The Law of Responsibility

[MangusKhan]

I'm not denying anything its own path, I'm asking if there isn't a moral imperative to live as fully activated as one knows how?

I don't think there is a moral imperative at all: that's what free will is.

I suppose that is, indeed, true as a general matter. Yet, on another level--and maybe this is my artistic bias pushing this, but--if one regards this vague construct considered to be self as an instrument of service to the Infinite, then is there not an implied imperative--which one may choose to accept or reject--to become as expansive an instrument as possible along the lines of the shopping example?

One response to this is, "Sure, if you want to do that, go right ahead."  I guess I'm just wondering why this bias is not more pervasive and supported.  What am I missing?

I think it's just that the western take on eastern philosophy tends to drift towards an attitude of "It's all good man, you just do whatever you want". Not that this isn't partly correct, but to know the potentially dire consequences of failing to love, of failing to serve, and then to fail to love and serve to your greatest ability, is indeed a failing of high order. If you can't claim ignorance, then it's as simple as that. An interesting point to consider is that if you teach someone about the laws and their consequences, especially against their free will, and they believe you wholeheartedly, have you not just placed a massive burden on them? Maybe some would say you have liberated them, or at least given them the opportunity to liberate themselves by teaching them so. What are your takes on this one?