determining morality is just a balance between the dharma of the individual and the collective

The social dynamics... The process of determining morality is just a balance between the dharma of the individual living unit and the collective or several dharmas of all things outside this living unit. Svadharma and Paradharma.

All other qualifications are mere frills or applying statistical probabilities and laws of averages..

It is always an element of estimation and uncertainty..

Even in pure mathematics, if you enter the realm of Calculus you will find such estimation of limits in both the major processes of differentiation and integration..

This becomes all the more intricate with imaginary number calculus and also when we add more dimensions in tensor calculus..

And one of the staple processes applied in Indian metaphysics is the" neti "principle. Instead of asserting something as solid, our thinkers apply the logic of elimination. They prescribe certain parameters for the validity of some precept or idea and through application of logical projections they eliminate certain characteristics as "this is not, this is not applicable".

Like peeling an onion perhaps no one knows what would be left after all the netis have been applied.

Just a good example of such an elimination process is Nirvana Shatkam of Adi Shankara..

He says that he is not many things, but ultimately he is Chidananda roopaH shivoham shivoham.. but then two questions would pester the rational mind.. What is chidananda roopa, what is shiva..

The intense bhaktas and faithful HIndus would attribute that these are the attributes of Brahman etc.

But we have to know that even within HInduism there are followers of Nyaya, Sankhya, Vaiseshika etc and there are Kanadas who would not exactly accept the existence of such a supreme authority without adequate reinforcement or proof.

Of course, there is a sort of consensus in the matter because even those people accept the primacy of Vedas and pay at least lip service toVedas.

But it is only Pax Romana. In absolute terms, there are gray or even very dark areas.

What we have to understand is that all arguments and logical projections often enter situations of impasse.. Maybe application of faith generated through adherence over many generations as precedents works as a pacification and contributes to maintaining the emotional and social balance..

But essentially, it is an utterly unstable equilibrium.

We cannot berate a person who refuses to submit to the authority of such a Supreme Being, because we really know nothing about that Supreme Being, and we are not even sure whether such a Being is there. We just trust because our elders had faith. That is all

In a group I found another fight.. stating that the ideas enuntiated in Tirukural are Bakvas and all. I beg to disagree.

In my view, no text or scripture is the ultimate authority or the last word. No idea deserves to be rejected in toto too. If one finds some ideas in any of the texts.. and if that idea would further social harmony, peaceful co existence and at the same time would also contribute to the Individual mental calmness, any idea that would contribute to reduce schism and inter-fighting among stakeholders with divergent priorities, is to be welcomed. That is all.

The text can be Veda, Upanishad, Bible Qrana, Kural or Puranam or Epic or any other sacred or not too sacred text too.

What is required is an open and receptive mind, an attitude without prejudices..

I think it is just a dream..