Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Humanity vs Morality

'One is man's essential nature while the other is imposed to bring sanity'

THE essential nature of “humanity” has been suppressed and destroyed in many ways, and the substitute of “morality” has been brought in to bring some order and sanity to our lives.


Right now, if you take away morality, a lot of people will behave like animals.

This has happened because we have not done anything to keep our humanity awake and alive all the time. If your humanity was alive, there would be no need for morality. If your humanity was in full force, would you need morality? No.

Morality varies from society to society and person to person. Something perfectly okay in one society is dead wrong in another society. So morality is subject to people’s convenience. But humanity is not a convenience; it is your essential nature.

It is not something that was invented; morality is invented; humanity has to be discovered. You can only discover that which is already there; but you can invent anything.

Different times in history and different points of geography have led to variations in interpreting moralities. Whatever your grandmother thought was absolutely immoral is something you are doing shamelessly today. Isn’t it so? So morality differs from person to person and according to times and situations. There is a huge argument between one generation and another generation about what is moral or immoral. In every house, the fight is going on. But there has never been an argument about humanity.

Wherever humanity found its expression, at any time in history or any point in geography, it is always the same.

On the surface, in our values, morals and ethics, each one of us may be different; but if you know how to poke a person deep enough to get this humanity out, every one of us will do things the same way. To impose morality, you do not need any involvement with people; I just have to tell you, ‘Be like this; speak kindly, if you speak angrily, you will burn in hell.’ But if you want to bring forth humanity in that person, it takes much more involvement; you have to give yourself.

Otherwise, it will not happen. But it is still worthwhile, because morality may bring social order, but it will cause inner havoc. Morality brings some sense of social order for some time, but it destroys the human being.

Humanity will also bring social order, but in a loose way without any enforcement; it will make the human being beautiful. That is what is most important; isn’t it? If humanity flowers and overflows, then divinity will be the next natural step. Only if you allow your humanity to overflow within you, then divinity will flower. Without the richness of humanity, divinity cannot happen, no matter what you do. Morality does not lead to divinity, but it has brought guilt, shame and fear, because nobody can fulfill the kind of morals which have been set.

Make a list of all the things the major religions of the world describe as sin.

Then you will see that just to be alive is a sin. Anything you do is a sin. Your very birth is a sin. Since the very process of life is supposed to be a sin, you always feel guilty and terrified. If your humanity is in full swing, you would not need morality.

Only because there are so many ways in which you suppress your humanity, you need morality to be good.

Ranked among the fifty most influential people in India, Sadhguru is a yogi, mystic, visionary and bestselling author. Sadhguru was conferred the Padma Vibhushan, the Indian government’s highest annual civilian award, in 2017, for exceptional and distinguished service.

More For You

Ella Devi

The post quickly gained traction online and prompted responses from right-wing media outlets

X/ ellad3vi

How 18-year-old Ella Devi mocked 'MAGA' over an ‘America-first’ fashion contradiction

Highlights

  • Fashion student Ella Devi drew criticism from conservative media after commenting on Jennifer Rauchet’s outfit
  • Devi claimed the dress worn by Pete Hegseth’s wife resembled designs sold on Temu and Shein
  • The 18-year-old argued the issue was linked to Maga’s stance on American manufacturing
  • Conservative commentators accused her of targeting Rauchet unfairly

Social media post turns into political flashpoint

Ella Devi has become the focus of criticism from conservative commentators in the United States after posting about an outfit worn by Jennifer Rauchet at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

Devi, an 18-year-old Parsons student studying English and philosophy, shared a post on X identifying Rauchet’s asymmetric pink dress as resembling designs available through low-cost online retailers including Temu and Shein. An identical version was later reportedly found on Shein listed for £31.

Keep ReadingShow less