So yeah this is way over due. I originally intended this to be written in Novemeber after the election, but well I got both busy and lazy.
For those that are unfamilair with Buddhism I'll direct your attention to I am a Buddhist Part 1 The begining for a brief primier on the historical details on the founding of Buddhism and the life of the Buddha; I would also direct your attention to I am a Buddhist Part 2 The Teachings as a relatively brief primier on the core tenets and teachings of Buddhism.
I had originally intended the next diary in this on and off series of mine to be about Buddhism and Politics, but after struggling for quite some time to write such a diary I realized once again I was moving out of order. So instead I will be writing about something simplier and yet at the same time more complex.
What is evil? How do you define it?
These seeming simple questions have dogged us really since time immemorial and there are many possible answers.
What I would like to do is provide a Buddhist perspective to those questions and I would do so for two reasons: first I believe such a perspective is fairly unique espeically when juxtaposed against Western thinking; secondly I think the answers have alot of relevence in today's world (especially in politics).
'Evil' as it's defined by Western thought is pretty boardly defined; this can clearly be seen in how the word changes as you move though belief systems. Ask a Roman Catholic what evil is and you get one definition, ask an atheist and you're get another (which will and will not have similarities). This becomes expectionally clear once we move to the realm of moral evil.
Bearing all of the above in mind then I'd like to introduce the two terms that Buddhists use. They are kusala and akusala, roughly translated they mean 'heatlhy' (kusala) and 'unhealthy'(akusala). This of course brings up immediately an interesting point of departure between Buddhism and most Western ways of thinking. What am I talking about? Namely that things like depression, sloth, melancholy, ill will, anxiety, anger, doubt, distraction or even doubt which in the Western way of thinking are rarely if ever called evil are called akusala. In the same way things like intelligence, calmness of mind and body, the ability to maintain attention to whatever the mind is engaged with, absence of desire and attachment, pose, or even living in community with others is considered kusala and yet may not readily be part of how good is defined.
So the question becomes, from where does kusala and akusala arise? The answer, like so many things is that intitially they arise in the mind and from there move to phyiscal action. Thus kusala and akusala stresses state, content and events of the mind as thier basis.
The following are four connotations of kusala taken from the Four Essential Commentaries (by the Dalai Lama):
- Arogya: free of illness, a mind that is healthy; mental states which contain those conditions or factors which support mental health and produce an untroubled and stable mind.
- Anavajja: unstained; factors which render the mind clean and clear, not stained or murky.
- Kosalasambhuta: based on wisdom or intelligence; mental states which are based on knowledge and understanding of truth. This is supported by the teaching which states that kusala conditions have yoniso-manasikara, clear thinking, as forerunner.
- Sukhavipaka: rewarded by well-being. Kusala is a condition which produces contentment. When kusala conditions arise in the mind, there is naturally a sense of well-being, without the need for any external influence. Just as when one is strong and healthy (aroga), freshly bathed (anavajja), and in a safe and comfortable place (kosalasambhuta), a sense of well-being naturally follows.
This can be taught of how one formally defines kusala. Akusala as you may have guess can be thought of as the opposite of these 4 connotations; namely a mind that is unhealthy, harmful, based on ignorance, and resulting in suffering.
Those looking for additional clarity might want to read said Commentaries as they are very insightful and interesting.
Now why is this that I felt this so important to write about? Becuase Buddhism teaches that good will comes from a mind that is clear, cheerful and happy and well I believe those reading can guess what Buddism teaches comes from a mind that is not.
It is important to point out that conditions that are clearly kusala (an insight while mediating, generosity and so on) can still create conditions that are aksula (for example thoughts of superority because you are generous). This means that one must constantly maintain awareness of thier thoughts and pratice discipline to insure that one's thoughts don't go in the wrong direction.
So from the begining Buddhism views the question in a fundmentally different way and while it may be perplexing at first I think it is worth thinking about and it is in my opnion that by fundmentally changing the way we approach the question we can perhaps move closer to a common definition on evil and the nature of it.
I thank you for reading and welcome your thoughts