Difficulty with moral grey area

This is the place to post whatever questions you have related to the teachings of Eckhart Tolle. The rest of us will do whatever we can to help you achieve a better understanding :)
Post Reply
jtightlips21
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:28 am

Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by jtightlips21 » Thu May 03, 2018 7:21 pm

I have begun to realize that I have a hard time with any form of moral fluidity. For the most part, I see things mostly being grey area, and tend to view very little being black and white. Now when it comes to morality, I tend to see things in a very black and white clear cut way. If there is grey area, then it is simply not a moral issue to worry about. Grey area or any moral standards open to flexibility or change are difficult for me, and hard to tolerate. I find that what it comes down to is that I have a hard time with moral standards where one thing can be prohibited in one place or time, social groups or individual, but be accepted in another. So for myself, the standards need to be rigidly defined and applicable in all times and places or its simply not a moral issue. However, I am noticing that I really cannot stand those who do adhere to rigid standards, because I dont like what I see in myself, and feel tied to these people because of this similarity.

ifunkygroove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:12 pm

Re: Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by ifunkygroove » Sun May 06, 2018 3:33 pm

Hi, regarding your difficulty with moral grey area, it would help if you were more specific about your concerns, but in general I believe Eckhart would say the point that you're struggling is because you have not accepted yourself or others as they are. One of Eckhart's frequent quotes of Jesus is, ""Forgive them for they know not what they do." Do not judge others' actions; they can only act based on their level of consciousness. Here are a few helpful quotes:

“Always say “yes” to the present moment. What could be more futile, more insane, than to create inner resistance to what already is? what could be more insane than to oppose life itself, which is now and always now? Surrender to what is. Say “yes” to life — and see how life suddenly starts working for you rather than against you.” ~ Eckhart Tolle. This means accepting yourself and others as they are. Resist nothing.

Acceptance and surrender helps you get to a place where you embrace the present moment as it is. Not because you no longer care about yourself or your life, but because you understand that by accepting and surrendering to what is, you find peace of mind. And from that peaceful state, you can make better decisions and create a better life for yourself. (Eckhart Tolle website)

Sit with your own issues, accept what needs acceptance and change what needs to be changed within yourself. "Know thyself". Then move forward fully conscious in the present moment.

Hope this helps,
Patrick

jtightlips21
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:28 am

Re: Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by jtightlips21 » Tue May 08, 2018 4:51 am

I think part of the difficulty in acceptance is feeling that it is equivalent to defeat. In this respect, saying yes to the present as it takes form feels like saying no to how we wish things were. It feels like your surrendering yourself to an indifferent outside world that doesnt give a care about anything just because it is stronger.

However, I know with myself that I get annoyed with judgmentalism even more than I do with defeatism. For example, I find myself easily irritated with the angry religious zealot constantly criticizing and protesting. I cannot help but wonder if they lack the acceptance. But I dont know if its just the ego saying that acceptance is defeat, and giving into injustice.

ifunkygroove
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:12 pm

Re: Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by ifunkygroove » Wed May 09, 2018 3:11 pm

Yes, Eckhart addresses this idea directly: acceptance does not mean defeat. This is tricky and requires practice, patience, and a solid grounding in the 'deeper I', meaning that you must adhere to the inner you - you must not allow outside forces (people, situations) define you. If you are acting from your deepest self in full consciousness, you don't react to others' reactions or their ego. Therefore if you accept a situation and someone else takes this as a victory for them and a defeat for you, you don't let their interpretation of this effect you. One of my favorite quotes Eckhart sites from a Book in Miracles is,

"Nothing real can be threatened; nothing unreal exists."

This puts everything into perspective. Realize that what is real is deep inside you, your consciousness, your connection to peace and nature and this cannot be threatened. Whereas situations, drama, possessions, gain, loss, emotions are transitory - they all come and go - and therefore can be threatened and are unreal.

You also touch on desire here - when you mention 'like saying no to how we wish things were'. There is much to be said about desire as well. To keep it short the Buddha said that suffering was caused by desire. In short, limit your desires and accept that you can only change what you control which is only your inner state. Everything else is out of your control.

Yes of course the angry religious zealot lacks acceptance as does the majority of activists. Many activists have very heavy pain bodies and their 'cause' is just a porthole for their pain body. They can be very troubled and angry people and toxic to be around.

You don't have to give into injustice to accept the present moment as it is. The idea is to accept that injustice is caused by others' unconsciousness. You don't have to be a part of the injustice or their unconsciousness. If your job or life situation is asking you to accept injustice it is in your power to remove yourself from this situation.

You have some great questions and themes here that I think are addressed in Echart's books and videos. Everything I have written here I learned from his teachings. I recommend you read or re-read "The Power of Now" and "Practicing the Power of Now" both by Eckhart Tolle. Another great resource is his website: eckharttollenow.com. It is a pay site but worth it. You can search for topics like "desire" and find short 5-15min video clips of Eckart addressing this exact issue.

Patrick

jtightlips21
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:28 am

Re: Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by jtightlips21 » Sat May 12, 2018 7:17 pm

I have noticed this week that much of the difficulty with moral grey area is the way the true self I find can become negotiable. I guess the best way I would describe it as the clash between moral pragmatism and moral idealism. With moral pragmatism, I find that people can be too compromising of their ideals if they become infeasible, or gives in too easily to peer pressure or authority. With Moral idealism, I find that people can get so uncompromising of their principles that they do not respect others ideals. So I find myself frustrated with idealists on an opposing side, and with pragmatists in general. So this seems to be the question of when does principle turn into stubborness and when does compromise turn into selling out.

jtightlips21
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:28 am

Re: Difficulty with moral grey area

Post by jtightlips21 » Mon Jun 18, 2018 4:34 am

ifunkygroove wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 3:11 pm
Yes of course the angry religious zealot lacks acceptance as does the majority of activists. Many activists have very heavy pain bodies and their 'cause' is just a porthole for their pain body. They can be very troubled and angry people and toxic to be around.


Patrick
This reminds me of Richard Rohr's book "Hope against darkness" in reference to the Zealots and Pharisees in comparing the Zealots to the activists or liberal rebellious while the Pharisees are compared to the status quo keepers distancing themselves from anything deemed tainted. I find that this is the common form of dualism in the Postmodern mindset that categorizes people into victims and oppressors. I find my egoic self thinking very much so in these terms of oppressor and victim. I find that it is all too easy to stick to the liberal victim metanarrative that sees the victims as these people who were living their lives peacefully and minding their own business and the oppressors as these intruders who decided to make trouble in imposing their will against the victims and disturbing their peace. I cannot help but think that this is what movies such as Avatar represent.

Yet I see something similar on the sacrificial side often embodied by religious fundamentalists, business tycoons, workaholics, moralists, or people in position of authority. In the sacrificial side, I have found that people see themselves as victims for such sacrifices they have made, such as working long hours, obsessive resistance to sin, ascetic pursuits, "selfless" acts, you name it. Then they feel more victimized when their superiority is not recognized.

I also see circumstances where people play the victim and see the other side as the oppressor, all the while being oblivious to how they have oppressed the oppressor. This is what I see with the free speech fundamentalism, in which people using hateful speech see themselves as the victims, and the "snowflakes" who did not take well to hateful speech became oppressive themselves.

Post Reply