Why Be Good? (Post 2 of 5)
To continue yesterday's post, here is my own response to the question. It is certainly a work-in-progress and as I've said before, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything or make a universal statement - this is the conclusion that I have made... yours will be totally different.
The first thing that has struck me as odd is the word should. I find that to be absolutely the wrong word. No one says I should be "good." Believing there are "shoulds" heaps on unnecessary guilt when I break my own good/bad rules and stems from an ignorant starting point.
If all my bullet-points were true, then it's quite alright for one to be a total bastard. That, too, is a manifestation of Spirit and HAS to exist in order for everything else to exist. Can you have a coin without a "tails" side? That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be stern punishment for the "evil-doers" (in order to allow all to live in a civilized society), but rather they are allowed to be who they are (internally). Wow, how Ken Wilber was THAT!
That being said, there are way more than enough "unconscious" people who lean toward the dark side without those who are conscious choosing that path.
It's not about should. It's about choice.
Knowing that the universe is full of every type of person, every form of manifestation, every side of duality, at least SOME of us must choose (are called or chosen or fated?) to represent the white/light/good side. Just as there are Hitlers, there have to be Zen monks - and everything inbetween on both sides. This doesn't mean that the Light Team should, or even will win each battle, just that the teams are balanced.
If I feel a pull toward the Jedi side, then may I go for it! I am a manifestation of the Positive and Light side of the polarity. That has to exist too! With all of my might, I can give, serve, love, teach, BE, radiate, paint, see, sit, fight for the white side...
At the end of the day, I am realizing that what used to be a focus on morality is being replaced by a focus on compassion. Compassion for no other reason than ... easing pain and suffering (your own and others). On her radio show a few weeks ago, Zen teacher Cheri Huber said that compassion is acting to “free people from suffering. Not to fix them, not to change them, not to judge them, not to criticize them, not to beat them, not to believe they should be different, but just to save them from all that suffering they're feeling.” Does your own suffering and the suffering of others break your heart? Do you think misery "sucks?" Then be a kind and gentle person! Don't beat yourself up when you don't fully make that happen, but at the same time, enjoy the possibilties of compassionate awareness.
And as far as refraining from the "bad" things, it just comes naturally when you realize that the universal prohibitions - such as the Ten Commandments and the Buddhist Precepts, that say don't lie, don't steal, etc. - are just guidelines to keep you present and centered and from feeling like a separate self. Remember we (and others) are not punished for our "sin," but by our sin. But hey, if you or I choose to "be bad," to wallow in suffering, then that's our prerogative.
As for me, I'm finding that peace comes when I act not out of conditioning, but out of a compassionate centeredness - and from that, there is no good/bad, right/wrong - just the opportunity in THAT moment to act in the most appropriate way.
Category:
buddhism,
christianity,
general spirituality,
zen
Posts
25 comments:
Great thoughts, Trev. (Who knew sk8er bois could be so deep?)
I'm kind of struck by your saying "just as there are Hitlers, there have to be Zen monks." I think there's something important in that observation.
I mean, Hitler probably didn't wake up every morning and think, "Wow, I am one evil guy, with this genocide and war and all. Still, gotta do what you gotta do." As incomprehensible as it may seem, Hitler was convinced he was doing good, because in his worldview the very existence of non-Aryan people was "bad."
Hitler is an extreme example, of course. But you can go up the spiral with them: the religious fundamentalist who thinks he's choosing light by blowing up buildings; the CEO who thinks he's choosing light by using sweatshop labor and churning out greenhouse gases. And so on. And if there's a lot less of that in the Zen monk, then it's still a difference of degree, not kind.
From this perspective, it starts to look like ignorance is the cause of suffering (hey, I should write that down!). What I call evil (e.g., genocide) is what somebody else (e.g., Hitler) sincerely thinks is a profound good.
For me this starts to explain why heads always implies tails, light always implies dark, yin always implies yang, and so on--without being forced into the place of telling someone who's suffering that they shouldn't feel so bad because without suffering they couldn't be happy. It's not that we just haven't "chosen the good" enough times to get rid of evil. It's that "good" and "evil" themselves are relative terms due to the ignorance of those who use them. And if there's some omega point at which all ignorance goes away, I suspect it's far enough away that we don't have to worry about it. (And even then, the game would just start up again!)
Does that make any sense at all? I know it doesn't much get into the question of should versus choice, but hey, you wanted to get us thinking!
(Just for the record, I've never skated in my life... :)
I think you're on to something as well, but I cannot quite grasp it entirely. I will have to sit with it for a while.
For example, I was hoping you could maybe explain the difference between "ignorance" and "non-ignorance" and both how the suffering arises out of that and how that's "above" labeling things as good/bad.
Does this mean we get Light Sabers!!!!!
When one comes to understand ones' ignorance, one begins to act from a state of compassion. Compassion doesn't just magically come into existence; it is precipitated by a thought, perhaps a decision- a choice to act, being aware, being conscious of past actions.
Although it seems hard to believe at times looking out into a chaos fraught world there is indeed this balance you speak of between good and evil. As purveyors of Light there is nothing we should do except let it shine.
I really, really love Cheri Huber’s words on compassion and your comments following:
“Does your own suffering and the suffering of others break your heart? Do you think misery "sucks?" Then be a kind and gentle person! Don't beat yourself up when you don't fully make that happen, but at the same time, enjoy the possibilities of compassionate awareness.”
The Force is strong with you, young Diesel!
Yah, dude. I think I've got a diagram on how a light-saber works in one of my uber-geek SW books. We could build our own, but I'm not sure if we can get ahold of the appropriate crystals and/or plasma. Damnit.
In response to one thing, though, I'm not sure Compassion ALWAYS requires a choice, does it? If one is simply resting in nondual awareness (where there are no "other people"), then wouldn't it be NATURAL to be compassionate? The problem, of course, is getting to the point where conditioning falls off and you CAN rest in that awareness (normally conditioning is saying: "You're too tired for this." or "What did anyone ever do for YOU!?" or rationalizing why you should fend for yourself)
I read somewhere recently that in the last Australian census, a very significant percentage of people indicated their religion as "Jedi". No joke!
Gotta bring up what I think is a bias when using the words light and dark. Why the dark has been given a bad rap, I do not know. When you look out into the universe, the overwhelming preponderance of what you get is: DARK. If we had unsustained Light on this planet, everything would wither and die in the unrelenting heat.
The Dark has been made into some kind of bogeyman by humans. So has the idea of balance. I don't think there is perfect balance, either. Nature has cycles, ebbs and flows like waves. Maybe that is a kind of balance? No one can stand in Tree pose forever.
The Cheri Huber quote. I think she does good work. But that quote... after 15 years as a psychotherapist, if there is one thing I have learned, it is that you can't 'save' anyone from their suffering. It is not up to you to save anyone, and you can't even if you wanted to. This was made clear to me in Stephen Cope's book, "Yoga and the Quest for the True Self". His quote: "it is my experience that for many of us, after exposure to the practice of yoga there is simply, and at times astonishingly, a great deal more of us there. More consciousness, more energy, more awareness, more equanimity, more life in the body, more connection with the mysteries of the soul. And there is that wonderful, haunting voice of the true self that calls to us, that keeps us company as we stride deeper and deeper into the world, determined to save the only soul we really can save."
Cope prescribes acceptance of people, as they are. Ram Dass has said we can practice acceptance of people as they are, while still saying no to their evil-doing.
I also wonder about the idea of duality. I wonder if it is only a construct of our human minds in order for us to understand things. We also used to think the world was flat. I strongly suspect the universe is way more complex than mere duality and that it is our human minds that are limited into duality at this time. Some of my teachers refer to the universe as the multiverse, and that is way more complex than a duality. The word Mystery is more satisfying to me than duality.
Why be good? I offer the Wiccan Rede: "And it harm none, do as thy wilt."
p.s., obviously I meant unrelenting Light on this planet, not unsustained! 8-)
Also, I have heard from people with brown skin that the demonizing of "dark" and the elevation of "light" feels racist to them. Something to consider. Why does the good guy wear the White hat and the bad guy the Black? Hmm.
Thanks, Celeste! Fantastic and provoking thoughts!
Your suggestion that (what we call) "darkness" isn't as bad as we all make it out to be is the very reason I posed the question in the first place. If darkness nor light is better than the other (and if they ebb and flow as you suggest), then why give food to the hungry, or go to the doctor when you're sick, or be a kind person? I'm not taking on your comments here, in fact I'm resonating with you.... with THAT sort of realization, why behave any certain way?
I also wonder if you can totally accept someone (not feel like there's anything "wrong" with them) while at the same time helping EASE their suffering (if the circumstances are appropriate)? If I pass an elderly man on the road who has fallen and is in terrible pain, am I judging him or asking him to change if I choose to ease/relieve his suffering by calling 911 and ministering to him?
Thanks again!
"I'm not sure Compassion ALWAYS requires a choice, does it?"
Perhaps when one can rest in the non- dual state, having achieved all- awareness, then no.
I know I must choose to be compassionate when I'm not aware...becoming aware, my compassion naturally arises.
Does that make sense? I think I'm agreeing with what you said.
Celeste brings up a marvelous point here- The Dark Side! OK, getting real...Wilber brings up a great point about embracing the shadow self and how we can get into trouble, become attached to our transcending therefore becoming 'stuck' thinking we're making real progress and actually spinning our wheels. Until we embrace the shadow self fully, integrate it, understand it as an 'integral' part of us we do real harm to the world and ourselves.
And another good point she brings out- we can only 'save' ourselves...our compassion alone will not remove all suffering for another.
As far as the "multiverse" and embracing the mystery- here...here is where the fun, where the spiritual pinnacle rests...inside the mystery. Nonduality is a mystery as is our truest nature...we can come to understand both- but can we really ever know beyond a doubt the outcome of the great mystery.
Great points and ‘balance’ you lend to the discussion. Thanks.
1.) "I know I must choose to be compassionate when I'm not aware...becoming aware, my compassion naturally arises." YES! YES!
2.) All of this "balance" and embracing our "shadow self" etc etc is exactly why I wanted to have this conversation.
No universal answers, more questions; Embrace the mystery.
:)
Well, I can try to explain. But having much more personal experience with ignorance than with non-ignorance, I'm likely to be wrong most of the time. Having said that, here goes:
I suppose the difference between ignorance and non-ignorance could be stated various ways depending on what's most useful in a given situation or to a certain audience: the extent to which you are in harmony with the Tao, the extent to which you "have the same mind in you that was in Christ Jesus," the extent to which your embrace as a self is Kosmos-centric rather than egocentric or ethnocentric. Whatever.
So, someone is less ignorant the more those things are the case. I'm more ignorant if I think that what's good for me is killing everyone who's different from me; I'm less ignorant if I think that what's good for me is to act compassionately toward everyone and everything.
This relates to suffering in a few ways: first, to the extent that if I'm identified only with my ego, then I suffer anytime something happens that I don't like, and I inflict suffering on others because I can't actually take their perspective. Whereas, if I identify with the whole Kosmos, then it's not as though pain of whatever kind doesn't HURT, but it ceases to be interpreted as SUFFERING because I have incorporated a greater perspective into my self (that is, I'm less ignorant). If Buddha falls off his sk8board and skins his knee, he still feels pain, but he doesn't suffer because, in the perspective of the universe, sometimes that happens when you're sk8ing. (I guess. I've never done it either.) This realization liberates him to respond with compassion--to himself and to everything.
Does that even begin to make any sense at all? Or should I not be allowed to play with light sabers? :)
The truth, Andrew, is that we ALL should be careful playing with our lightsabers, lest we all go blind.
You're making a hell of a lot of sense to me with statements like: "Whereas, if I identify with the whole Kosmos, then it's not as though pain of whatever kind doesn't HURT, but it ceases to be interpreted as SUFFERING because I have incorporated a greater perspective into my self (that is, I'm less ignorant)."
So...
Maybe you can ease someone's pain (especially physical) and not ease their suffering (since that's an internal resistance to 'what is'?).
..............andyet................
Let me just bring the question back out into the fore-front so we don't get TOO far off track...
Why be kind and compassionate when the universe also requires the grumpy and selfish?"
What I'm picking up from the conversation SO FAR is that:
A.) Pain sucks. Suffering sucks.
B.) Pain is unavoidable. Suffering, however, is unnecessary.
C.) Since the universe is One, acting in accordance with Harmony - being kind, compassionate, helping others - brings a peace that can't be found through other avenues.
D.) If you choose to opt out of that "peace that passes understanding" - that's your right, but for those who see the value in it, it's available.
"Whereas, if I identify with the whole Kosmos, then it's not as though pain of whatever kind doesn't HURT, but it ceases to be interpreted as SUFFERING because I have incorporated a greater perspective into my self (that is, I'm less ignorant)."
Wonderful and clear- yes.
"Why be kind and compassionate when the universe also requires the grumpy and selfish?"
Can one be any other than what one is?
I think you should add
E.)Can we ever realize the complete, whole, compassionate beings we are capable of being without fully embracing the darkness as well as the light?
Is this off topic?
“One man gathers what another man spills.” I understand your point of view. I see it. Compassion is rooted in selfishness. (A good example of the duality you speak of) Every compassionate act has a little selfishness in it. It makes us feel good, and that is fine. The reason we do good things is not important; as long as we do them.
That being said, good and bad is all relative. We condemn the insurgents in Iraq for fighting back. But we give the status of hero to the Son’s of Liberty; a group known for its violence and unorthodox ways. And, in fact, they weren’t fighting an invading army. They were overthrowing their own government. Here in lies the problem with good and evil. The guidelines for good and evil are depended on time, place, situation, and the individual.
I appreciate how you put a disclaimer at the beginning of this post.
“Here is my own response to the question. It is certainly a work-in-progress and as I've said before, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything or make a universal statement - this is the conclusion that I have made... yours will be totally different.”
This statement, in my mind, is where peace grows from, the ability to express without judgment. To understand that; I see it this way you see it yours and that’s ok. I personally can shine on either side, good or evil, because, although we see ourselves as compassionate or good, it took hate and evil to get us there.
We, as Americans are considered evil by a large majority of the world population. That of course, does not mean we are evil it simply means we are on both sides. Of course, one could argue that we are not our government and that is true. But, in reality, we are representative of the good and evil our country does.
One more point, we must label things. As you said, you choose do good and be on the white team. But the white team is only white within your own experiences. You by default have labeled your perception of good as…good. There has to be good and evil just as there has to be labels. In my mind it’s inescapable and very important. Good and evil must be defined even if it is only within our own perception.
Great post, thought provoking and well thought out. You obviously explore your inner workings and express a need to justify your beliefs. Hell so do….. I thrive on it.
In the end “I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with saints.”
What are your thoughts on “necessary” evil; such as mercy killing and the protecting your way of life? Just curious.
Isaiah/Tommy- Definately not "off topic." A perfect addition to the list so far.
Buford - Welcome to the conversation. Lots of great stuff in your post. I appreciate the feedback about the relativity of good and evil.
I've tried to write 3 of 4 sentences in response, but everytime I do, something doesn't make sense. So I'll leave it for now.
In the meantime, Buford (or anyone else), what is your basis for "doing good," morality, compassion, kindness?
LET'S NOT ALLOW THE CONVERSATION TO SWAY TOO FAR OFF TOPIC, but to answer your question about "necessry evils" - while I use the Precepts as a guide, with the first being to abstain from harming/killing, I also realize there are times that a greater good and greater depth are furthered by war/etc (not starting war, mind you). As I've heard Ken Wilber say, the people that oppose taking out a vicious dictator that is killing millions in order to perserve peace are basically condoning the dictator's killings. So which do you choose?
That being said, sometimes nasty things take over my body - illnesses, viruses. Until my cells go and attack (and kill!) the intruders, they very well make destory my entire body.
Just for the record, I've always thought it interesting that all of us (myself included) equate evil with death/dying/killing.
"Why be kind and compassionate when the universe also requires the grumpy and selfish?"
Well, ultimately because it's more fun and more fulfilling! Exactly because "the universe is One, acting in accordance with Harmony - being kind, compassionate, helping others - brings a peace that can't be found through other avenues."
It's your right to opt out of the peace that passes understanding...but you'll change your mind eventually. Because it's only satisfying in the short term.
Eventually you'll get tired of egocentrism. It'll grow dissatisfying. And so then you'll think, "hey, maybe these people who share my beliefs are okay, even if they're different in other respects. So I'll identify with the whole group!" And you'll do that for a while, until that becomes dissatisfying and eventually you think maybe you should start thinking about tolerance and respect for everyone...and so on.
And of course, this process can take an infinite number of lifetimes, and there may be setbacks, but it will happen, and the timetable grows less and less important the less you identify with the ego. Which again, frees you to be compassionate with whatever kind of compassion the situation calls for, whether that's feeding someone who's hungry or consoling someone who's grieving, or simply sitting in meditation.
"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." And so the folly and the wisdom are part of the same process. So if you're feeling grumpy and selfish, great. If you commit to a lifetime of grumpiness and selfishness, well, see where that takes you. You're on the path to waking up!
Andrew, my God. That's amazing stuff. You keep making comments like those and this post series is going to shrink from 5 to 2.
"It's your right to opt out of the peace that passes understanding...but you'll change your mind eventually. Because it's only satisfying in the short term."
That's why all of this talking and theorizing may be fun and possibly even useful, but the real life RIGHT NOW experience is where you discover these things for yourself.
:)
Again, everyone, you're amazing. Please, keep it coming if you've got thoughts to add!
A basis for doing good:
I know (and this- I know for sure- for me)that as I do, so it will be done unto me.
Selfish--maybe yes...but I'm all for selfishness if it results in greater good (I know I'm leaving myself wide open on this one).
I rest in a Source that is always giving: I choose to define higher power or God as the creative giving process, even transitioning is a part of this process. I am that, too!
Trev, you state quite elequently here:
"As for me, I'm finding that peace comes when I act not out of conditioning, but out of a compassionate centeredness - and from that, there is no good/bad, right/wrong - just the opportunity in THAT moment to act in the most appropriate way."
This is acting selfless, with no thought of return (that enevitably comes- it cannot-not!)and it comes from being centered (perhaps selfish in desiring the sensation...but, as Andrew stated..even this "will pass" when acting from center, from Self.
Self-ish isn't selfish. (say that 3 times really fast!)
No! Keep the post series coming! I'll shut up, I promise! ;)
Okay, no, I won't, but I love how you've got us all talking and thinking! You're amazing, too.
Sorry about going off on a tangent. I tend to do that from time to time. I’ll try to stay on the Good/evil subject.
Well for me “doing good” is taking care of my family, friends, and myself. I have a very animalistic view of the world. Living up to the responsibilities of my pack is the only good/bad I feel is necessary. If everyone simply took care of family, friends, and themselves, no one would ever need to be taken care of. And the whole debate about good/evil would be pointless.
Maybe, ultimately, the key to understanding good/evil is to take care of your own. Maybe life shouldn’t be defined by good and evil but survival of the fittest. Maybe there is a divine god who has strict rules for good/evil. Maybe Jesus and Allah are having it out right now in heaven and poor old God is over there saying, “ OK breaking it up one can be good and one can be evil.” Maybe good/evil means nothing. Maybe was just here and there will be no punishment or reward when we die. (I like that one best)
Ultimately, I wish I knew there is an eternal reward after life because it would certainly affect my behavior while I’m here. Maybe that’s it……maybe by not knowing we tend to be good.
Hell, I don’t know. One thing is for sure I have the capacity to do both. If good and evil must be balanced, then the good an individual performs must be equal to the bad and visa/versa.
I also know this whole debate is big fun!!Good happy hour conversation. I'll talk to my happy hour friends who are mostly lawyer buddies and get their take.
Compassion as a choice?
If ya gotta choose, you're doing it wrong. I mean...
If I am in the right place, there's no chosing. Just knowing right action, right time. No question, no mind. Flow like water.
That's the essence of my response to this post.
Sorry to join this conversation late; needed to write my response to the initial question first. (No, Trev, we don't have to!) It is over here... I decided to keep it short and still got bored with it.
Jesus and Allah aren't having it out in a battle of good and evil. If anything, they are sitting at a table drinking a home brew, shaking their heads over what the silly humans are doing.
Why do good? My mama say: "In my neighborhood, right is right and wrong is wrong."
I think we all have the potential to listen to our "still, small voice" inside and do good. Because it feels good, silly! 8-)
ON THE OTHER HAND, I have seen many people totally subjugate themselves in the name of doing good, winding up totally co-dependent, unable to say no, and doormats to be walked on. In that case, they aren't really doing good, are they?
In yoga teacher training, I was told that the heart muscle gives blood to itself before pumping to the rest of the body. And likewise, we also must be giving (good) to ourselves before giving to others.
"If ya gotta choose, you're doing it wrong... just knowing right action, right time."
Agreed, Julie.
That's where I am arriving. And yet, the conversation was/is needed to allow me to realize that the conversation is not needed. Make any sense?
:)
Celeste-
"Because it feels good, silly! 8-)"
Ha, for sure. For any other reason, it's not real, but rather out of obligation or guilt.
Post a Comment