Expert: Joe McSorley - 6/11/2009

Question
QUESTION: Hi there!

I have recently been reading around Buddhism, and it has raised some interesting questions. I really connected to the concept of releasing aggression, anger and self-righteousness and that there is no good and bad. I can see how this belief is valuable. But I wonder in the case of murder, does this mean that the person should not be punished? and what are the repercussions if they do? In the case of serial killers, they have to be stopped to save lives, to stop the killing spree. Also what would be the Buddhist standing on protecting yourself and loved ones from great harm? choosing to live rather than die, which subsequently could lead to committing an act of violence yourself?

Many thanks,

Nadya

ANSWER: Hello Nadya,
 You have encountered the problems that any idealized form of religion has and this is why I say that I write about Zen, not Buddhism.  Zen does not adhere to or rely on the precepts and tenets of the religious system but strives for direct awakening outside of these things.  I don’t think Buddhism teaches there is no good and bad but that there is no absolute good and bad, that it is relativistic.  A parasite might be bad for you but living in you is good for it so there is no single way of looking at it.  There is definitely a subjective sense of good and bad; you do what is good for your child, your health and your family.  The problem comes with an objective eternal sense of good and bad as in scripture because that is a culturally and historically based good and bad.
  Many Buddhists explain the problem with ethics and justice by karma.  They claim that it’s in the process of living dying and we are working through it so that whatever we happens to us is conditioned by this.  The problem here is that karma has to begin somewhere.  At some point in history, whatever it is they define us/self as, had to do wrong to fall.  So somehow we fell from nature as a bad amoeba or something and then keep reincarnating to be human. So when you ask what the karma is of a two year old in Dafur being raped and murdered you have to somehow justify it with a past life scenario, that something in the innocent child’s ‘soul’ preconditioned this.  The problem is that it just doesn’t work and it’s really dismissive of the horrible suffering in the world.  Right now you can view Hubble telescope images of galaxies colliding, billions of lives going into extinction and somehow this is supposed to be explained by personal karma.  I find it very problematic.
  What you ask about the criminal is something I just addressed in a letter here when asked about doing no harm and the problems that seeking justice might cause in karma.
“  The idea of doing no harm on the surface seems straightforward and clear but if you really look at it deeply it becomes complicated.  Religious like to tell stories about how compassion works and there is a classic story of a fellow that robs a temple/church and his caught by the priest as he leaves with gold candlesticks.  The priest, rather than apprehending him, hands him two more and lets him go.  It seems the path of least resistance and compassionate but is it?  Suppose now that thief goes to another place and while robbing it kills or rapes someone, was it compassionate to allow this person to lead this life when it could have been stopped?  Is it compassionate to allow this person to be in their ignorant thief mind or to the next victim to let them go?  It is never so easy as ‘doing no harm’.  Nature does harm all the time, however, it does not do intentional harm, that is, harm for the sake of harming.  I cannot walk across my yard without killing countless creatures underfoot and at the same time a deer cannot walk across it without doing the same thing.  Are we doing harm, yes, but do we mean to, no.  Creatures in nature defend their lives and offspring and it is right and natural while humans do not follow what is right and natural and best for themselves.  It is nice to have these ideal thoughts of compassion but sometimes the compassionate way is not painless.  Sometimes you have to cut off a finger to save your hand.”
  So, Nadya, as you can see this is a complex issue and when someone tries to apply broad religious tenets to real life there can be many contradictions.  If Buddhism becomes your path utilize it to realize yourself as all nature expressed in the form of Nadya.
  I hope this has helped you,  Take care,
         Joe



---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you for this! I really engaged with your answer. The main points I found valuable, is how we as humans do not allow what is right and natural. That seems to apply to a lot of things, not just physical threat or pain. Also I had not noticed that my thoughts of right and wrong were routed in a Christian outlook. It seems that we are so conditioned by our past that we are hardly aware how our language and beliefs carriers this forward and how easy it is not to truely question. Many thanks again, Nadya

Answer
Dear Nadya,
  Thank you for your kind words.  It is hard to develop the skills to truly question deeply and earnestly.  I came from a Christian background where deep inquiry was frowned upon.  I tried it to understand my faith better and that caused greater problems.  When I tried to get Christian leaders to show me some evidence of their faith, wanting this not to tear down faith but to enhance it, I found it woefully lacking.  It was their lack of wanting a deep understanding of faith and what contradictions it might hold that drove me elsewhere.  When I came to Dr DeMartino, my first Zen teacher, he never did a thing to enhance my beliefs or detract from them, he just asked ‘how do you know that’?  It was maddening because he didn’t offer an answer but he made me probe deeper and deeper.  Quite honestly I couldn’t stand it but it took root in me and made me truly question.  I came upon a point where I realized that searching for the truth and hanging onto a belief came into direct conflict.  The dilemma being if when searching for truth it conflicts with what you believe, what do you give up, the search or the belief?  This is a hard place to be and is very threatening because it tears at the root of all you believe to be true; your foundation crumbles.  On the positive side you gain an entirely new perspective that is free from cultural and religious constraints and allows you to be good for the sake of goodness.  I heard a debate with Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church and to paraphrase his answer to a question he said that he is good   ‘because he is told to do so by the Bible and if he is wrong about the Bible being the word of God then he’s being good for no reason and he’s wasting time when he could be enjoying himself.’  I found this so sad and odd that he’s only being ‘good’ because of fear not because of compassion and love for others and that it’s his nature.  So he’s a bad person only acting good because of the God cops and if given the freedom he’d do otherwise.  Real good is good for its own sake not out of fear but out of true compassion.
   Take care and good luck,
         Joe