“I would distinguish what is commonly called choice among men, and which is a partial act, the choice of the hands, of the eyes, of the appetites, and not a whole act of the man.  But that which I call right or goodness, is the choice of my constitution.”

To me, this portrayed the same concept as part of Chapter Four of the Bhagavad-Gita:

“You must realize what action is, what wrong action and inaction are as well.  The true nature of action is profound, and difficult to fathom.  He who can see inaction in the midst of action, and action in the midst of inaction, is wise and can act in the spirit of yoga.”

This quotation discusses the nature of the Atman as distinct from the body.  The actions made by the body are not necessarily the actions of the atman, or the true self.  I found it interesting that Emerson, who was at one point a Unitarian minister, and the Bhagavad-Gita both express, though in very different terms, that the action of the body are not necessarily the actions of one’s true self.  I was surprised to find such similar ideas expressed by such different sources.

What do other people think?  Are there any aspects of Hinduism that are universal?  That are specific to Hinduism?

Related posts:

1. The Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 5 I wanted to follow up this past week’s discussion on...
2. In Search of the True Self There is much discussion in Hindu literature about the true...
3. Gita Study Group 2.21.11 In this week’s Bhagavad Gita study group with Swami Tyagananda,...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Have you got the will to surmount mountain-high obstructions? If the whole world stands against you sword in hand, would you still dare to do what you think is right?

I am assuming that these rhetorical questions have injunctive force — by asking, Swami Vivekananda is suggesting that we acquire those qualities of tenacity and principled living.

Here I ask — for all the bloodshed and murder that the terrorists in Mumbai have caused, are they daring to do what they think is right, though the whole world stands against them? The distinction between what is right and what they think is right is important. I am still trying to untangle this question, because it seems that Swami Vivekananda’s quote justifies the terrorists’ vicious character, a justification that I do not like. Or maybe my gut reaction is invalid, and we must accept the tenacity of the terrorists, separate from their horrific goals — learn something from people whom we instinctively decry.

Related posts:

1. The history of the world As I was reading through some of the lectures...
2. Intersection of the four yogas In Karma Yoga, Swami Vivekananda says the following: “So...
3. Strength, self-abnegation, and self-esteem As I was reading my psychology textbook, I came across...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.