Continuing the discussion on the problem of evil.

[Aupmanyav]

It makes no sense. You create evil so that people recognize good, but in the process you also have created evil. Why not create people to just recognize good? Why create a universe with pain and suffering so that people worship you and become better, when you can just create people good from the get go. Also to create evil, you must be part evil and thus you cannot be fully benevolent.

In 'Advaita' (non-dual) Hinduism, the problem of evil does not exist, it is short-circuited; since what is good and what is evil is part of one whole (Brahma satyam - Brahman is the truth) - and what is perceived is an illusion (jagan-mithya, the perceived world is an illusion). The eater and the eaten is the same, the killer and the killed is the same, the oppressor and the oppressed are the same; so hurting another is hurting yourself. Good and evil exist because of absence of 'jnana', not knowing. If one knew better, one would not indulge in evil. Atoms and molecules again, energy, Brahman, the ultimate substrate, which constitutes everything.

Buddhism short-circuited the problem in its own way. It did not dwell upon why good and evil exist, they exist because of absence of 'jhana', not knowing. If one knew better, one would not indulge in evil. Buddhism debated on how it may affect one and what is the best course of action for one's peace of mind and happiness and that of others.

 

[MD]

Wouldn't the perceived world be more real, since Brahman is universal consciousness and our perceptions are the conscious properties of how we view the world?

If evil does exist as a metaphysical force, does avoiding or hiding from evil give it an opportunity to spread?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

it is called building character. if people have no choice they will just do what they are forced to do. but by giving a choice people can build character by resisting evil

 

[George-ananda]

Buddhism short-circuited the problem in its own way. It did not dwell upon why good and evil exist, they exist because of absence of 'jhana', not knowing. If one knew better, one would not indulge in evil. Buddhism debated on how it may affect one and what is the best course of action for one's peace of mind and happiness and that of others.

This does not address evil not caused by someone's (or someone else's) free will; like childhood cancer. I think Buddhism avoids this problem by not positing a creator God. Things just go wrong randomly and we can only accept it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Wouldn't the perceived world be more real, since Brahman is universal consciousness and our perceptions are the conscious properties of how we view the world?

If evil does exist as a metaphysical force, does avoiding or hiding from evil give it an opportunity to spread?

The world is real, since everything is Brahman; but its appearance as we perceive it is an illusion, good and evil also are perceptions. We depend on our limited senses which do not perceive ultraviolet or infrared, cannot hear sounds below a certain threshold or above it, cannot see more than 9,096 stars or so when there are millions upon billions. How do you think such senses can give us the true picture of what exists?
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-resources/how-many-stars-night-sky-09172014/

'Ajnana' (not knowing) causes evil and makes it spread. Why should 'ajnana' be preferred over 'jnana'? That will be a retrograde step. Hinduism and other dharmic religions do not take it as a metaphysical force, devil or satan.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes I believe self knowledge is the key to realizing we are all One in Consciousness, the ignorance of not knowing this is to live our life unconscious, or in sleep, when we are awakened we then live our life as One, there will be no thought of harming another, for to do so is to harm our self.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This does not address evil not caused by someone's (or someone else's) free will; like childhood cancer. I think Buddhism avoids this problem by not positing a creator God. Things just go wrong randomly and we can only accept it.

I think you are right. Like if there is life, then old age, disease and death are unavoidable. Perhaps a Buddhist member could give us better explanation.

 

[NathanShepard8888]

Buddha is the tree. In you. In me.

That's the Buddhism I learned at least.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This does not address evil not caused by someone's (or someone else's) free will; like childhood cancer. I think Buddhism avoids this problem by not positing a creator God. Things just go wrong randomly and we can only accept it.

The Fall concept in Christianity explains those things, too. I actually think the Fall was a dimensional event and it created an imperfect parallel universe that we're currently living in.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh. So, eating an apple creates a parellel universe.

 

[arthra]

Baha'is believe evil does not have a substantive reality... It is the absence of good.. like shadow is the absence of light. Further Abdul-Baha expalins:

"...it is possible that one thing in relation to another may be evil, and at the same time within the limits of its proper being it may not be evil. Then it is proved that there is no evil in existence; all that God created He created good. This evil is nothingness..."

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 261

 

[Aupmanyav]

Somewhat difficult to understand. Are IS beheadings and crucifixions evil or good?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh. So, eating an apple creates a parellel universe.

It was an allegory. There was no literal apple, tree or garden.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Really! What about Adam and Eve created from his ribs?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Really! What about Adam and Eve created from his ribs?

I said the Biblical creation stories are allegorical. They're myths that are meant to get certain teachings across. You're bonkers if you take it as a literal account.

 

[Thana]

I said the Biblical creation stories are allegorical. They're myths that are meant to get certain teachings across. You're bonkers if you take it as a literal account.

I'm not sure you realize how many people you just casually dissed.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not sure you realize how many people you just casually dissed.

Yes, crazy literalist Young Earth Creationists. I don't care about their feelings. They have issues, same as those who still believe the Earth is flat or that the Earth is hollow with its own sun within it. Sometimes people become so far removed from reality that we shouldn't hesitate to point that out to them.

 

[Augustus]

For me the more monotheistic a religion, the less it makes sense for this reason. The ultra-monotheistic position that no power exists outside of God, who is truly omnipotent, seems completely untenable with evil.

Religious that are duelistic, polytheistic, etc seem to be more logical in this regard.

 

[ShivaFan]

I don't know a lot about the apple and the snake history, but personally I find it a great idea of good and evil. It makes it easy to understand, that we can be good if we are not tricked by the whisper in our ears from the snake, always saying we can have something better and we need to carry some grievance in order to find peace. The entire grievance thing is the root of evil, it does not bring peace.

The snake says, why work? Just take the easy way, pick the apple. "Don't listen to the old man who says it isn't the right time to harvest the apple! He just doesn't want you to enjoy, he doesn't have the overall wellbeing in mind. Just pick it, it is the easy way to enjoy."

Hmmm... everyone thinks they know the law for themself, but many have no idea how their inner clock even works and the basic laws that govern the wider world around them and the apple is just their own selfish stupidity and the root of evil. Listen inside, not to the snake. The snake is evil.

Anyway, maybe I am wrong, but that is how I see the apple deal, and I find it an amazing teaching.

A lot of evil in this world right now. I see it in ISIS. EVIL. Some want to distract me, and hate Christians. I got bigger fish to fry, not Christians.

Look, I am not going to be tricked by the left nor by Obama into going viral on the Pope and hate for the Pole. The Catholic Church has been a big target from the left for a long time, take the whole agenda of attack on Catholic priests as child molesters and homosexuals who were priests and such, the fact is there are statistically way more child molesters who are teachers in our public schools than there are like so priests in no small measure. And were their some homosexual priests who got too close to little boys on the choir? Of course, just like hetero priests with little girls - the like problems of child abuse in non-church circles is the same and actually much worse. Anybody have a utopian answer? I don't. Same things went on in the Hindu sects I have been involved in. It is everywhere, just don't play this game full of agendas. The worse case as far as sexual abuse of children is among the muslim ISIS freaks, many of which have AIDS, were criminals, and are drug addicts.

So Obama is lining up "guests" to greet the Pope purposely picked with the hope of raising the ire of non-Catholics to peg the Pope into some idea in their heads... really, Obams wants others to hate the Pope, it is a trick and though I am a Hindu it isn't going to work on me.

Do I disagree with some of the Pope's politics? I sure do when it comes to his Jesus and the "free fish" economics, but no way will I be tricked into some hatred by Obama and the left.

Christianity has gone under a number of reforms. And now is reforming again - for example regarding gays. But one thing that hasn't ever yet had a reformation is what we are seeing now in the Jihadi wing of Islam. Reform that before *****ing on others.

Evil is real. ISIS is an example. They listen to the snake and just "grab it". Maybe you want to use another word instead of evil. Fine. But don't listen to the snake. And there ARE demons in Hinduism, too. Demons are out there, some are very smart. Real evil isn't dumb. It can be, but it can be very good with the fork tongue and have a great philosophy of grievance and grab.

 

[Glaurung]

I'm not sure you realize how many people you just casually dissed.

Frankly, insisting on a six-thousand year old universe created in six days as described by a literalist interpretation on Genesis is intellectual suicide for anyone with even the most basic education. It may not be heretical, but it is demonstrably untrue.