If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

[Risho]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

***First, this is the internets... so please don't read this as an aggressive response. I'm just being candid.

I try to resist the temptation of assuming someone's mindset in order to mold it into a justification of one's beliefs.

For instance, how the hell do I know what Hitler's true motives were? It's impossible. I don't always know my own motives. Likewise, I don't know about the motives of serial killers, rapists, a old woman crossing the road, etc.

I do know that even if you don't like the word evil, bad or evil (for lack of a different word; that is the word that we as a culture have agreed upon for negative things) does exist in the world.

I do agree it is all about what we bring into the world. It's not as if I believe that there is a force of evil independent of things waiting to strike down on us. It is all a result of actions. And we are responsible for those, no one else.

And there are definitely harmful and hurtful actions. Sometimes those actions are a result of our own ignorance as in the case of road rage or yelling at someone to get revenge. However, it's not black and white. I'm a rational human being; fortunately I was created that way, and nothing has yet deteriorated my rationale. However, some people have mental breakdowns and blow shit up. Others are born as child molesters. These things happen, and I'm never naive to say that it's due to some ignorance on the part of those individuals. Perhaps, it's just not in some person's capacity to be moral, e.g. sociopaths and psychopaths.

I don't know if they are evil, but they are sure as hell aren't beneficial people, so no matter what word or concept you like to apply, there you have it.. it's there whether you pretend it to be or not, or no matter how you want to explain it such that it fit in nicely with your belief system's origin stories.

[JohnsonCM]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

***First, this is the internets... so please don't read this as an aggressive response. I'm just being candid.

I try to resist the temptation of assuming someone's mindset in order to mold it into a justification of one's beliefs.

For instance, how the hell do I know what Hitler's true motives were? It's impossible. I don't always know my own motives. Likewise, I don't know about the motives of serial killers, rapists, a old woman crossing the road, etc.

I do know that even if you don't like the word evil, bad or evil (for lack of a different word; that is the word that we as a culture have agreed upon for negative things) does exist in the world.

I do agree it is all about what we bring into the world. It's not as if I believe that there is a force of evil independent of things waiting to strike down on us. It is all a result of actions. And we are responsible for those, no one else.

And there are definitely harmful and hurtful actions. Sometimes those actions are a result of our own ignorance as in the case of road rage or yelling at someone to get revenge. However, it's not black and white. I'm a rational human being; fortunately I was created that way, and nothing has yet deteriorated my rationale. However, some people have mental breakdowns and blow shit up. Others are born as child molesters. These things happen, and I'm never naive to say that it's due to some ignorance on the part of those individuals. Perhaps, it's just not in some person's capacity to be moral, e.g. sociopaths and psychopaths.

I don't know if they are evil, but they are sure as hell aren't beneficial people, so no matter what word or concept you like to apply, there you have it.. it's there whether you pretend it to be or not, or no matter how you want to explain it such that it fit in nicely with your belief system's origin stories.

Well, let me be candid in response. True. You or I don't know what Hitler's motives were, truly. Only Hitler did. We can extrapolate an idea, though from his writings. Ever read Mien Kampf? His ideologies were not, from his perspective, to feed some sick need to kill people, but because in his mind, he thought he was doing something for the benefit of the German People. Same ideology is found in Rwanda and the Sudan where Hutu kill Tutsi, Bosnia where Bosnian killed Serb, during the Crusades where both Christian and Muslim killed each other. Is all that killing evil? To you, to me, to many, heck yeah it is. Was it to them? No. To them they were doing what they thought was right. As to your coment about not knowing your own motives, isn't that one of the many point-less points of this practice? To remove all delusion and attachment to act from a place of actualized enlightenment? Moving on to rational humans. What is rational? The process by which we reason isn't really fully understood. You say "However, some people have mental breakdowns and blow shit up. Others are born as child molesters. These things happen, and I'm never naive to say that it's due to some ignorance on the part of those individuals." So you definately have a stance on the Nature vs. Nurture debate that has plagued psychologists for decades. Is a person BORN a child molester, or do they BECOME a child molester because of their environment? Do they think what they are doing is wrong? Not 300-400 years ago, it was not only accepted but common practice for females to be married and have children by age 15. That's not that long ago in the history of human evolution. And you can't say, "well, look how far we've come since then" because you're basically equating our moral and spiritual growth to our technological advancement, since people are really no different now then we were then. People still do terrible things, kill each other, the same crimes are still around now that were around then, only the tools have changed. If a man is beaten as a child, and beats his child, was he born like that or is it Pavlovian in response?

Evil is a word. Just like tree, or rock, or soda. Humans made it to describe something, in this case something that goes against what is commonly thought of as good and virtueous behavior. This does not make it true. This description and lable of action does not create the existance of "evil", it's still just a word that people apply based on their individual ideology.

The point is that these people who do these things, almost certainly do not do them because they are "evil" people, they do them because they think, that somehow it's ok to do them. That is being mis-guided in the dharma and being attached to their own wants and needs so badly that they forget everyone else. Be careful that you don't mistake the word we use to lable these actions for the actions themselves. That's the whole 'mistaking the finger for the moon' thing. But you are correct, these actions do exsist, and culturally we have decided to term some of them as "evil".

But for me, the end result will always remain the same. The world is the world and the people in it will act. I will do my best to act from a place of realization, and I will do my best to help others to do the same. I don't do it because it's "good" or because it's not "evil", I do it because I want to be of benefit to others. If we all act in a similar fashion, what could we accomplish? Buddha said, in the Dhammapada, "With our thoughts, we make the world." Thoughts beget karma.

[Risho]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Thank you for your response... I get really intense with this issue. I think it's one of the places where I'm caught. I will leave it be for now, and wait for Jukai preparation

Well, let me be candid in response. True. You or I don't know what Hitler's motives were, truly. Only Hitler did. We can extrapolate an idea, though from his writings. Ever read Mien Kampf? His ideologies were not, from his perspective, to feed some sick need to kill people, but because in his mind, he thought he was doing something for the benefit of the German People. Same ideology is found in Rwanda and the Sudan where Hutu kill Tutsi, Bosnia where Bosnian killed Serb, during the Crusades where both Christian and Muslim killed each other. Is all that killing evil? To you, to me, to many, heck yeah it is. Was it to them? No. To them they were doing what they thought was right.

Yeah we can assume his motives. I'm just saying that I don't like to extrapolate ideas to fit them in with another belief system of evil or not evil.

As to your coment about not knowing your own motives, isn't that one of the many point-less points of this practice? To remove all delusion and attachment to act from a place of actualized enlightenment? Moving on to rational humans. What is rational? The process by which we reason isn't really fully understood. You say "However, some people have mental breakdowns and blow shit up. Others are born as child molesters. These things happen, and I'm never naive to say that it's due to some ignorance on the part of those individuals." So you definately have a stance on the Nature vs. Nurture debate that has plagued psychologists for decades.

I actually believe it's always both nature and nurture, but to be nurtured you have to have some genetic pre-disposition to be nurtured in that way. I do believe that a sane individual can be nurtured to be a sociopath, but I also believe that there are people who are born that way.

Is a person BORN a child molester, or do they BECOME a child molester because of their environment? Do they think what they are doing is wrong? Not 300-400 years ago, it was not only accepted but common practice for females to be married and have children by age 15.

I believe both are possible. I also think that marriage at 15 is quite different from child molestation.

That's not that long ago in the history of human evolution. And you can't say, "well, look how far we've come since then" because you're basically equating our moral and spiritual growth to our technological advancement, since people are really no different now then we were then. People still do terrible things, kill each other, the same crimes are still around now that were around then, only the tools have changed. If a man is beaten as a child, and beats his child, was he born like that or is it Pavlovian in response?

I completely agree.

Evil is a word. Just like tree, or rock, or soda. Humans made it to describe something, in this case something that goes against what is commonly thought of as good and virtueous behavior. This does not make it true. This description and lable of action does not create the existance of "evil", it's still just a word that people apply based on their individual ideology.

The point is that these people who do these things, almost certainly do not do them because they are "evil" people, they do them because they think, that somehow it's ok to do them. That is being mis-guided in the dharma and being attached to their own wants and needs so badly that they forget everyone else. Be careful that you don't mistake the word we use to lable these actions for the actions themselves. That's the whole 'mistaking the finger for the moon' thing. But you are correct, these actions do exsist, and culturally we have decided to term some of them as "evil".

But for me, the end result will always remain the same. The world is the world and the people in it will act. I will do my best to act from a place of realization, and I will do my best to help others to do the same. I don't do it because it's "good" or because it's not "evil", I do it because I want to be of benefit to others. If we all act in a similar fashion, what could we accomplish? Buddha said, in the Dhammapada, "With our thoughts, we make the world." Thoughts beget karma.

Benefiting others means doing them good, as opposed to doing evil towards them. So you've just replaced one word for another.

I agree with Jundo here, and now I'm done :P Good and evil are what we bring into the world, and we are responsible for it. There's no doubt we do it, and that's why we atone for it. If you don't believe that evil exists, and if you chant the gatha of atonement, what are you atoning for (nothing, a non-word)?

Of course words are just words, but they have meaning and without them or some shared communication method, we would not be able to er... communicate. Would we see the moon without the finger?

Ok, I'm really done now :roll:

[Rich]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Some of this is our biological conditioning also. So much of human social behavior still boils down to displays of dominance and submission. People often shame or assault another person to demonstrate their own dominance and power. A lot of the more common violent actions we see in the human world are testosterone-driven aggression. As far as nature is concerned, violence isn't wrong, it is an integral part of animal life.

But this is where the Buddha's approach is also interesting... it does away with a lot of the thorny moral debate that can emerge over whether violent actions are truly "wrong" or "evil." A theist might argue these are evil, an evolutionist that they are natural. Buddha would simply say that they are stupid. And, well... they are. In modern human society, violence isn't as profitable as cooperation. Cruelty isn't as profitable as kindness. We don't need to beat our chests and kill and eat our rivals any more. There are many more creative ways we can compete and make a place for ourselves in the world.

I truly do not believe that the simplest and most natural forms of violence and aggression are "evil." The evolution of life and the evolution of our species absolutely required it. We live on a violent Earth and life means finding a way to make other life our food. Survival means defeating our rivals. But now, direct violence is outmoded and no longer advantageous.

A small act of aggression or what is perceived as aggressive can trigger a violent and extremely aggressive act by another. This is why aggressive driving can lead to road rage, or why they tell store clerks or tellers to cooperate with robbers. But this doesn't mean we have to be passive doormats, just use skillful means to make our point. There are still many people that believe that 'direct violence' is effective and advantageous, that's the reality so we have to be careful and pay attention.

/Rich

[Onshin]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Hi,
When went for my first Jukai in 2003 before commiting to the ten grave precepts we were given the three pure precepts; Cease from Evil. Do only Good. Do Good for Others.. In taking these we confess that 'All wrong actions, behaviour and karma, have been, and are, caused by greed, anger and delusion which have no beginning, born of my body, mouth and will...
This to me seems to confirm what most people are saying here; that we are responsble for all our actions and the after effects thereof. So is evil just another word for unskillful means? Who decides when unskillful is no longer a sufficient word, and evil must be used to describe the act? The precepts show us how to avoid these unskillful means but not everyone follows the precepts. All we can do is temper our reactions to keep ourselves within Buddha way. An example of cause and effect running out of control (not following the precepts here I think): A lady was caught on cctv ( we have more of those here in Britain than anywhere else, by the way) stroking a cute little cat. Suddenly she grabbed the cat by the scruff of the neck, lifted the lid of a nearby wheeliebin (trash can) and dumped the cat in it. The owners of the cat found it before the rubbish men came and emptied the bin luckilly. The woman was identified and is now under police protection. Yes, what she did was a bit reprehensible, but the hate campaign that has been launched on the internet here which includes death threats, is surely way over the top. I would say that threatening to kill someone is much more evil than dumping a cat in a bin. I am sure that she did not even consider that the cat might die, but a death threat is pretty sure.
What I am getting at here is that (yes, I can get to the point eventually) evil breeds, if we allow ourselves to react to events without consideration and control we can create more evil than was there in the first place. My parents are probably the reason for my thoughts on this; My mother lost both her parents and lots of friends in the London Blitz during WWII and my father spent most of the war working German coal mines as a POW after capture at Dunkerque, neither of them held any animosity for the Germans after the war, I was brought up to believe peace and kindness.
So all we need to do to stop evil is stop breeding it, The buck stops right here,with us.


Joe

[Manatee]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

I think the illusion that we don't know right from wrong is just that.

We know, but we choose not to.

We choose to unlearn, because we think it is expected of us. Does a baby do wrong?

Nature's violence is merciful. It is the supremest mercy. It is beyond any concept we could have of randomness.

Gassho, Mandy

[JohnsonCM]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Basically what I'm saying here is that "evil" is a concept and a reality. As Jundo is fond of pointing out, we must be able to view things from a multitude of points of view. At the same time we have to be clear about what we are doing, saying, thinking, acting, etc. The point is that this four letter word e-v-i-l and the deffinition that we ascribe to it, is just a compilation of words and sounds, another lable that people use to try and separate out what is hurtful, and offensive to them about life, from all the nice fluffy stuff that makes them happy. So as Buddhists, we know that there is no such thing as "evil", there is only things-as-it-is as Suzuki Roshi says.

However, we live in this world and in this world people do things that hurt and offend others, things that cause suffering, and yeah, that's evil. When people do evil deeds, they give life to this concept of "evil", so as Buddhists we know that evil is a very real thing.

Also, we accept that "evil" or the negative, hurtfull, oppressive, and depressive aspects of life, the suffering, is not something that can be separated from this life, not something that can be removed from the world of Samsara. So as Buddhist, we must accept that "evil" is a necessary part of life.

But we are not heartless people, who stand by and watch the suffering of others, brought about by their attachement to thier own egos, and desires. We all want to cultivate goodness in this world. Do that which is good, do not do that which is evil, thus all Buddhas have taught. We want all sentient beings to be free of this oppressive weight of desire, attachement, and delusion that causes them to act, think, and feel in ways that promote "evil". So as Buddhists, we work to actualize good in the world and remove evil influences.

A question was asked of me, when I recite the vow of attonement, am I attoning for nothing or a non-thought? My answer is this: I am attoning for anything that I have done that has caused someone suffering, myself included. I am attoning for anything that I have done that others may consider evil. I am attoning for anything I have done that looking back on, I consider evil. I am attoning for anything that I have done, that inadvertently negatively effected someone, that they looked at their circumstances and thought was the work of some evil.

Do not mistake the finger pointing at the moon for the moon itself. Would we see the moon without the finger? Maybe, finger or no, the moon is still there, one only need look up. Would we understand it was the moon with out the finger pointing and someone saying "moon", I'm not sure. Would the moon care? All I am saying is that we need to be careful how we think about these things, lest we fall into the pit of delusion and end up mistaking the lable for the thing itself.

[Risho]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Thank you Christopher!

Gassho,

Cyril

[Saijun]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

Hello friends,

Look at the Venerable Angulimala.

He killed 999 people trying to be happy. Doing what he was assured would make him happy in the end. When he had to choose between his mother and the Buddha, he tried to chase down the Buddha. He saved his mother. Is he evil for killing so many, or good for showing compassion? Was he a victim of the greed for happiness, and the delusion that whatever his teacher said had to be true? I think the latter is true.

Mara, Kanon.
Heads, Tails.
Dharma.

So maybe it isn't a question of a "good vs evil" dichotomy. Maybe it is a progression of skillfulness. "What, when I do it, will be for my long-term wellbeing and happiness?" I'm sure that no two can agree on an answer. Maybe one wants to feed hungry children, another wants to feed a hungry Self. Deep deep down, the basic motive is the same.

I think that the dualism inherent in "good vs evil" is an easy way to pass a judgment, to say "I must be better than you." When there is a label, there is a separation. It's much harder to look at a murderer, an arsonist, and say "I understand that you want to be happy. I want to be happy too."

But that is exactly what we must do. I'm not going to say "perhaps" or "maybe" or the like here, because this is of such vital importance to me.

When we try to understand, even at a very basic level, we admit the humanity of the "evil" person. He or she becomes like us; doing the best they can with what they have. It's frightening to think that people seek happiness through flame and sword, who try to do good through violence and theft, but the simple truth is that we all try. Some of us have an economic, social, mental leg up on others. It doesn't make us better, doesn't make us good. It makes us us.

As Jundo said, the perpetrators of "evil" are victims, too. Buried in greed, anger, and delusion, they try to find a way out, and bury themselves that much further in the process. We should be compassionate, understanding, forgiving to these people.

Because the same forces that drove them to this "evil" are driving us to the Dharma.

Am I a demon or a saint?
It depends;
Have I had my morning coffee yet?


Metta,

Perry

[Myozan Kodo]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

By the way, I have now found photographic proof that evil exists:



Well, no harm in lightening things up.

[Risho]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

hahhahahahahhahaha

[JohnsonCM]

Re: If all is a manifestation of Dharma, what about 'evil'?

I always assumed evil would be something that you would never expect would be evil. Something like this perhaps......