Michael Wiin's post on evil...

[sunshine]

I'm sorry people. Regarding "good" or "bad" I tend to become more and more a relativist.

 

To me the word "balance" is the key point.

 

you all know the story of that chinese student who managed to pass his state exams (not an easy task in the ages of old):

he got so excited running to his teacher, showing off, becoming nearly maniac, that his teacher thought for a way to calm him down by saying: "sorry boy. Your mother has died."

 

This "poor" guy travelled for several days to find his mother healthy cooking at home...

 

asking his teacher why he did that he replied: "to get you back into balance. Your excessive happiness would have damaged your heart."

 

Regarding the nuclear bombs... well. That discussion was there in the past and will continue, but the historic truth is that at that point in time bombing wasn't necessary any longer. The Japanese had lost the war anyway and the USA government knew...

 

So. The question is not so much one of good or evil (with regard to relativity), but one of necessity. It sure was not necessary for the outcome of the war...

 

so far

 

Harry

[Lozen]

Hagar, I don't know you from Adam so I don't know if you are an apologist. I was reacting more to your words and to the sentiment (as spoken by many many other people, most of them Buddhists or Taoists) than to you as an individual. Mirriam Webster's definition of an apologist is "one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something."

 

I think forgiveness is great, to dissolve rage, which is corrosive and harmful. To let it go and not dwell on it. To set it to rest.

 

However to me this does not mean that I need to surrender, or to meditate upon the virtues of a tyrant (especially when they are "potential" or "unrealized" virtues.) I think forgiveness is something that comes after the act. There is still time to set boundaries, protect one's territory, and I think this can be done in a mindful way. One can be strong and generous, fierce and sensitive, etc. The idea of turning the other cheek has its time and place. But it is not right in EVERY time and place. There is a time to take action. And I would hope that most people would take action against a Hitler or a Bin Laden rather than turn the other cheek or think about that person's inherent Buddha nature.

 

There's a story in the book Women Who Run With the Wolves about a man who had a terrible temper and was sent to the desert by a wise man to give water to every stranger he saw. He did this for years and felt no more rage, until he was encountered by a man on a camel who scoffed at the water, refused it and began to ride away. The man was so filled with rage that he immediately seized the rider from the camel and killed him on the spot. Another rider appeared, praising God that he had killed the man who was on the way to murder the king. At that moment the withered desert trees burst into full bloom.

 

This isn't a story about killing people. It's about understanding everything has its time and place, and that "first thought right thought" in this instance, released the man from the oversimplified rule of "never be angry." Just some food for thought.

[peter falk]

So. The question is not so much one of good or evil (with regard to relativity), but one of necessity. It sure was not necessary for the outcome of the war...

 

it was done to save lives, not win the war. read it again.

 

i know this will piss off you antinuke types, but the only time they were ever used tactically in all of world history, nuclear weapons were a tool of comapssion.

[RON JEREMY]

it was done to save lives, not win the war.  read it again.

 

i know this will piss off you antinuke types, but the only time they were ever used tactically in all of world history, nuclear weapons were a tool of comapssion.

4850[/snapback]

 

 

MAN, GIMME A FUKIN BRAKE!!! AMMONG ALL DA ATTRIBUTES YA COULD CUM UPWITH,CALLIN NUKESATOOL OCUM-PASION REALY GO BEYOND DA SIGN.

 

REALY.

AMMONG OTHER THANGS, ROOSEVELT *KNEW* ABOUT DA IMPENDIN PEARL HARBOR ATAK BUT DID JACK-SHIT CUZ HE NEED DA EXCUSE TO START WAR. EXACTLY DA SAME TECHNIQUE WAS USED ON 911 TO START DA IRAQ WAR, THEY KNEW IT WAS CUMMIN TO SAY DA LEAST. THEN THEY BLOW UP 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES OUTTA CUM-PASSION...MINE SALAMI!!!

GET OUTTA HERE MAN!!!!!!!!!

 

A KAMI-KAZE BE CALLED A TERORIST, BUT A NUKE BE CALED CUM-PASION - RIGHT OUTTA ORWELL'S LINGO MUTHAFUKA!!!!!!!!!!!

 

AM DONE WITH YA COKSUKER!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

ARGHATTARUKKATTA MERGHATU RRRAAAKK WROOTTTAKKKATT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sunshine]

it was done to save lives, not win the war.  read it again.

 

i know this will piss off you antinuke types, but the only time they were ever used tactically in all of world history, nuclear weapons were a tool of comapssion.

4850[/snapback]

 

save lives as the war was already over? will never get it!

 

the timing was absolutely inappropriate!

 

and it was not compassion but wanting to see what one can do with those little babes... I always wonder if history lessons are different in the major civilized countries of the world!?!

 

If it is we sure do not need to discuss that further as we have learned different truths about it

[Lozen]

Save the lives of all of the people who would have been killed in a full invasion, because the Japanese were literally ready to die to the person. A friend of mine told me he saw a video where a Japanese soldier literally jumped off of a bridge to avoid being captured by the Americans.

 

Do you think it would have been more compassionate to have had millions more die on each side?

 

And if you are a relativist, why does any of this matter?

[sunshine]

And if you are a relativist, why does any of this matter?

4860[/snapback]

 

 

That's an interesting question... look: even a relativist can have an opinion, but he does know if it comes down to believes there is really not much arguing about. Good or bad. It's a question of belief in this world, so it's only relative.

 

So. Regarding the bombing I do not argue about if it was a good deed or not. We can argue about if it was necessary and even that can be a question of belief.

 

We can collect data to prove both sides and present them and in the end even the one with much more and maybe even proper data must not have won the comparison, as the other party might still resist "the quantity" cause there believes sure enough are true.

 

Regarding this Japanese guy jumping of a bridge. He could have had a thousand reasons for doing this... There have been enough soldiers for sure on both sides committing suicide in order not to fall into the hands of the enemy. So. What does it prove? Nothing! And the belief that the US goverment bombed the cities only because there were plans of million suiciders invading the US... well. I don't believe it. Much less though I believe they did it out of compassion

[peter falk]

Regarding this Japanese guy jumping of a bridge. He could have had a thousand reasons for doing this... There have been enough soldiers for sure on both sides committing suicide in order not to fall into the hands of the enemy. So. What does it prove? Nothing! And the belief that the US goverment bombed the cities only because there were plans of million suiciders invading the US... well. I don't believe it. Much less though I believe they did it out of compassion

 

 

there is a lot of film footage of japanese soldiers killing their own civilians because the refused to commit suicide in the face of advancing american forces. i havet o wonder how many civilians would have been slaughtered wholesale by the japanese army if japan had been invaded and their civilian population preferred surrender to death.

 

of course, i always find it interesting how people love to pick on the nuking of nagasaki and hirosima as some horrible, evil or unnecessary act and therefore paint the US as some villain in WWII. faults of the US Gov't aside, the fact remains that the japanese killed over 15 million people in that conflict, committing atrocities in the process that rivalled or even exceeded the nazis. the japanese suffered only 2 million casualties themselves, military and civilian.

 

if you wanna know what the japanese war record is, come to china and get their perspective. living here has been a very eye-opening experience. the rape of nanjing in 1937 is the centerpiece of japanese atrocities in china. the army spent 6 weeks raping, torturing and killing over 20,000 chinese women aged 11-76, while slaughtering a total of 3-400,00 civilians over the same 6 weeks. what a horrifying bath of blood and terror that had to be. yet they revelled in it.

 

if a country does shit like that has a nuke dropped on them, i really dont feel very sorry for them. they call it upon themselves. karma. where's your compassion for the 15 million people the japanese tortured and killed? their own people among them?

 

sorry, dude. i know all the sides of the story and all the goddamned intrigue and scheming on all sides. so don't tell me about roosevelt knowing about the attack, and blah, blah, blah. that doesn't exonerate japan for attacking pearl harbor and casting the first stone or the atrocities they wrought on humanity that began years, YEARS before pearl harbor.

[peter falk]

MAN, GIMME A FUKIN BRAKE!!! AMMONG ALL DA ATTRIBUTES YA COULD CUM UPWITH,CALLIN NUKESATOOL OCUM-PASION REALY GO BEYOND DA SIGN.

 

REALY.

AMMONG OTHER THANGS, ROOSEVELT *KNEW* ABOUT DA IMPENDIN PEARL HARBOR ATAK BUT DID JACK-SHIT CUZ HE NEED DA EXCUSE TO START WAR. EXACTLY DA SAME TECHNIQUE WAS USED ON 911 TO START DA IRAQ WAR, THEY KNEW IT WAS CUMMIN TO SAY DA LEAST. THEN THEY BLOW UP 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES OUTTA CUM-PASSION...MINE SALAMI!!!

GET OUTTA HERE MAN!!!!!!!!!

 

A KAMI-KAZE BE CALLED A TERORIST, BUT A NUKE BE CALED CUM-PASION - RIGHT OUTTA ORWELL'S LINGO MUTHAFUKA!!!!!!!!!!!

 

AM DONE WITH YA COKSUKER!!!!!!!!!!

ARGHATTARUKKATTA MERGHATU RRRAAAKK WROOTTTAKKKATT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4852[/snapback]

 

the war started many years before pearl harbor, ronnie boy. roosevlet didnt have to start anything. it had been going on for a long time already. or don't you know history?

 

and nobody ever called kamakazis terrorists, so please don't go attributing things to people they don't say. as far as i know kamakazis were legitimate military personnel attacking legitimate military targets. hardly terrorists.

[RON JEREMY]

there is a lot of film footage of japanese soldiers killing their own civilians because the refused to commit suicide in the face of advancing american forces.  i havet o wonder how many civilians would have been slaughtered wholesale by the japanese army if japan had been invaded and their civilian population preferred surrender to death.

 

of course, i always find it interesting how people love to pick on the nuking of nagasaki and hirosima as some horrible, evil or unnecessary act and therefore paint the US as some villain in WWII.  faults of the US Gov't aside, the fact remains that the japanese killed over 15 million people in that conflict, committing atrocities in the process that rivalled or even exceeded the nazis.  the japanese suffered only 2 million casualties themselves, military and civilian. 

 

if you wanna know what the japanese war record is, come to china and get their perspective.  living here has been a very eye-opening experience.  the rape of nanjing in 1937 is the centerpiece of japanese atrocities in china.  the army spent 6 weeks raping, torturing and killing over 20,000 chinese women aged 11-76, while slaughtering a total of 3-400,00 civilians over the same 6 weeks.  what a horrifying bath of blood and terror that had to be.  yet they revelled in it.

 

if a country does shit like that has a nuke dropped on them, i really dont feel very sorry for them.  they call it upon themselves.  karma.  where's your compassion for the 15 million people the japanese tortured and killed?  their own people among them?

 

sorry, dude.  i know all the sides of the story and all the goddamned intrigue and scheming on all sides.  so don't tell me about roosevelt knowing about the attack, and blah, blah, blah.  that doesn't exonerate japan for attacking pearl harbor and casting the first stone or the atrocities they wrought on humanity that began years, YEARS before pearl harbor.

4863[/snapback]

 

ITS DA SAME OLD BULSHIT BY WHICH, "WE HAD TO DESTRTOY DA VILAGE IN ORDER TO SAVE DA VILAGE", JUST HYPPOCRACY. WHAT YA BE SAYIN, SINCE *THEY* WERE COMITIN WAR ATTROCITIES, THEN *WE* COMIT A BIGER WAR ATTROCITY IN ORDER TO SAVE EM. BUT I SAY, IF YA COMIT A BIGER WAR ATTROCITY, IT MEAN THAT YA DIDNT GIVE REALY A SHIT ABOUT WAR ATTROCITIES, JUST USED EM AS AN EXCUSE.

 

DA ATTOMIC BOBMBS PULVERRIZED HOLE CITIES, CIVILAINS N ALL, NOW THAT WAS A HUGE WAR CRIME NO METER WHAT *THEY* HAD DONE.

 

ALSO, NO METEER HOW BLOODY DA JAPS WERE, THEY HAD A CODE O WAR ETTHICS AFTER ALL. THEY WOULD KILL YA SURE BUT THEY WOULD TAKE 100% PERSONNAL RISK IN DOIN SO. YA CAN CALL EM ALL BUT COWARDS. BUT DROPPIN A BOMB FROM AN AIRPLANE AT 0% PERSONNAL RISK, I CALL *THAT* COWARDLY. BUT I DOUBT YA CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT ME BE TALKIN ABOUT SINCE YA BE A BAKSTABER LIKE MANY OTTHER COKSUKERS IN HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

TENNO HEIKA BANZAI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

PS DA CHINESE WERENT ANY LESS BLOODY THEMSELVES, ONLY WHEN THEY GET THEM ASES KIKED THEY WHINE ABOUT IT BUT THEY TOO HAVE KILED THEIR OWN, IN FACT THEY KILL THEM OWN BABIES N EAT EM.

 

RONNIETSU MISHIMA GAKKAI

[thelerner]

Okinawa was a cold lesson for the allies, The Japanese fought damn near to the last man. The samurai code of losing = dishonor and death was creating self fulfilling genocide.

 

We didn't need to drop two, but my read is we needed to drop one. Trying to take Japan by invasion would be throwing away millions of lives. There were indications that the Emperor might surrender. There were indications (proven) that there would be a coup and a kidnap if the did allow a surrender.

 

There was a strong indication that Russia would get involved in the wars end game if it dragged on much longer. Certainly if they came up w/ any wonder weapons like plague or Nukes they would have used them gleefully and quickly.

 

For the first casualty of war is truth. From history's back seat I can pooh pooh the decisions that knowingly led to the deaths of 100'000's of civilians. Yet I think I can unobjectively say, we WERE more moral. I think the statistics bare me out.

 

I think the way we acted after the war was exemplar.

 

yada yada

 

Peace

 

Michael

 

To Hagar, I admired your posts. Writings about war, good and evil, its easy to look like a theoretical ass hole. Looking above and writing something like, I admire the decision makers who planned the deaths of 100,000+ civilians is something no rational human being should write. Yet yet I don't know

 

If there were alternatives to the Human Race I might sign up

[三江源]

Good Works vs. Self Centeredness

http://www.healingdao.com/cgi-bin/tpost.pl?smessage=761

 

"That is why some Taoists are sometimes accused of being amoral, they refuse a fixed cultural idea of moral behavior because it does not match the fluid reality of the Life Force. Rigid moral ideas become evil when they block the flow of the Life Force and kill its spontaneous virtue of sustaining balance and integrity in the present moment. Cultivation of tao was traditionally done in pairs or small communities to ensure feedback in the beginning to developing cultivators so they are not deluded by stray impulses."

 

"I think historically mass religions have served a useful function as a repository for spiritual values for their community. But because they cast the world in a good-evil struggle and ignore the third factor of neutral truth, the dualism produces a shadow that reveals itself sooner or later in holy wars, judgements against the non-believers, guilt at not meeting someone else's standard, etc."

 

 

Regarding Violence

http://www.healingdao.com/cgi-bin/tpost.pl?smessage=1460

 

"This is a very difficult question to answer. One, we have animal genes, and violence is allowed (spiritually) as the necessary pattern of their life and survival. So it may be incomplete evolution of animal aspect of our animal-divine hybrid that appears to be the nature of humans.

 

The question as to whether there are larger evil beings (whether alien or divine) behind human violence, a kind of war in heaven that humans are the unconscious playground for, is an even tougher question. It is overlaid with so much religious myth and belief, although most of it is much more recent than we realize.

 

The early Daosits never mention reincarnationi or hell. I believe that theywere very focused on the truth of the present moment containing all that is needed to be known spiritually. But that doesn't resolve the question of violence, and its origins.

 

My own conclusion regarding karma is that violence contributes to shaping patterns of incarnation, as all violence leaves a soul incompletion. But I don't believe personally that some fall of man due to an evil act has perpetuated karma ever since. There is no motive in the first instance."

 

 

Winn's definition of evil ... I think this is what you were looking for

http://www.healingdao.com/cgi-bin/tpost.pl?smessage=1140

 

"The life force is expanding and contracting all the time, this is True Yin and True Yang. When the contraction is forced or frozen by force of will, so it cannot return, that is evil.

 

Evil is real, and is the source of all fear. Being aware of evil and being afraid of it are two entirely different responses. Evil is self-limiting, its sphere of influence naturally contracts itself - if it expands too much it begins to behave in accordance with yin-yang cycles.

 

Fear feeds evil, neutrality offers it a space to expand into (become yang, get back into cycle).

 

Excess yang could be considered a precursor to evil, as it flips and becomes excess yin. If yin and yang keep cycling between extremes it is not evil, merely unstable and liable to produce suffering or disease. Evil requires intent/will to contract the life force in opposition to the natural phase of expansion.

In a criminal murder trial, its the difference between first degree murder at one extreme and manslaughter (accidental killing) at the other.

 

michael"

 

 

Fear feeds evil, neutrality offers it a space to expand into...Evil is self-limiting, its sphere of influence naturally contracts itself - if it expands too much it begins to behave in accordance with yin-yang cycles.

Evil is self limiting, it naturally contracts... does anyone here feel they can expand on this point, have any experience of this principle in action?

Would love to ground the insight.

[Jetsun]

Evil is self limiting, it naturally contracts... does anyone here feel they can expand on this point, have any experience of this principle in action?

Would love to ground the insight.

 

Maybe an overly repressive personality structure could be an example as it is something which naturally contracts the being of a person, so it blocks the emotional fluidity of a person always contracting the impulse for expression.

 

Or an overly repressive government always tries to control its population always limiting and contracting its energy, any attempt to go beyond the tight limits set by the government are harshly repressed.

 

Maybe even the ego itself once it has served it's purpose during the childhood and teenage/early adult years could be viewed as evil from that perspective as it limits a person from reaching higher potential.

[三江源]

oh Jetsun, yes of course. Perfect, thankyou.

 

I was thinking of the evil of many things like pollution, politics, disallowing personal freedom, and hoping it was self limiting in a way I hadnt perceived.

 

Yes, my own contraction and self limitingness is evil, in the sense that it is not doing anything toward expansion and love.

 

(I am sick of my own evil, thats for sure.)

[Apech]

oh Jetsun, yes of course. Perfect, thankyou.

 

I was thinking of the evil of many things like pollution, politics, disallowing personal freedom, and hoping it was self limiting in a way I hadnt perceived.

 

Yes, my own contraction and self limitingness is evil, in the sense that it is not doing anything toward expansion and love.

 

(I am sick of my own evil, thats for sure.)

 

So are we LOL.

[三江源]

So are we LOL.

Trust you to lower the tone.

[Apech]

Trust you to lower the tone.

 

It's what I'm good at.

[三江源]

Lowering the tone is self limiting and evil.

 

My contraction, is all the times I have not been able to reach out with heart, and instead have retreated into a closed position.

 

The contraction becomes ossified within the body and mind, bodymind, and .. well... have you ever tried to defrost a freezer which has been left for far too long without attention?

 

I keep drinking hot tea.

[Apech]

Lowering the tone is self limiting and evil.

 

My contraction, is all the times I have not been able to reach out with heart, and instead have retreated into a closed position.

 

The contraction becomes ossified within the body and mind, bodymind, and .. well... have you ever tried to defrost a freezer which has been left for far too long without attention?

 

I keep drinking hot tea.

 

 

Good analogy ... which I can relate to ... its very hard to thaw out the old negative contraction ... which is self justifying and thus perpetuating. Some times you have to wrk hard when you are 'up' and just ride out the times when you are down. Its all about available energy.

[三江源]

There is a lot of energy tied up in contraction. Its not so much riding the down, its about locating the down which is like floorboards that you stand on and dont notice anymore because it underlies the up.

 

Talking massive renovation.

[Apech]

There is a lot of energy tied up in contraction. Its not so much riding the down, its about locating the down which is like floorboards that you stand on and dont notice anymore because it underlies the up.

 

Talking massive renovation.

 

Could you expend this a bit ... I don't get the standing on floorboards ... do you mean the low point below which you cannot go?

[三江源]

I mean that what is contracted, what has shut down, doesnt go away. It stays. And it is yin. It is cold, it is death in life. It is always with us.

 

Can we see it? Do we look at it?

 

Or is strinking cold up through us, through our contact with this planet and with ourselves.

 

Is it what we stand on, while we look at what is at eye level. That which we take for granted.

 

You can be as 'up' as you like, but if underneath the up is contraction....

 

eh.

 

I think it is the low point, yes.. contraction to get further contracted... would be lower, I guess, or just harder and more than half in love with easeful death.

[Jetsun]

Lowering the tone is self limiting and evil.

 

My contraction, is all the times I have not been able to reach out with heart, and instead have retreated into a closed position.

 

The contraction becomes ossified within the body and mind, bodymind, and .. well... have you ever tried to defrost a freezer which has been left for far too long without attention?

 

I keep drinking hot tea.

 

Yeah I can relate to that, but I have found that being hard on yourself for doing this is just another form of contraction, so if it happens you have no real option except to forgive yourself unless you are into self flagellation, so calling it evil can cause some problems as it could just give you another excuse to reject yourself and thus contract even more, especially if you have been conditioned to believe evil is something to be attacked or rejected.

[Apech]

I mean that what is contracted, what has shut down, doesnt go away. It stays. And it is yin. It is cold, it is death in life. It is always with us.

 

Can we see it? Do we look at it?

 

Or is strinking cold up through us, through our contact with this planet and with ourselves.

 

Is it what we stand on, while we look at what is at eye level. That which we take for granted.

 

You can be as 'up' as you like, but if underneath the up is contraction....

 

eh.

 

I think it is the low point, yes.. contraction to get further contracted... would be lower, I guess, or just harder and more than half in love with easeful death.

 

Death is not easeful (not in my opinion anyway).

 

 

 

 

To die: to sleep;

No more; and by a sleep to say we end

The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks

That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation

Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;

To sleep: perchance to dream: aye, there's the rub;

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,

When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,

Must give us pause:

 

 

I know its a cheap trick resorting to Shakespeare but there you go.

 

BTW I don't see yin like that.

[三江源]

Yeah I can relate to that, but I have found that being hard on yourself for doing this is just another form of contraction, so if it happens you have no real option except to forgive yourself unless you are into self flagellation, so calling it evil can cause some problems as it could just give you another excuse to reject yourself and thus contract even more, especially if you have been conditioned to believe evil is something to be attacked or rejected.

Yes, good point. I have only just 'discovered' evil as a useful concept, so I find it helpful to see it this way. It's a new one one on me, and gives me a simpler framework than previous ones, which at this point is liberating.

I am finding it very helpful and interesting to get more intimately acquainted with fundamentals like truth and good, also. I guess I am the product of a secular and haphazard liberal education, so things that carry baggage for some, dont do so for me.

I'd like not to be into self flagellation. I think evil likes that stuff.