I occasionally encounter situations where people distinguish between good and evil, living in a dualistic world. There are various arguments, and some claim a fundamental principle like "not violating others' ○○," but as long as they say "others," they are living in a dualistic world.

When I listen to people who live according to dualistic logic, it often seems that good and evil correspond to light and darkness, respectively. Good equals light, and evil equals darkness. This is an interpretation that I personally find unsettling, but people who live in a dualistic world of good and evil seem to think that way, so for now, let's consider it correct. If that's the case, the discussion of good and evil can be replaced with the relationship between light and darkness. Based on that premise, let's explore the relationship between light and darkness.

First, in spirituality, light refers to one's own consciousness. This is also claimed by those who advocate dualistic logic, and I don't have any particular objections to that. Then, what is darkness? According to those who advocate dualism, darkness is something that must be destroyed. And by destroying darkness (evil), light (good) will triumph. This seems like a very simplified and old teaching. It's as if good and evil dominate this world, like in Zoroastrianism.

In reality, darkness arises as a shadow of something that obscures one's own light. In the general interpretation of light and shadow, "shadows are created where light is blocked," but there is something that blocks the light, and darkness arises in that place. This is a fairly common sense understanding, so I don't have any particular objections.

Now, let's interpret that spiritually.

・One's own light (consciousness) → Current awareness, conscious mind ・What is obscuring it → Ignorance, misunderstanding, misinterpretation ・Darkness → Things that one cannot understand, fear

In other words, darkness is simply something that one cannot understand. People try to justify this with elaborate arguments.

If interpreted spiritually, justifying one's own (self-proclaimed) "good" by using the logic of good and evil is nothing more than an "ego's self-defense mechanism." If that's the case, there's no need to emphasize it so much, but that ego's self-defense mechanism itself is the root cause of conflict in this world.

And, trying to justify this conflict with spiritual logic is what dualism of good and evil is all about, but in reality, it is nothing more than an ego's self-defense mechanism to justify one's own actions, and ultimately, the lack of understanding towards the other person continues, and it becomes a story of good and evil, a story of light and darkness, where "one is right and the other is wrong," which is a characteristic of old religions that think about things in terms of good and evil.

Even in modern times, there are various groups that continue the battle between good and evil in the world, using techniques and other means. This is not simply a cultural way of thinking, but also has religious and cult-like ideological backgrounds that still exist today.

Because such ideologies and ways of thinking exist, the conflict in this world will not end.

I will summarize this situation again in a simplified manner.

・Awareness of oneself as light. ・"Things that obstruct" due to a lack of understanding. ・"Darkness" as something that is invisible and incomprehensible to oneself.

Therefore, "darkness is something that must be destroyed," as dualists say, is a mistaken interpretation. If we think about it honestly, instead of destroying such others, we should eliminate our own lack of understanding. However, it seems that the general dualists in the world have a much simpler view, simply believing that visible others should be punished and destroyed as evil.

Supplement:

That being said, there is no need to force ourselves to interact with troublesome, uncomprehending, and disorderly people. We should interact with those we can understand, and there is no need to force ourselves. As the saying goes, "it's useless to say," and there are always a certain number of people for whom nothing we say will make a difference. Therefore, even if it's not a conflict between light and darkness, or between good and evil, a lack of understanding exists everywhere. So, there's not much point in worrying about it too much. I think it's good to avoid immoral people, as Buddhism says.

It is okay to refuse those who force themselves upon us. This could even be called a conflict between good and evil. However, this is because they are not living independently and autonomously. While it is true that, in principle, one should refuse coercion if one is independent and autonomous, in this world, it is necessary to earn money, and things may not always go well.

Regarding the physical constraints of this society, most constraints are lifted by death. However, the concepts of good and evil mentioned above will not disappear even after death, so we must re-examine our understanding if we want to eliminate conflict in this world.

Supplement: