Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Honza
The West believes in a GOOD God. Not a Neutral state of bliss.
|
Is neutral really bliss anyway? - we are a mixture of good & bad depending on circumstance.
The west personifies God as good because it is believed that as our father & creator he has given us a gift. He gave us free will whereas other beings were there to serve i.e angels.
** Caveat: West often means Abrahamic religions as true original western religions are actually pagan/druidic **
The Eastern balance doesn't seem to want you to ponder too much on the hows or whys of the universe - Gods laws - but to become part of the universe by accepting that things are as they are.
West = it's that way because God wishes it
East = it's that way because
it is that way.
I think that the West contemplates how to be better by following Gods rules. The East does the same by essentially allowing yourself to be who you are much the same as a duck would never ponder how to be a duck - it just is.
The issue I find is that both have followers whom look upon others as wrong.
Whilst technically both ways encourage you to be happy & healthy by not hurting others but some of the western notions can be harmful just as neutrality can also be harmful.
Neutrality or just saying that things will simply be doesn't right wrongs as they happen.
Western: She's been robbed - well it is the way it was meant to be ...
Eastern: She's been robbed - ah God has a plan & the thief will be punished at some point ..
Both fail to protect the victim, allow a very negative person to be empowered by a violent act against another.
Both systems have conflicting or illogical methods which is why at the very least they have been altered from what was originally said - or at most the fault shows that they were never representative of the divine in the 1st place.
Neutrality is essentially not being human.
But
Only following rules simply makes you a programmed robot.
Which way is better - or are they both the same?
.