The Ten Commandments are for clueless people
by Vic Shayne
author
The Self is a Belief: The idea that causes suffering
I could easily have reduced this long little article into one simple idea: If you are a good person who understands right from wrong, the Ten Commandments is a useless collection of dribble that neither appeals to the good person nor the one intent on doing harm to others. That’s it in a nutshell. You can stop reading to avoid the pontification that’s to come.
Those of us in the Western world, familiar with the ethnocentric Judeo-Christian teachings, are quite familiar with the Ten Commandments. And the equally popular Golden Rule.
The Golden Rule was taught more than a century before the time of Jesus by Jewish scholars such as Hillel the Elder of the Jewish tradition who said, “Do not do unto others what you would not want them to do unto you.” He also said, “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.”
The Greek scholar Thales, 600 years before the birth of Jesus, said, “Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing.”
The Golden Rule is one of reciprocity, summed up in the idea “if I don’t do this to you, I am hoping you won’t do it to me.” It’s a selfish concept.
The ancient Egyptian goddess Ma’at, in the story of The Eloquent Peasant (2040–1650 BC) is credited with saying, “Now this is the command: Do to the doer to make him do.” A Late Period Egyptian (c. 664–323 BC) papyrus taught: “That which you hate to be done to you, do not do to another.” And in ancient Persia there was the adage, “Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others.”
Finally, we have the ancient Indian epic Mahābhārata, in which sage Brihaspati tells the king Yudhishthira that “One should never do something to others that one would regard as an injury to one’s own self. In brief, this is dharma. Anything else is succumbing to desire.” — Mahābhārata 13.114.8 (between 400 BC and 400 CE).
It’s selfish and self-centered
The Golden Rule is a rather selfish idea in the least, although if strictly followed it would result in the elimination of cruelty, criminality, and suffering. The Golden Rule obviates even the popular Ten Commandments, because if we all follow the one Rule then we don’t need the rest of them.But before we go any further, we have to agree that rules are important if for no other reason than people tend not to behave themselves and society can’t function optimally when that happens. However, there’s a bit of a paradox here. A big paradox: Rules are written for those inclined to break them and therefore they are most likely to be broken anyway.
Why do you need the Ten Commandments at all? You don’t, unless you are a terrible, corrupted, confused, violent, crazy, conflicted, and/or clueless person. If you’re any or all of these things, you won’t pay attention to the commandments anyway. If you are a good-natured, kind-hearted, compassionate person, then the Ten Commandments are unnecessary to know or think about. And, of course, if you are aware of the Commandments, but violate them anyway, then what purpose do they serve other than to remind you and everyone else that you’ve been a terrible person? (Or, if you’re a sociopath, getting away with such a violation may only serve to make you satisfied with your achievement).
This brings us to Ahisma, a Hindu teaching that admonishes bad behavior. The Hindu scholar Sivaya Subramuniyaswami explained that, in Sanskrit, himsa is doing harm or causing injury. The “a” placed before the word negates it. “Very simply,” wrote Subramuniyaswami, “ahimsa is abstaining from causing harm or injury. It is gentleness and noninjury, whether physical, mental or emotional. It is good to know that nonviolence speaks only to the most extreme forms of forceful wrongdoing, while ahimsa goes much deeper to prohibit even the subtle abuse and the simple hurt.”
Ahimsa is a good rule for society, but does it mean anything to a person who is incapable of practicing it?
Karma is a convenient system
Let’s contemplate this explanation given by Subramuniyaswami: “Belief in karma and reincarnation are strong forces at work in the Hindu mind. They full well know that any thought, feeling or action sent out from themself [sic] to another will return to them through yet another in equal or amplified intensity. What we have done to others will be done to us, if not in this life then in another. The Hindu is thoroughly convinced that violence which he commits will return to him by a cosmic process that is unerring.”
Subramuniyaswami’s idea is based on self-centeredness, because the idea is not to behave badly or harm others so that you don’t suffer. This is not in any way, shape, or form, an example of compassion or altruism. Instead, it has to do with self-interest, self-preservation.
What are we looking at here? The Hindu idea is a relatively similar idea to the Golden Rule and the admonitions of the Ten Commandments and its litany of thou shalts and thou shalt nots. Don’t do it, or else you’ll personally suffer. A better idea would be: Do not harm others because it will cause suffering for them, which creates suffering for everyone and everything out of disharmony.
Who really needs such rules not to misbehave? Do you? Do you need to be told not to steal or have sex with your neighbor’s wife or husband? If you feel it’s wrong to do so, why would you do it anyway? This brings us to the deeper issue of why people act a certain way against their own sense of righteousness.
The problem is the mind itself
The fundamental problem is the egoic mind, which is in a perpetual state of conflict. We have impulses to do certain things, while at the same time there is a sense of conscience that knows that acting on the impulses is wrong — wrong in the sense that they cause suffering to others. So, why is the mind conflicted?
Egoically speaking, the mind is conditioned to believe that it is a person who is attached to, and identified with, myriad ideas. When you say “I am this,” or “I am that,” then we’re witnessing the egoic mind at work.This egoic mind is the cause of all suffering borne of internal conflict and the strong desire to protect and perpetuate itself at all costs.
Force and control doesn’t create transcendence
The admonition not to steal has been created by the egoic minds of others and is therefore directed only at the egoic self of a follower or adherent. Ironically, though, attempt to force or control the egoic mind not to steal will not work, because the egoic mind is doing what it does, which is self-centered.
Important summary
Rules are important to maintain a functioning, peaceful society, but they don’t create a realization, and they don’t stop anyone from misbehaving. Self-conflict within each of us must be observed for change to begin. Just being told that we cannot act a certain way doesn’t really have much of an impact either personally or societally.
