Evil?

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Altair

It's not relative. You may refer to different perspectives we can have when committing deeds. I think most people are unwilling to admit that evil is or can be a part of them, so they come up with excuses when they hurt others. At that moment they may think it was necessary or there was no other way, but it does not change the impact it has on the recipient.

The issue of impact on others is complicated. What you say here is overly-simplistic IMO, Altair, because it implies that 'evil' actions on someone else's part has the power to 'impact' others - as though they (said others) are 'powerless' in said regard. Such kind of thinking leads to 'philosophies' which undermine personal response-ability, IMO - which, in turn, can itself result in people being 'evil' in terms of condemning (etc.) those they 'see' as being 'evil' and wanting them (or even others in the case of needy/greedy 'victim' mentality types) to compensate them for their 'suffering', as well as thinking and feeling, if they have 'wronged' someone, that they themselves are eternally 'guilty' and so forever seeking to morally 'atone' and 'compensate' others (in general) therefore, in such philosophical framework-context.

I share the following 'philosophical' premise from my treatise as a possible 'corrective' in said regard:

A soul’s being and becoming process does not depend on any external event‑factor – on whether one is physiosocially handicapped or privileged, for instance; or on how biologically young or old one is when he, she or it ‘dies’; or the relative degree of personal pleasure or pain, success or failure, affirmation or rejection, welcome or persecution, etc. one experiences while one is still ‘alive’. Any and all worldly events and conditions are just ‘fodder’ for a nascent soul’s development, ‘grist’ for its psychospiritual ‘mill’ to make what it wishes to become out of. As already suggested, ‘situations’ and ‘occurrences’ are just incarnational stage-prop ‘set-ups’ which provide souls with challenges and opportunities whereby they may be stimulated and enabled to ‘grow’ to become more Love and Joy capable and adept if and as these are responded to and utilized with such purpose in mind and heart. This statement pertains no matter how daunting, in terms of what one thinks and feels one can possibly cope with, or how unjust, in terms of what one thinks and feels, and so ‘judges’ to unacceptable, an event or condition may initially be experienced as really being!

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Altair

It's not relative. You may refer to different perspectives we can have when committing deeds. I think most people are unwilling to admit that evil is or can be a part of them, so they come up with excuses when they hurt others. At that moment they may think it was necessary or there was no other way, but it does not change the impact it has on the recipient.

There are various Christian groups that claim what we believe is dark and evil
whereas most of us believe what we believe is very good... even enlightening.

How can that be..... perspective.

Originally Posted by Jyotir

Huh? How could anyone remain ignorant of what they know? If I know enough about some construct to determine its truth value as being harmful, evil, how can I then ‘unknow’ it? I might choose to not utilize it, but to remain ignorant of what I know?

Please explain how this is possible.



uhhh… Truth?

How can "a soul" go astray when the soul is the gnostic part of the individuated being? And this is the source/awareness of truth in the being. It's usually the mind, vital, or physical aspects that 'go astray', not the soul.

Again, if any construct or teaching is known and identified as false, misleading, harmful, evil, what then is the necessary prohibition in simply not actualizing said teaching? Do we not have free-will in that regard?

I just don’t see how what you are saying is relevant or primary. Evil is always possible or available, but why deliberately go there? If one is ignorant or naïve and has not established this and follows or is misled accordingly, by definition that isn’t evil. There has to be a knowing deliberate complicity (including any active pretense of denial) for it to be evil.

The same confidence is involved either way, but here we are discussing the spiritual dimension... In that context, we just expose our mind to what the search for truth reveals and where it leads to by that internal necessity. That is the spiritual way.

This is what true confidence is: when someone is sincerely searching for truth, the Truth itself begins to guide and direct that very search. It’s important to understand that Truth is not the same as ‘information’. It is a mode of continuously active sincere intuitive search and discernment - subjective knowing by identification - not the mere absorption, memorization and rational comparison of objective information.

How about ignorance?
And ignorant cognition. This is a fundamental problem. Ignorant modes of cognition yield ignorant results. This is why spiritual people meditate, because it supersedes the mental/intellectual modes that are inherently ignorant as a cognitive means. Meditation practice conditions to normalcy a more gnostic intuitive receptive modality that isn't otherwise predominantly available in the conscious being.

But people also spend a lot of time becoming enamored of their own cleverness for its own sake too. That is also a type of ignorance. It’s not necessarily evil, but it is ultimately a diversion. Why waste precious time?


~ J

Agreeing with Jyotir

[Starman]

In my opinion what we call “evil” is the activity of bondage, as the soul, our deeper being,
seeks to set us consciously free. Bondage is a test of faith, and that is the purpose of what
many call “evil.”

Alas, we will know the truth and the truth will set us free. In knowing, and experiencing that
truth of being, all evil vanishes. There is really no such thing as “evil,” there is only the illusion
of bondage and the reality of freedom.

[Busby]

Whatever one may believe about evil it was unknown until mankind appeared upon the scene. Good and evil (as we understand them to be ) have stepped outside nature. A dinosaur killing a tiger for lunch was quite normal, had the same dinosaur killed and eaten my cousin Harry it would be evil.
We now all live in a world of goodies and baddies, cops and robbers, cowboys and indians, and so on. We all know that certain religions, countries, politics and beliefs are inferior to ours and that only we see the world in a true light.
We are also quite prepared to bomb, desecrate, destroy, ruin, eliminate and remove all we consider to be some kind of evil.

With good intentions of course.

Sometimes even in God's name.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Starman

In my opinion what we call “evil” is the activity of bondage, as the soul, our deeper being, seeks to set us consciously free. Bondage is a test of faith, and that is the purpose of what many call “evil.”

Alas, we will know the truth and the truth will set us free. In knowing, and experiencing that truth of being, all evil vanishes. There is really no such thing as “evil,” there is only the illusion of bondage and the reality of freedom.

Good way to look at it. The Q then become 'bondage' ('slavery') to what, to being to ? To being 'driven' or 'dominated' by what?

Self-(ego)-interest I would say.

In the myth, Lucifer (a/k/a Satan) just couldn't stand being subordinate, i.e. not being 'Number One'.

He responded to the 'failure' of his 'rebellion' in said regard by becoming 'vengeful' and willfully aiming to desecrate Life. This is the kind of 'evil' I think Jyotir/Aurobindo spoke of.

P.S. IMO, self is actually a necessary (and potentially beneficial) tool/means for serving the 'cause' (meaning purpose) of Life which (I think) is to maximally experience and express Love and Joy in relationship to and with others (who in combination constitute Life's Being-n-Doing).

It is when 'self' rebelliously runs rampant (goes 'crazy' and puts its 'own' Love and Joy 'ahead' of that of co-related others) that Life ends up being dis-severed and de-secrated.

For all the 'damage' it does, 'evil' is a short-sighted and ultimately pathetic 'rebellion', however. As the myth accurately (IMO) portrays, in terms of 'its' goals', it is 'doomed' to eventually 'fail'. (What's more, it also inadvertently ends up serving Life' purpose, as it 'wakes up' those who are positively relational at heart to what not to 'fall' for!)

A child sex ring, in my opinion would be considered evil acts.

I believe the word speaks to acts that create physical or moral and other injury knowingly.

[lemex]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Evil is relative. What one calls evil another migth say innocent, safe, benign, etc.

Sometimes but not usually imo. Evil usually is allowed associated with fear, and then justified. I always wait for the reason. Saying "no" is considered evil a lot of times and so people get threaten with loss of safety. Something I've seen relative to good. Good then is also relative. I've also noted it is always associated in a memory state anger and hate and negativity that must be given up.

We may think evil does not have to exist, but we do not know how to exclude it.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by ImthatIm

I believe the word speaks to acts that create physical or moral and other injury knowingly.

IMO, a person who commits such acts knowingly may be reverenced as an 'evil' person, because he or she chooses 'evil' over 'good'. Acts themselves are just that, like rain they may have good' or 'bad', or a mixture of both, consequences.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by davidsun

IMO, a person who commits such acts knowingly may be reverenced as an 'evil' person, because he or she chooses 'evil' over 'good'. Acts themselves are just that, like rain they may have good' or 'bad', or a mixture of both, consequences.

Some people believe if a 12 year old gets pregnant by somebody who is an adult, the person who got her pregnant is evil.

But then...... most people believe Mother Mary got pregnant when she was 12 and had Jesus when she was 13.

Similar conflict of beliefs occur over issues of war. For example, some believe if they get drafted, they are not fully responsible for their actions.