevertheless Yâgñavalkya said, 'I, for one, eat it, provided that it is tender.'

- Satapatha Brahmana [SIZE=-1]3:1:2:21[/SIZE]
This verse is about whether one should eat meat (beef) or not. At first it appears that the sage is saying to us that it is a great sin to eat the flesh of the cow and the ox but in the end the sage himself says that he eats it provided it is tender.
 
Mahabharata, Book 14, Ashwamedha Parva: Anugita Parva: Section XCII

"Janamejaya said, 'If, O illustrious one, Heaven is the fruit of wealth acquired by lawful means, do thou discourse to me fully on it. Thou art well-conversant with the subject and therefore, it behoveth thee to explain it. O regenerate one, thou hast said unto me what the high fruit was that accrued unto that Brahmana, who lived according to the Unccha mode, through his gift of powdered barley. Without doubt, all thou hast said is true. In what way, however, was the attainment held certain of the highest end in all sacrifices? O foremost of regenerate persons, it behoveth thee to expound this to me in all its details.'


"Vaisampayana said, 'In this connection is cited this old narrative, O chastiser of foes, of what occurred in former days in the great sacrifice of Agastya. In olden days, O king, Agastya of great energy, devoted to the good of all creatures, entered into a Diksha extending for twelve years. 1 In that sacrifice of the high-souled Rishi many Hotris were engaged that resembled blazing fires in the splendour of their bodies. Among them were men that subsisted upon roots or fruits, or that used two pieces of stone only for husking their corn, or that were supported by only the rays (of the moon). Among them were also men who never took any food unless it was placed before them by others solicitous of feeding them, and those who never ate anything without having first served the deities, the Pitris, and guests, and those who never washed the food which they took. There were also Yatis and Bikshus among them, O king. All of them were men who had obtained a sight of the deity of Righteousness in his embodied form. They had subjugated wrath and acquired a complete mastery over all their senses. Living in the observance of self-restraint, they were freed from pride and the desire of injuring others. They were always observant of a pure conduct and were never obstructed (in the prosecution of their purposes) by their senses. Those great Rishis attended that sacrifice and accomplished its various rites. The illustrious Rishi (Agastya) acquired the food that was collected in that sacrifice and that came up to the required measure, by lawful means according to the best of his power. Numerous other ascetics at that time performed large sacrifices. As Agastya, however, was engaged in that sacrifice of his, the thousand-eyed Indra, O best of the Bharatas, ceased to pour rain (on the Earth). At the intervals, O king, of the sacrificial rites, this talk occurred among those Rishis of cleansed souls about the high-souled Agastya, viz., 'This Agastya, engaged in sacrifice, is making gifts of food with heart purged of pride and vanity. The deity of the clouds, however, has ceased to pour rain. How, indeed, will food grow? This sacrifice of the Rishi, ye Brahmanas, is great and extends for twelve years. The deity will not pour rain for these twelve years. Reflecting on this, it behoveth you to do some favour unto this Rishi of great intelligence, viz., Agastya of severe penances.' When these words were said, Agastya of great prowess, gratifying those ascetics by bending his head, said, 'If Vasava does not pour rain for those twelve years, I shall then perform the mental sacrifice. Even this is the eternal ordinance. If Vasava does not pour rain for these twelve years, I shall then perform the Touch-sacrifice. Even this is the eternal sacrifice. If Vasava does not pour rain for these twelve years, I shall then, putting forth all my exertion, make arrangements for other sacrifices characterised by the observance of the most difficult and severe vows. This present sacrifice of mine, with seeds, has been arranged for by me with labour extending for many years. 1 I shall, with seeds, accomplish much good. No impediment will arise. This my sacrifice is incapable of being baffled. It matters little whether the deity pours rains or no downpours happen. Indeed, if Indra does not, of his own will, show any regard for me, I shall, in that case, transform myself into Indra and keep all creatures alive. Every creature, on whatever food he has been nourished, will continue to be nourished on it as before. I can even repeatedly create a different order of things. Let gold and whatever else of wealth there is, come to this place today. Let all the wealth that occurs in the three worlds come here today of its own accord. Let all the tribes of celestial Apsaras, all the Gandharvas along with the Kinnaras, and Viswavasu, and others there are (of that order), approach this sacrifice of mine. Let all the wealth that exists among the Northern Kurus, come of their own accord to these sacrifices. Let Heaven, and all those who have Heaven for their home, and Dharma himself, come hither.'--After the ascetic had uttered these words, everything happened as he wished, in consequence of his penances, for Agastya was endued with a mind that resembled a blazing fire and was possessed of extraordinary energy. The Rishis who were there beheld the power of penances with rejoicing hearts. Filled with wonder they then said these words of grave import.'


"The Rishis said, 'We have been highly gratified with the words thou hast uttered. We do not, however, wish that thy penances should suffer any diminution. Those sacrifices are approved by us which are performed by lawful means. Indeed, we desire duly those sacrifices which rest on lawful means. 1 Earning our food by lawful means and observant of our respective duties, we shall seek to go through sacrificial initiations and the pouring of libations on the sacred fire and the other religious rites. We should adore the deities, practising Brahmacharyya by lawful means. Completing the period of Brahmacharyya we have come out of our abode, observing lawful methods. That understanding, which is freed from the desire of inflicting any kind of injury on others, is approved by us. Thou shouldst always, O puissant one, command such abstention from injury in all sacrifices. We shall then be highly gratified, O foremast of regenerate ones. After the completion of thy sacrifice, when dismissed by thee, we shall then, leaving this place, go away.' As they were saying these words, Purandara, the chief of the deities, endued with great energy, beholding the power of Agastya's penances, poured rain. Indeed, O Janamejaya, till the completion of the sacrifice of that Rishi of immeasurable prowess, the deity of rain poured rain that met the wishes of men in respect of both quantity and time. Placing Vrihaspati before him, the chief of the deities came there, O royal sage, and gratified the Rishi Agastya. On the completion of that sacrifice, Agastya, filled with joy, worshipped those great Rishis duly and then dismissed them all.'
This conflict is about showing which sacrifice is more sacred, powerful and auspicious whether physical animal sacrifices by killing them or pure mental sacrifice by non-violence.
 
Hinduism has a scriptural bank probably 100 times larger than most faiths, so finding contradictions would be both easy, and an arduous task.
 
Thank you Ammonius!

Hinduism has a scriptural bank probably 100 times larger than most faiths, so finding contradictions would be both easy, and an arduous task.

Indeed, but I'm not so much searching for contradiction as discussion on how to act when faced with contradiction.
 
Indeed, but I'm not so much searching for contradiction as discussion on how to act when faced with contradiction.

I am no scholar, but I can tell you how I react ... with tolerance, and in one ear and out the other, for those wishing to enter a debate. "We have nothing to defend, it's all good."

Of course there are contradictions, Hindusm being far more 'grey' than a set established doctrine or dogma. So it's just natural, and each to his own. You think your way, I think my way, Hari thinks his way, and it's all good.
 
With all the contradictions, Hindus became adept in facing them. So we have 'matas' (sects, opinions). The key is not to attack the views of others but to maintain one's own. That has worked beautifully. They said 'Munde-munde matir-bhinna' (Each head will have a different view) and 'Eko Sad, Vipra bahudha vadanti' (Truth is one, sages describe it variously).
 
I'm not entirely sure Senthil and Aupmanyav understand me completely. I try to explain through the Greek tragedy of Antigone. Antigone is a Greek woman who's brothers killed each other over the throne of Thebes. The new king of Thebes declare one of the brothers a hero and the other a villain and forbids anyone to preform burial rites over the latter.

This is the conflict for Antigone, because she feels it's her filial duty to care for her deceased brother. A duty higher then mortal laws. The contradiction in this text is to obey the mortal law and risk her soul or to obey the divine law and risk her life.

So what I'm looking for is similar texts from other cultures where the protagonist/antagonist must choose to act one way or the other.

But I thank you for your interest so far.
 
From what little I've read about it, (I've never read it) isn't the Bhagavad Gita Krishna's response to a moral dilemma?
 
Antigone is a Greek woman who's brothers killed each other over the throne of Thebes. The new king of Thebes declare one of the brothers a hero and the other a villain and forbids anyone to preform burial rites over the latter.
To answer the particular conflict, a sister must perform whatever rights are necessary for a dead brother, irrespective of what the king of Thebes declares. She should follow her duty (dharma), and if she is punished for it, she should bear it bravely. The threat should not deviate her from her duty. What king of Thebes ordains is the temporal law, 'dharma' is higher than that.

Mahabharata is about such a war. In defense of 'dharma' if the Pandavas have to fight their brothers and other relatives and acquaintances, so be it. The support of Vibhishna, brother of Ravana, to Ram also falls in this category. Vibhishana helped Rama because Ravana had acted against dharma by abducting a woman (Sita). Does that answer your query, Acot?

However, let me state that Hindu mythology also contains many stories which fall in a grey area, where even the actions of Gods may not be considered totally justified.
 
Back
Top