# Who has 'real' merit?



## Freestyler777 (Nov 2, 2007)

The answer is, those who give.  The Buddha said, 'the more clothing you give away, the more beautiful you become, the more food you give away, the stronger you become.'  

Man is a social animal.  Even the most primitive men, such as aboriginal people, live in societies.  No one can live for any significant amount of time in the wilderness by themselves.  Anyone who says to the contrary of that statement is kidding themselves.  Even a 'survivor' who can kill his own game and construct his own tent needs an axe or machete manufactured in a factory halfway across the world, and wear boots that were made in some sweatshop far away from the shoestore where he bought them.  No man is an island.

A good man gives to others, and a good community depends upon its members being good to each other.  A man's merit, or redeeming value, is based on how much he can give to others.  Giving to yourself is the easy part, being of benefit to your fellow man is really difficult!

There are many people out there who hurt others, intentionally or unintentionally, and there are many more who simply dont care about others.  Most people, as I have found, are willing to send anyone outside their nuclear family into the foulest hell if it means protecting themselves and their livelihood.  If only people extended the compassion and kindness they have towards themselves and their family to the whole human race....

But that will never happen, because paradise is a fairy tale.  Only enlightened people see the universe as a whole, as 'one being' of which everyone is a part.  If you are good to others, you get love in return, and if you do bad to others, it will come back against you, like fine sand thrown against the wind.  Treat everyone as the same and equal, and you have something valuable.  Equanimity is the essence of Yoga.


----------



## Kacey (Nov 2, 2007)

Hmm.... I'd have said "those who give _freely_" - because many who give do so because of restraints placed on them from without.


----------



## Freestyler777 (Nov 2, 2007)

Maybe I should have said, 'those who give/help with no thought of reward?'


----------



## Kacey (Nov 2, 2007)

Freestyler777 said:


> Maybe I should have said, 'those who give/help with no thought of reward?'



That's pretty much what I mean, yes!


----------



## theletch1 (Nov 2, 2007)

Freestyler777 said:


> Maybe I should have said, 'those who give/help with no thought of reward?'


The truly altruistic, perhaps?


----------



## newGuy12 (Nov 2, 2007)

theletch1 said:


> The truly altruistic, perhaps?



No, you do not have to have pure motives to reap a reward.  Now, I may be wrong, but this is MY take on it.

If you give out something, some time, you offer help to a friend of a friend  who needs something done, some virus/trojan/spyware removal or some painting done on a garage.  That is just simply being a good neighbor.

Now, it is okay to do this with the motivation that "Hey, if I do this, I will realize a return on my investment."  It still works.  Your self-worth can increase.  You feel better about yourself.  Your self-esteem will increase.  You feel more part of the group.  You don't have to have a "pure heart" for it to work!

I may not particularly like a person, yet I may have an opportunity to be of use to them, and do so.  Even if I do not give time or other resources with happiness, it STILL has a tendency to make me happy, satisfied, contented.





Freestyler777 said:


> Equanimity is the essence of Yoga.



Haha! --> Yoga is the cessation of the fluctuations of the mind!

(That would be nice for me to have!)


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 3, 2007)

Per Confucius, a gentleman

Confucius 'five virtues a gentleman should practice every day to live a healthy, harmonious life:

*Ren* is the virtue of benevolence, charity, and humanity

*Yi*, of honesty and uprightness; Yì may be broken down into zhong, , doing one's best, conscientiousness, loyalty; and shù, reciprocity, altruism, consideration for others, and Confucius&#8217; early version of the Golden Rule, &#8220;what you don't want yourself, don't do to others."

*Zhi*, knowledge;

*Xin*, the virtue of faithfulness and integrity; and,

*Li*, correct behavior, or propriety, good manners, politeness, ceremony, worship.


----------



## Freestyler777 (Nov 3, 2007)

Thanks for all the posts.  You guys are very insightful. 

Newguy's post embodies the jewish concept of action being more important than faith.  If you do good actions, you eventually become good yourself, regardless of what you believe.  That is very good in my opinion.

And Xue Sheng, thank you for the analysis of Confucian Ethics.

But to tie the two together, even if one is motivated by self-interest, he still can do good, when he sees that we are all part of the same being, and that his actions will come back to him, good or bad.  So really, all three views are paths to happiness and a good life.

I don't know who said it, but someone said, 'there is no happiness without enlightenment'.  

I believe in gradual enlightenment, rather than sudden, because I believe this life is about growing closer to the light day by day, and therefore one can make progress or regress day by day, but there are many schools of thought on this.  The point is, giving to others is what makes you good.  And the best way to become generous is to think  of all beings as being the same being as you.


----------



## newGuy12 (Nov 3, 2007)

If I wish to have strong self-esteem, I can do so by engaging in esteemable actions.

I do not have to know HOW a piece of code works in order to use the application on a computer machine.

Also, with some spiritual laws, I do not have to understand them, and wonder about some complicated ideas.

No.  Instead, I engage in some action that seems appropriate.  Even if I do it with the mindset, "I wish to be happy, so in order to achieve this, I will try to be of use to someone today".  It will still work.

Now, I have no cares for enlightenment or any such great spiritual awakening.  I simply wish to be content.  So, that makes it easy for me, I have no lofty goal to achieve.

I'm sure that some psychology student could explain this, but I do not care about that.  I can observe the results of actions myself, and make my own conclusion that this seems to be effective.  In the end, a person must experiment with this and see for themselves if it works, or it does not work.  Simple, practical.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Nov 3, 2007)

My answere would be all men/women have merit

i have real merit to my fsamily . friends, students and those I interact with just as all of yo do


----------



## newGuy12 (Nov 3, 2007)

Wait a minute.  I misunderstood the OP!

The following has nothing to do with *merit*:



Freestyler777 said:


> The answer is, those who give.  The Buddha said, 'the more clothing you give away, the more beautiful you become, the more food you give away, the stronger you become.'


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 3, 2007)

Freestyler777 said:


> Thanks for all the posts. You guys are very insightful.
> 
> And Xue Sheng, thank you for the analysis of Confucian Ethics.
> 
> ...



It appears that you are saying that as long as we follow the Buddhist idea of who has real merit than that is the correct way and if that is what you believe or feel I am certainly not trying to change that but there are other ways to consider whether that be Buddhist, Confucian, Maoist, Taoist, Shinto or Hindu. And as Buddhism moved from India to China to Japan it did just that and it did change, it still had its core beliefs but it adopted others as well.

As I mentioned Confucius ideas there are also the ideas of Taoists (Lao Tzu) where someone of merit or a good man is someone who follows nature. And people are naturally good. Man did not need to be controlled and any control was just making things worse. Man could not live naturally by Man-made Laws, traditions or customs. This only produced unhappiness. The only way to be good to be of any merit was to follow the Tao and thereby lead a good life. 

 As to happiness and the need for enlightenment I would disagree but I do not disagree that it would be a better place if people were more generous but I do not agree that this is the only way to be considered good. And enlightenment is achieved how, as you feel gradually or as sudden as other Buddhist believes (sorry I cant remember the name of the sects  I could look them up but I am sure someone will be along to tell me). 

But if you follow Buddhism to enlightenment and by that you feel that is the to have real merit then you miss the point of enlightenment all together but per Buddhists the only way to get to enlightenment is to follow the four noble truths

1. All existence if filled with suffering
2. Suffering is caused by desire
3. Liberation from suffering is possible
4. The eight-fold path is the only route to liberation. 

Then your previous statement



> But to tie the two together, even if one is motivated by self-interest, he still can do good, when he sees that we are all part of the same being, and that his actions will come back to him, good or bad. So really, all three views are paths to happiness and a good life.



Would say enlightenment was not possible if you follow the four noble truths. Self-interest is desire therefore you can never become liberated and gain enlightenment. Therefore by your quoted statement 





> I don't know who said it, but someone said, 'there is no happiness without enlightenment'.


 not capable of happiness

I am not trying to start a debate, but I have done a good job of starting one (sorry), I am saying that just because Buddha said it does not mean it is necessarily correct and that enlightenment is both a whole lot harder than people believe and yet a whole lot easier. And I am not enlightened, I have had my moments that I would say were extremely happy and very aware but they are just moments, and we all have those, but I wouldnt call them enlightenment but I would say they were moments of great joy and they were not all moments of generosity or giving.


----------



## Kacey (Nov 3, 2007)

Freestyler777 said:


> Newguy's post embodies the jewish concept of action being more important than faith.  If you do good actions, you eventually become good yourself, regardless of what you believe.  That is very good in my opinion.



Since you brought up the Jewish concept of tzedakah, or charity, I'm going to add the 8 levels of tzedakah, as that's where my understanding of giving freely originated (had to learn _something_ in 10 years of religious class at the temple...)

 		Giving begrudgingly
 		Giving less that you should, but giving it cheerfully.
 		Giving after being asked
 		Giving before being asked
 		Giving when you do not know the recipient's identity, but the recipient knows 		your identity
 		Giving when you know the recipient's identity, but the recipient doesn't 		know your identity
 		Giving when neither party knows the other's identity
 		Enabling the recipient to become self-reliant


----------



## Freestyler777 (Nov 3, 2007)

Your posts are very interesting!  It seems I am the student, and you guys are my teachers!

BTW, I can't really define 'enlightenment', but I know that a man or woman who sees all of the world as the body of a single being, tends not to harm others, but to help, regardless of motivation.  Your left arm wouldn't get angry at your right eye, and your left leg wouldn't try to kick the right, so why should one man hurt another?


----------



## newGuy12 (Nov 3, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Since you brought up the Jewish concept of tzedakah, or charity, I'm going to add the 8 levels of tzedakah, as that's where my understanding of giving freely originated (had to learn _something_ in 10 years of religious class at the temple...)
> Giving begrudgingly
> Giving less that you should, but giving it cheerfully.
> Giving after being asked
> ...



Oh my gosh, this is freaking awesome!  I'll have to see if there is a wikipedia article on this!!!

This makes such good sense!


----------



## Steel Tiger (Nov 4, 2007)

Kacey said:


> Since you brought up the Jewish concept of tzedakah, or charity, I'm going to add the 8 levels of tzedakah, as that's where my understanding of giving freely originated (had to learn _something_ in 10 years of religious class at the temple...)
> 
> Giving begrudgingly
> Giving less that you should, but giving it cheerfully.
> ...


 
This reminds me of the Taoist modes of action.

Act with Necessity (simply doing what you must)
Act with Justice (doing what you feel is right)
Act with Compassion (doing what is good for others)
Act with the Tao (doing what is ???)

Only a master of the Way knows what acting with the Tao is. To others it may appear just like one of the other modes. But as the Taoists say'



> The one who knows does not speak, the one who speaks does not know.


 
From the Taoist point of view enlightenment is beyond concepts of justice and happiness. To be happy in ones actions is to not be sad, but it is not necessarily enlightened. Taoism is an expression of dualism so,



> There is no happiness without saddness. There is no beauty without ugliness.


 
The result being one must know selfishness to truly be unselfish.


----------

