Oneness of Good and Evil

Buddhism is definitely not just saying that "it's all relative" — it emphasizes that good is created through a continual struggle against evil. Nichiren Daishonin thus explains: "Opposing good is called evil, opposing evil is called good. Therefore, outside of the heart there is neither good nor evil" (Gosho Zenshu, p. 563). First Soka Gakkai president Tsunesaburo Makiguchi gives this example: "Even a good person, if he opposes great good, immediately becomes a person of great evil. Even an evil person, if he opposes great evil, immediately becomes a person of great good" (June 1997 Living Buddhism, p. 28).

Evil in this context refers to mental calculation with respect to spiritual practice. Suppose a person is concerned about the afterlife, and believes that by following a particular spiritual leader, he is doing the right thing. Mental calculation would occur when he stops thinking for himself, and chooses to follow that leader's instructions blindly.

The Buddha never urged this of his followers. He only stated that a person could try out meditation, and learn about Buddhism.

Thus evil in the context of Buddhism is when such calculations leads me astray from the practice of awareness. Such calculations are actions one takes which result in feelings that becloud the mind and hinder the cultivation of awareness.

Indeed, the five Buddhist evils are greed (lobha), hatred (dosa), delusion (moha), conceit (mana), and lust (kama). These evils may lead to temporary mental unrest.

Great good is accomplished when I practice awareness by meditation, first on the breath to calm the mind.

Once my mind is calm, I am able to reflect on my life and live according to the basic concepts of Buddhism.

Yet, I am also aware that good and evil does not exist outside the heart. For compassion (loving-kindness) helps overcome evil.

---

Reference:

Good and Evil in Buddhism: http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/goodevil.html

Meditation on Friendship

Friendship transcends personal cliques. Indeed, a good friend is more likely to support unrelated friends of good standing than that unrelated person's group of fair-weather friends, some of whom might assure him of their undivided loyalty and devotion, only to lose their support when their devotion and loyalty is called into question by circumstances.

If we had no friends, then even our mothers would abandon us. For the friendless are the odd Johns of society, and few people tolerate them.

Yet I can tolerate all people, because I believe strong that to deny an offer of friendship based on who you (don't) know, one would have to have only the potential to understand the concept, not the ability to "be a friend to all and enemy to none".

In order to be a good friend, one ought to keep the ancient adage at heart: "Keep your best friend at arm's length, and your greatest enemy nearby."