Photo by Somben
Chea from Pexels
84 Is there evil?
Meaning clarified
Article 12 teaches that you are the light that reveals the
happiness around you. Light carries warmth, spreading happiness.
Light illuminates, making the happiness visible. Think of it as a
bidirectional flow of cause and perception.
Alternatively, think of sound. The
adjective form of the word identifies a longitudinal pressure
fluctuation: sound wave (type of wave). The noun form is
illustrated in the grade school saying that a tree falling in a
vacant forest does not make sound. Various dictionaries associate
that meaning of “sound” as a noun with “auditory impression,”
“sensation,” or “can be heard.” There “sound” is the perception,
not the wave.
I am introducing the principle “it
depends on what you make of it.” The above illustrations describe
physical phenomena that can be measured. Both examples ignore the
physical quantity and concentrate on the human perception.
Meaning misapplied
Some say that by creating good, God
created evil—that is, He created the categories when He separated
one quality from the other. Neither “creation” makes sense. Good
and evil are not physical phenomena that anybody creates. They
describe measurements that “depend on what you make of them.” I
am comparing that process to the perception of light and the
hearing of sound. What follows is a discussion of
interpretation.
When things go wrong
During many months of writing a
pollyannaish happiness blog, I have worried about the possible
reality of the world we are not creating together. I have
been treating it like darkness: it is only the absence of a light
that is real. The “evil world” is not a creation;
it is a condition that disappears when the light goes
on.
Today I reinforce the model that there
are not parallel good and evil universes engaged in an
existential struggle. Although we are still creating it, there is
one unitary world that appears dark (suffers) until we
illuminate it. We are realizing (revealing and achieving) the
world of our creation by turning on the light. (Note: here we
will speak of the physical and social worlds we inhabit and not
stretch the metaphor to apply to black holes in galaxies.) The
humanist says there is nothing so dark that light cannot
illuminate it. The Christian says that there is nothing so
depraved that there is no redemption.
I am sad that so many descriptions of the
four noble truths of Buddhism use the word “suffering.” Early on,
I decided that the word does not refer to disturbances like
divorce and toothaches. I take it to represent anything that is
not in its highest state of being. Enlightenment is not a weapon
for expunging the evil world. It is rather the illuminating
condition that marks the right order. The darkness is gone when
we turn on the light. The suffering ends without going
anywhere.
Without enumeration
I omit a list of the world’s pains. You
must learn to evaluate your being and your circumstance. From
that, contemplate the higher order as we have done many times in
this blog. Intelligence is the power to project our ideals beyond
our current conditions. We are creating our worlds, and today’s
article is one more encouragement to do so thoughtfully toward
the best outcome. It is indeed what you make of it
(articles 30, 60,
78, and search the word “wrong” in this course).
Article 83 teaches your duty to find the good and support it.
This is never a fight (articles 14,
38, 45,
78). Instead, it is adding your unique light to others to
provide the widest possible coverage.
I grieve over the cruelties I am not
naming. Suffering is not healing. We divert abuse by patiently
rehabilitating perpetrators and lighting their candles to give
them a blessing to pass on to others. Should we die before our
love has dissolved someone’s hatred, let us at least leave
guideposts and stepping stones along the trail to
enlightenment.
From negative to profound
Albert Schweitzer, the musician
philosopher and physician who taught “Reverence for Life,” told a
story from his leprosarium at Lambaréné. He had asked one of his
patients or a visitor to that patient to fetch a utensil for
another patient with whom he was working at the moment. The one
requested replied “but
he is not brother to me.” Dr. Schweitzer had learned patience
with this sense of tribalism, although it grieved him when his
basic teaching had not been learned. The lesson of our
brotherhood is still missing in too many lives.
Since the beginning of this blog I have
tried to gain the courage to share one of my most ignorant deeds.
It is appropriate here next to Dr. Schweitzer’s story.
While in early grade school, I frequently
did shopping errands for my mother who operated a senior care
facility and needed household help. On one trip, she explicitly
authorized me to buy an ice cream cone with part of the change
from the grocery purchase. The price was then five cents. After I
began to place the order at the window, one of my school friends
appeared and greeted me by name. I welcomed talking to him but
was uncomfortable with the purchase I was making. In my weakness,
I let the ice cream shop finish filling my order and ate the ice
cream cone on the way home. I justified my rudeness by telling
myself that if the friend wanted to avoid suffering, he could
just leave me to my ice cream and come by some other time.
When we arrived at my home with the
groceries and half the ice cream cone still in my hand, my mother
immediately asked where my friend’s ice cream cone was. I
explained that I had been authorized to buy only one. To my
mother’s eternal credit, she gently explained to me that
the feelings of other people should override my immediate
pleasure. I owed a certain respect to my friend. She provided the
five cents for another ice cream cone and gave me the redemptive
assignment of buying my friend an ice cream cone that he would
eat as he returned with me. Stepping into the position of this
“brother to me” was the best healing I could have experienced
then. It underlies everything I have written in this blog.
That ice cream incident is one of the
most powerful teachings of my life. The social etiquette I
learned (as if I could not have figured it out by empathy) was
much smaller than the real teaching: my mother taught me that her
love was stronger than my weakness. By avoiding any tone of
punishment, she gave me the opportunity to improve and trusted
that that was my intent. That trust is the reason her name
(Waltraud) is half of my business alias name “Ernstraud.” My
father (Ernst, the other half of “Ernstraud”) was of like mind.
Together they always assumed that it was my wish and my intent to
do good. My life still witnesses to that.
Being For Others Blog copyright © 2020 Kent Busse
Have you shared this with someone?