Mutually Dependant vs. Mutually Exclusive

[bushido_man96]

Evil, as we see it has more to do with evil acts, murder, acts of random violence, things with no base, no measure. From my study of Eastern Philosophy, it would seem that some evils are viewed as necessary. While it was evil for the Emperor Qin to destroy the armies of his rivals, it did allow him to unite China for the first time. This unity brought peace. I don't think Confucius would have labeled Emperor Qin a junzi or Confucian gentleman, but Qin's reforms did help China in the long run. This would be good coming from acts of evil.

I see what you are saying here, and I highlighted the last point, to emphasize it, and add to the discussion here. I think one point you have to consider is whether or not the way Qin accomplished his goal was the only means to this end. Take, for example, if Hitler would have emerged victorious from WWII. Germany may have become a very prominent and successful place to live (for some people, anyways...), but in the end, would it have been a good way to come to those reforms?

I do think that at times we accept some evils as necessary, but the extent of the evil is what should be evaluated, and whether or not another route could be arrived at; much like you have stated.

The ethics of Qin's acts depend on the practicality of alternatives: was there another way to an equally or more satisfying outcome, or one nearly as good that caused a lot less suffering en route?

This is the point I was stating above; thanks for bringing it out. It does make one think. Of course, you also have to consider the attitudes of all other sides involved, as well. Yet, history is riddled with situations like this, on all sides of the globe.

I would suggest that something truly evil is not done with the intent to benefit anyone else, nor a justifiable insistence on one's own rights or those of the group to whom you belong. For example, it is open to question whether killing others in an attempt to protect yourself or others is "evil", but acting only out of hatred and a wish to cause harm is evil (assuming good and evil exist at all, which probably requires that humans are more than the biological equivalent of a computer virus - itself an open question).

These are the points that tend to put a cut-off point on the idea of things being "mutually dependent." Maybe its because of my job, but I can't observe the kinds of charges and read about the things that people do, that are inherently evil, and think to myself as evil and good being "mutually dependant."

To Buddhists, what we perceive as reality is an illusion, and is not truly the greatest reality. The reality which we perceive, and to a certain degree which we actually construct, is made up of concepts which adhere to the doctrine of dependent origination, this being the idea that everything which is, is so because of something else: "On ignorance depends karma; On karma depends consciousness; On consciousness depend name and form; On name and form depend the six organs of sense..."

Karma is an aspect of Eastern thought that I have a tough time clinging to, as well. I hear it typically translated or "Westernized" by the saying "what goes around, comes around." I just don't buy into it. The reason is, because nothing is guaranteed in life. The bad guys don't always get caught; not everyone "gets what's coming to them." Its nice to think that it might work that way, but in my experience, it just doesn't.

It does appear that the most of us agree that the concept of "mutual dependence" does work in Martial Arts training:

Back to the original post... I think applying duality to martial arts is essential... the deeper one's relaxation, the greater one's explosiveness. The less one forces concentration on whatever seems important, the more one's awareness is open to everything and the more accurate one's assessments of import are, whether for perceiving incoming attacks, counter opportunities, opponent's mental state as projected through body language, aspects of the environment/surroundings, fatigue or injury to one's own body. The more subtle one's defense, the less deviation is required from attack until they eventually become integrated. We must always do "just enough", which is to flow from defense back to offense as naturally as air moving around a thrown stone. Sustaining an effort of strength fatigues the muscles and makes them weak, so the weakness should be invited earlier so we can be strong again sooner, and only the necessary muscles should be taxed. We should give way only so that the opponent brings themselves to us, and so we can utilise their own effort. Where they are weak, we must cut through with strength. It's easy to see all this... harder to do it. The ability to overcome all obstacles one encounters in this way is my idea of martial arts mastery.

"In order to contract/It is necessary first to expand./In order to weaken/It is necessary first to strengthen./In order to destroy/It is necessary first to promote./In order to grasp/It is necessary first to give."

Thanks for all of the replies so far, Kempohands, tonydee, isshinryu5toforever, and joesteph. Your contributions here have been very enlightening to me especially, as I have little knowledge of these subjects.

[isshinryu5toforever]

The western idea of Karma is that things come and go in your single lifetime. The original idea of Karma is that it's a never-ending stream of life force. Your karma affects your punishments in future lives. One example that sticks in my mind is when a Boddhisatva (excuse my spelling please) tipped over a rock to show a monk a toad being eaten alive by maggots or something of the like. The monk asked why such a thing would happen. The Boddhisatva explained that the toad had once been a general who killed thousands. The thousands of things eating the fat toad alive were the souls of the people he killed. If I'm remembering the story wrong, which is completely possible, I'm sure someone can correct me. But that's the point of more classical Buddhism.

And as far as Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism are concerned, they may not work hand in hand, but they are ever-present in East Asian society. They're forced to work together in a very strange way. It's hard to explain. I'll think about it more, and try later.

[bushido_man96]

Ah, that's another thing that wouldn't jive on karma for me. I'm not a re-incarnation guy, either.

[sensei8]

So what do we do? Serve the Yin or the Yang

We choose neither and just live..I guess

But, as far as the Yin and the Yang are concerned. One has to choose because both are connected. You can't have Yin without the Yang, and in that, you can't have day without night, or soft without hard, or fast without slow, or right without wrong, etc....! Therefore, as far as Yin and Yang are concerned, one has to serve BOTH because BOTH control the Yin and Yang universe.