| Cougar Press PO Box 894 Meadview AZ 86444 |
| What is meant by good and evil? |
Who knows? It would seem that the story found in the scriptures of Christianity, Judaism,
Islam and ancient Sumer has something to do with it.
In The Bible, Adam is told not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Over my own life I have encountered many interpretations of just what this means. For instance,
there have been groups who claimed that this rule was a prohibition of sexual intercourse.
Others have suggested that the phrasing was merely meant to include all of the pairs of
opposites, as in the expression "all things, great and small." However, this interpretation implies
that the Lord was banning all knowledge.
I suppose that could be true. We have learned that the universe is so vast that to know
everything is impossible. As science has progressed, we have seen earlier beliefs fall. Humanity
used to believe all sorts of things that are no longer considered to be correct. These beliefs range
from the origin of the universe, the age of creation and the arrangement of the sun and the
planets to the circulation of the blood in our bodies, the causes of disease, evolution, and so on.
Democritus proposed the idea of the atom as an indivisible basic building block of matter. This
error was passed down to us by the nuns in grade school ten years after the event in Hiroshima
that showed the world just how atoms could be split.
However, this is a false trail. With the advent of modern science, the reality of the universe has
become less and less obscure. Two observations support this claim, the first being that the
predictions of science are frequently correct: comets and meteor showers show up when they are
supposed to, and all of the stars and planets move in their prescribed paths.
The other thing that supports the validity of science is our technology. Things work. Engines
rumble, planes fly, electricity flows, radio, television and microwaves reach out through the void.
Right and wrong have meaning for mathematicians, scientists and engineers. Two plus two
equals four, right? We assume that this is not the sort of right and wrong that Adam was
forbidden to know about.
I want you to understand that I am not attempting here to offer any knowledge of good and
evil. I believe that we can get inspiration and enlightenment from anything that we read or hear.
For instance, I love some of the Psalms and Proverbs; I love the Gospel according to John. I like
Ecclesiastes.
But I don't like them just because someone told me that these are the Words of God. In a
sense, all words are the Words of God, but, if they don't ring true for the reader or the listener, it
really doesn't matter.
I also love the words of Lao Tsu in the Tao Te Ching. I love what Khalil Gibran wrote in The
Prophet, and I am charmed by some of the things Carlos Castenada had to say in The Teachings
of Don Juan: a Yaqui Way of Knowledge.
I find deep wisdom in the story, in Genesis, about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
When I read those verses in Chapter 2, I get the impression that God (the author) was giving
Adam (mankind) a tip. Don't get hung up trying to figure out what is good and what is evil, he is
telling us. He isn't saying that this pair of opposites does not exist. I believe that the suggestion
is to accept all of creation. Experiencing both good and evil is part of life, and it depends on ones
point of view whether this or that event is one or the other.
One man kills another. That's evil we are tempted to think. But then we find out that the dead
man was preparing to murder an innocent woman and her children. Suddenly the same act that
we at first condemned starts to look like a noble sacrifice, and it is, but does that mean it's not
evil?
Suppose the children grow up and turn out to be people like Adolph Eichman, Hitler or Charles
Manson. Where do we draw the line?
Philosophers and theologians have waxed endlessly on this subject, as have political scientists
and lawyers. A big problem for these thinkers has been that, if God created everything, didn't he
create evil as well? That doesn't seem right, but if God didn't create evil, doesn't that imply that
it had its own source? Doesn't that imply then that He did not create everything? So who would
this other creator be?
The concept of free will is one of the tactics that has been used to get around this problem. God
created man, yes, but he created him with a free will, and then man chose to commit evil.
Aside from problems with the whole idea of free will, we are left to wonder, when the great
minds of moral philosophy are unable to zero in on the definition of good and evil, how is an
ordinary man going to figure it out? If he can't tell which of his alternative behaviors are good
and which are evil, how is he to knowingly choose to commit evil?
I am only exploring these ideas briefly with you so as to point out the vanity of expecting any
success at deciding whether what we or anyone else does is good or evil. If you do choose to eat
the fruit of that tree, then you are going to need the rest of that big book to try to unravel the
maze in which you will find yourself.
The irony of it all lies in the truth that you don't need to know anything about good and evil.
The practice of Yoga does have its strictures, the abstinences and observances, but these are not
presented as definitions of good and evil. In fact, each of the eight limbs of Raja might be
thought of as descriptions of the behavior of the Yogi. This is what he or she does. This is what
works.
Islam and ancient Sumer has something to do with it.
In The Bible, Adam is told not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Over my own life I have encountered many interpretations of just what this means. For instance,
there have been groups who claimed that this rule was a prohibition of sexual intercourse.
Others have suggested that the phrasing was merely meant to include all of the pairs of
opposites, as in the expression "all things, great and small." However, this interpretation implies
that the Lord was banning all knowledge.
I suppose that could be true. We have learned that the universe is so vast that to know
everything is impossible. As science has progressed, we have seen earlier beliefs fall. Humanity
used to believe all sorts of things that are no longer considered to be correct. These beliefs range
from the origin of the universe, the age of creation and the arrangement of the sun and the
planets to the circulation of the blood in our bodies, the causes of disease, evolution, and so on.
Democritus proposed the idea of the atom as an indivisible basic building block of matter. This
error was passed down to us by the nuns in grade school ten years after the event in Hiroshima
that showed the world just how atoms could be split.
However, this is a false trail. With the advent of modern science, the reality of the universe has
become less and less obscure. Two observations support this claim, the first being that the
predictions of science are frequently correct: comets and meteor showers show up when they are
supposed to, and all of the stars and planets move in their prescribed paths.
The other thing that supports the validity of science is our technology. Things work. Engines
rumble, planes fly, electricity flows, radio, television and microwaves reach out through the void.
Right and wrong have meaning for mathematicians, scientists and engineers. Two plus two
equals four, right? We assume that this is not the sort of right and wrong that Adam was
forbidden to know about.
I want you to understand that I am not attempting here to offer any knowledge of good and
evil. I believe that we can get inspiration and enlightenment from anything that we read or hear.
For instance, I love some of the Psalms and Proverbs; I love the Gospel according to John. I like
Ecclesiastes.
But I don't like them just because someone told me that these are the Words of God. In a
sense, all words are the Words of God, but, if they don't ring true for the reader or the listener, it
really doesn't matter.
I also love the words of Lao Tsu in the Tao Te Ching. I love what Khalil Gibran wrote in The
Prophet, and I am charmed by some of the things Carlos Castenada had to say in The Teachings
of Don Juan: a Yaqui Way of Knowledge.
I find deep wisdom in the story, in Genesis, about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
When I read those verses in Chapter 2, I get the impression that God (the author) was giving
Adam (mankind) a tip. Don't get hung up trying to figure out what is good and what is evil, he is
telling us. He isn't saying that this pair of opposites does not exist. I believe that the suggestion
is to accept all of creation. Experiencing both good and evil is part of life, and it depends on ones
point of view whether this or that event is one or the other.
One man kills another. That's evil we are tempted to think. But then we find out that the dead
man was preparing to murder an innocent woman and her children. Suddenly the same act that
we at first condemned starts to look like a noble sacrifice, and it is, but does that mean it's not
evil?
Suppose the children grow up and turn out to be people like Adolph Eichman, Hitler or Charles
Manson. Where do we draw the line?
Philosophers and theologians have waxed endlessly on this subject, as have political scientists
and lawyers. A big problem for these thinkers has been that, if God created everything, didn't he
create evil as well? That doesn't seem right, but if God didn't create evil, doesn't that imply that
it had its own source? Doesn't that imply then that He did not create everything? So who would
this other creator be?
The concept of free will is one of the tactics that has been used to get around this problem. God
created man, yes, but he created him with a free will, and then man chose to commit evil.
Aside from problems with the whole idea of free will, we are left to wonder, when the great
minds of moral philosophy are unable to zero in on the definition of good and evil, how is an
ordinary man going to figure it out? If he can't tell which of his alternative behaviors are good
and which are evil, how is he to knowingly choose to commit evil?
I am only exploring these ideas briefly with you so as to point out the vanity of expecting any
success at deciding whether what we or anyone else does is good or evil. If you do choose to eat
the fruit of that tree, then you are going to need the rest of that big book to try to unravel the
maze in which you will find yourself.
The irony of it all lies in the truth that you don't need to know anything about good and evil.
The practice of Yoga does have its strictures, the abstinences and observances, but these are not
presented as definitions of good and evil. In fact, each of the eight limbs of Raja might be
thought of as descriptions of the behavior of the Yogi. This is what he or she does. This is what
works.
| Yoga for Carnivores by Jay Dyck |