What are the qualities of a Holy person , in your own words

[osgart]

Nobody has ever achieved holiness or ideal virtue. I know very few people who are on the right track to absolute pure virtuousness.

I have counted over 100 virtues. Words of good character. I think the main stumbling block to achieving perfection is learning sound judgment, and being a flesh and bone creature.

Holiness to me is mastery of the self and selfless motivations. A pure heart in full knowledge of being.

There are plenty of decent people whom have faults. But to be holy is to be faultless. A holy person never strays from their virtues. Their virtues is literally who they are.

I think the best humans can do is to be novices and all are far from masters. Holiness lacks nothing and errs not ever.

 

[PearlSeeker]

So through the lens of your individual philosophy, be it spiritual or even atheistic, tell me all the attributes that you think a 'Holy' person should have. How do they live, what is their personality, what is their behavior at all the times in their life. Also, please don't name an existing character from religious history as a direct reference, I want you formulate an ideal without that level of 'ease.' And if you would refrain from merely mentioning a holy figure from history, we might instead analyze what holiness is on a more particulate level, to see if there is a mechanical pattern to it.

For I think that we often relegate our holy figures to be ossified in considerable stratums of history, for to live and walk the earth in any current moment of reality often seems vilifying, does it not? Therefore to simply name an ancient saint is too easy, as time has washed his bones of the hairyness of reality. Who among the living is not free of public judgement, which celebrity, politician, or spiritual figure? Even the pope might occasionally bat an eye to jar his lookers.

And if possible, don't even bring your religion itself into aid with your description, as to try to get an even more objective sense of this. If you are an atheist, read 'holy' as 'ideal'

In my language the word for a holy person or a saint is similar to the word lighthouse. I would also choose the words radiant, pure, noble.

There is a poem/prayer that beautifully describes that (English translation):

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is offense, let me bring pardon.
Where there is discord, let me bring union.
Where there is error, let me bring truth.
Where there is doubt, let me bring faith.
Where there is despair, let me bring hope.
Where there is darkness, let me bring your light.
Where there is sadness, let me bring joy.
O Master, let me not seek as much
to be consoled as to console,
to be understood as to understand,
to be loved as to love,
for it is in giving that one receives,
it is in self-forgetting that one finds,
it is in pardoning that one is pardoned,
it is in dying that one is raised to eternal life.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And to your perception , would you consider this accumulation of traits in a person to be rare. Like out of a hundred people, how many have all of these

Not really.
I know a lot of people who are like that.

The thing is though... such people usually aren't "famous". You won't find them among politicians. You won't find them with millions of followers on instagram. You won't find them as big shot CEO's.

Reason being that they don't fit the psychological profile of such "professions".

Because the properties they don't have are things like vanity, hunger for power, hunger for money, etc.

Succesfull ceo's oftenly lack empathy and compassion.
Big shot politicians are so by choise: they like power.

It's a paradox in a way...

I think it was Mohammed that once said that power is best given to those people who actually don't want it.

 

[oldbadger]

Holiness is separate to goodness.
Holiness is like another quality altogether.
You can see, in some of the greatest monsters in history, aspects of goodness.
Hitler for instance loved children, animals, he initiated the concept of national
parks and public highways, wanted there to be a people's car, passionate about
his country etc.. This extreme example is not isolated - most people who would
never see themselves as virtuous have sides of their character that truly shine.

In the bible holiness is what is given to you. You cannot imitate it.
The bible says that virtues you are born with do not endear you to God because
these characters have been given to you by God. Holiness is what comes through
love of God, obedience, self surrender. It yields the "peaceable fruit", an other-
worldness, serenity, grace, majesty etc..

That's your opinion.
I am a Deist and so see the word holiness quite differently.
And this thread has asked not to mention names, but to stick to definitions.
For me Godliness and Holiness are all about what folks are, think and do, not what they believe they can get.

 

[oldbadger]

And yes, you are right - need to hit that Like button more!!!

No probs!

 

[amorphous_constellation]

The thing is though... such people usually aren't "famous". You won't find them among politicians. You won't find them with millions of followers on instagram. You won't find them as big shot CEO's.

Reason being that they don't fit the psychological profile of such "professions".

Eh, I dunno maybe. I've met plenty of people from all over the spectrum that seemed petty and self-concerned, and others who weren't. I don't really buy into that kind of thinking anymore, judging people on surface level stuff. I have to know more about the ceo or the instagram star before I make a judgement

 

[Vinayaka]

I found this short lecture insightful ...

 

[sun rise]

Nobody has ever achieved holiness or ideal virtue.

I consider that St. Francis of Assisi, Rumi, Ramakrishna, Kabir and many others have achieved holiness.

Holiness to me is mastery of the self and selfless motivations. A pure heart in full knowledge of being.

I would agree with that.

 

[osgart]

I consider that St. Francis of Assisi, Rumi, Ramakrishna, Kabir and many others have achieved holiness.



I would agree with that.

I find it very difficult to visualize perfection, and account for all it's qualities. Is it in the meanings we use to characterize it? Perhaps the power of being affected by profound things that shape the course of life. I think peace, love, and joy are hallmarks of holiness. I think suffering for noble causes is apart of it.

So like there are lots of good people but holiness seems like a whole new level of good that goes far beyond self. Holy people have as their highest priority the will and earnest intention of giving their all for the sake of others.

 

[Darkforbid]

Light

 

[MonkeyFire]

Non-violent safety.

 

[sun rise]

I find it very difficult to visualize perfection, and account for all it's qualities. Is it in the meanings we use to characterize it? Perhaps the power of being affected by profound things that shape the course of life. I think peace, love, and joy are hallmarks of holiness. I think suffering for noble causes is apart of it.

So like there are lots of good people but holiness seems like a whole new level of good that goes far beyond self. Holy people have as their highest priority the will and earnest intention of giving their all for the sake of others.

I can't visualize it either not being in that state. What you wrote has been said by many different people in different languages. I like how Meher Baba expressed it:

To penetrate into the essence of all being and significance, and to release the fragrance of that inner attainment for the guidance and benefit of others, by expressing in the world of forms truth, love, purity and beauty — this is the sole game which has any intrinsic and absolute worth. All other happenings, incidents and attainments in themselves can have no lasting importance.

 

[Galateasdream]

I really don't know!

I'm not sure what 'holy' even means. It can't mean perfect, for humans anyway, so that's not it.

And a part of me is tempted to pronounce everyone and everything holy as a rough synonym for 'sacred', 'valuable' and 'connected to the divine.'

And holy doesn't seem to mean the same as 'good' or 'moral' or 'virtuous' (although all those are included), as it seems to have a spiritual flavour on top (which seems, sadly, to cut out non-spiritual folk from the running).

So to me, it seems that a holy person would be someone of high moral character, evident developed virtue, and unusual spirituality.

Perhaps like pornography it's hard to define, but you know it when you see it

 

[Quagmire]

My idea of a Holy person is someone who knows terms like "Holy person" don't actually mean anything.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

My idea of a Holy person is someone who knows terms like "Holy person" don't actually mean anything.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I basically interpret that as a variation of humility, where on feigns their true worth. Humility in my opinion, can take the form of a mask when perhaps it needn't. If I want someone to fulfill a certain responsibility, I think I much prefer an honest and non-egotistical measure of confidence in one's qualities.

As a musician, I run into this in the music world a lot. People are instantly judged if they declare any hint of competence in their own abilities, and I'm not entirely sure that this is appropriate in all cases. Ego can corrupt, but I suspect that too much humility might make one wither

 

[amorphous_constellation]

And holy doesn't seem to mean the same as 'good' or 'moral' or 'virtuous' (although all those are included), as it seems to have a spiritual flavour on top (which seems, sadly, to cut out non-spiritual folk from the running).

Perhaps you might not define the term 'holy' as an independent trait, but as a quality that arises with the accumulative collaboration of certain traits

 

[Galateasdream]

Perhaps you might not define the term 'holy' as an independent trait, but as a quality that arises with the accumulative collaboration of certain traits

That would make sense, yes. In the same way that 'virtuous' is a combination/nest of traits.

Holy, then, I would tentatively hazard is a descriptor for the combined nested traits of: highly moral, highly virtuous, highly spiritual.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Holiness to me is mastery of the self and selfless motivations. A pure heart in full knowledge of being.

There are plenty of decent people whom have faults. But to be holy is to be faultless. A holy person never strays from their virtues. Their virtues is literally who they are.

So what is their method, is this in conflict with one who 'increases their virtue' by accepting faults and limitations, or is the holy person meant to tackle their faults head on at all times. Does the holy person think deeply about their faults, or do they make it a practice to focus on avoiding their recognition to bypass them

 

[Galateasdream]

Let me pad out with a few more details my current working definition of highly moral, virtuous and spiritual.

Moral: although potentially highly complex in terms of ethical philosophy, I'm going to give a crude idea of what I mean by moral - 'doing good to one's neighbour out of right motives', where the less tribalistic and more inclusive the understanding of 'neighbour'; the more demonstrably beneficial for flourishing the outcome and the intention of the 'doing good'; and the more other-regarding the 'right motivation', then more moral the choice.

Virtuous: drawing upon Aristotle, I'd rattle off some near-universal virtues, like courage, self-control, reasonableness, generosity etc in light of a golden mean - so the more someone had the right amount of courage for the situation, as opposed to foolhardiness or cowardice, the more virtuous they are; and the more virtues developed the more virtuous they are.

Spirituality: this is the most difficult and controversial. But for me, spirituality is what distinguishes 'holiness' from just 'being a really good person' (moral and virtuous), and why we have the separate term. I think at bottom spirituality implies some awareness of, respect for, and connection to, a higher reality than the mundane every-day life we share. For me, I find it difficult to see how one could thus be 'spiritual' without some sort of belief in at least some sort of religious ideas like: God, or an afterlife, or the supernatural, or the unity of all things, or psychic phenomenon, or prayer, or meditation, or miracles etc. Some element of some of those (or similar) must be present, I think, to classify someone as 'holy' rather than simply 'good'.

Although I've met people who seem quite good, or quite spiritual, or even have many strong virtues, I don't think I've ever met anyone who had all three to such a degree that they struck me as 'holy'.

But since I cannot see the heart, nor am I any of those things myself and so would probably struggle to recognise them, I'll leave the assessment of people's holiness to God

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Moral: although potentially highly complex in terms of ethical philosophy, I'm going to give a crude idea of what I mean by moral - 'doing good to one's neighbour out of right motives', where the less tribalistic and more inclusive the understanding of 'neighbour'; the more demonstrably beneficial for flourishing the outcome and the intention of the 'doing good'; and the more other-regarding the 'right motivation', then more moral the choice.

Hm, I suppose that's ok in principle

But to that point, I'm a little iffy on it as an american, where foreign involvement often becomes unwanted and depletes internal resources. I feel that they often try to sell us on this with similar points to yours, or ground their motivational ontology therein. I feel as though it doesn't make the nation into much of a 'beacon,' holy or otherwise. Therefore, I feel like morality should often be tempered with pragmatism, though the problem is, that this often appears to tamper with its sense of purity

Virtuous: drawing upon Aristotle, I'd rattle off some near-universal virtues, like courage, self-control, reasonableness, generosity etc in light of a golden mean - so the more someone had the right amount of courage for the situation, as opposed to foolhardiness or cowardice, the more virtuous they are; and the more virtues developed the more virtuous they are.

I guess a problem is that those areas can be subjective. Different interpretations of those things are, quite possibly, at the foundation of what makes any culture any different from any other. Virtues then, would be shown to be subjective. What is courageous or cowardly in all situations? What is reasonable? What exactly does a sense of self-control mean throughout life? Humans seem to take these things and walk in all different directions with them

. For me, I find it difficult to see how one could thus be 'spiritual' without some sort of belief in at least some sort of religious ideas like: God, or an afterlife, or the supernatural, or the unity of all things, or psychic phenomenon, or prayer, or meditation, or miracles etc. Some element of some of those (or similar) must be present, I think, to classify someone as 'holy' rather than simply 'good'.

Hm, well some of the things you listed might be in the bin of experience rather than belief. If spirituality is what accrues with experience, it becomes a sort of inherent reality that might discard the old shell of belief. But there are a number of ways to describe spirituality. I think maybe it's become an amorphous term even in western culture. If we can't cage it, perhaps we should let it fly away and look to other words..

But since I cannot see the heart, nor am I any of those things myself and so would probably struggle to recognise them, I'll leave the assessment of people's holiness to God

Unless you think that humans are designed to intuitively locate these things. If nothing within can show you some semblance of a trail toward them, how can anyone ever find them?