Confucius said, "Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you". Some people rephrase this to "Do to others what you want others to do to you". I found them different in all entirety.
If someone punch me, can I presumed that someone want me to punch him back?
Of course, before I punch him, I would be wondering do I want him to punch me back?
Anyway, I think Confucius statement is less ambiguous.
So the next day, I ask my wife that if I want to have a friendly spar with a friend in a boxing match, can I assume that he would also like to do it? Based on second statement, I would like him to have a spar with me. So does that means, it is ok for me to initiate the spar? So what does Confucius original statement say to this? I do not want my friend not to spar with me so I should not not spar with him which mean I should spar with him? This sound like the original statement.
Overall, my opinion is that the decision seems to only lies with the 'I', the 'Me'. The 'Me' think what the other would want or would not want. What about the real thing that the other want?
So here's what I think should be added to Confucius statement :-
"Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you and what others do not want you to do to them"
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha
I like this phrase by Buddha because most people will check who say those words before really crediting whether those words are true. Here Buddha, Himself tell the reader not to trust what He says but accept what He says only if it agrees with ones reason and common sense. In other words, we should not credit quotes on word of wisdom because those words should be credited as what they are instead of who says it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment