Distinguishing Good and Evil
The problems of good and evil, right and wrong, have been dealt with in the
discussion on karma. Here it may suffice to give a brief summary on the subject.
To determine whether an action is good or evil, right or wrong, Buddhist ethics
takes into account three components involved in a karmic action. The first is
the intention that motivates the action, the second is the effect the doer experiences
consequent to the action, and the third is the effect that others experience
as a result of that action. If the intention is good, rooted in positive mental
qualities such as love, compassion, and wisdom, if the result to the doer is
wholesome (for instance, it helps him or her to become more compassionate and
unselfish), and if those to whom the action is directed also experience a positive
result
thereof, then that action is good, wholesome, or skillful (kusala). If, on the
other hand, the action is rooted in negative mental qualities such as hatred
and selfishness, if the outcome experienced by the doer is negative and unpleasant,
and if the recipients of the action also experience undesirable effects from
the action or become more hateful and selfish, then that action is unwholesome
or unskillful (akusala).
It is quite probable that on the empirical level an action may appear to be
a mixture of good and bad elements, in spite of the intention and the way it
is performed. Thus, an action committed with the best of intentions may not
bring the desired result for either the doer or the recipient. Sometimes an
action based on negative intentions may produce seemingly positive results (as
stealing can produce wealth). Due to lack of knowledge and understanding, people
may confuse one set of actions with an unrelated set of results and make wrong
conclusions, or simply misjudge them on account of social values and conventions.
This can lead to misconceptions about the law of karma and loss of moral consciousness.
This is why precepts are necessary in the practice of moral discipline: they
provide definite guidelines and help to avoid some of the confusion that empirical
observation and social conventions may entail.
Buddhist moral precepts are based on the Dharma, and they reflect such eternal
values as compassion, respect, self-restraint, honesty, and wisdom. These are
values that are cherished by all civilizations, and their significance is universally
recognized. Moral precepts that are based on such values or directed toward
their realization will always be relevant to human society, no matter to what
extent it has developed. Moreover, their validity can be empirically tested
on the basis of one's own sensitivity and conscience, which are beyond factors
of time and place. Killing, for instance, is objectionable when considered from
the perspective of oneself being the victim of the action (although when other
lives are subjected to the same act, its undesirability may not be felt as strongly).
The same is true with regard to stealing, lying, and sexual misconduct. Because
Buddhist moral
precepts are grounded on these factors, their practicality remains intact even
today, and their usefulness is beyond question.