Concept of Good and Evil
The Buddhist definition of "good" and “evil” is based on this consideration for others as well as oneself:
"But what, Your Reverence, is good conduct?
Whatever conduct, Sire, that is faultless
What, Your Reverence, is faultless conduct?
Whatever, Sire, that is harmless
What, Your Reverence, is harmless?
Whatever, Sire, is not ill in effect
What, Your Reverence, is not ill in effect?
Whatever conduct, Sire, is not conducive to the ill-fare of oneself, ill-fare of others or ill-fare of both"
(Bahitika Sutta M.S. II, 299)
The ‘Kalama Sutta' makes it clear that a person who lives by this mature Buddhist ethic, does not have to worry about the problem of an after life.
"By that Aryan disciple whose heart is thus freed from enmity, free from oppression, untainted and made pure, by such in this very life four comforts are attained, thus:
1) 'If there is a world beyond... I shall be reborn in the happy lot. '
2) 'If, however, there is no world beyond...... in this very life do I hold myself free from enmity and oppression, griefless, and well.....
3) Though, as a result of action, ill be done by me, yet do I plan no ill to anyone...
4) If as a result of action, no ill be done by me, then in both ways do I behold myself utterly pure.
(G.S. I, 127)
Therefore, though 'Kamma and rebirth' is considered a good view and a factual view in Buddhism, it is neither an essential dogma of Buddhism nor is Buddhist ethics based on this belief. Very few writers on Buddhism have made this point clear. Therefore, it is very important to emphasise this. The point that needs recognition here is that Buddhism is a ‘Kamma Vada' (speaks of action) rather than a 'Vipaka Vada' (speaks of results). This point is clear from the dialogue between the Buddha and Upali, the follower of the Jains.
"Ven. Gotama, it is not the custom of Nataputta the Jain to lay down 'deed, deed' (kamma, kamma); Ven. Gotama, it is the custom of Nataputta the Jain to lay down 'penalty, penalty' (danda, danda)......
"Upali, it is not the custom of a Tathagata to lay down 'penalty, penalty'; Upali, it is the custom for a Tathagata to lay down 'deed, deed’ "
(Upali Sutta, M.S. II 36)
Nigantha Nataputta, the founder of Jainism, was a contemporary of the Buddha. Here, it is Jainism that emphasizes the result of deeds in the form of punishment and reward. Buddhism, on the other hand, evaluates the goodness of the action by itself irrespective of its results in the future, by considering how it affects oneself as well as others, here and now, The 'Kalama Sutta' explains this clearly:
"Now what think ye, Kalamas? When greed arises within a man, does it arise to his profit or to his loss?" "To his loss, Lord."
"Now, Kalamas, does not this man, thus become greedy, being overcome by greed and losing control of mind, - does he not kill a living creature, take what is not given, go after another's wife, lies and leads another into such a state as causes his loss and sorrow for a long time?" He does, Lord."
(Kalama Sutta, G.S. I, 127)
Here, another point becomes clear in addition to the emphasis on the goodness or evilness of the deed by itself. There is also the emphasis on the mental state that, motivates the action. This fact is brought out dramatically in the 'Upali Sutta' quoted above.
"Nataputta, the Jain lays down that penalty of body is the more blamable. penalty of speech is not like it, penalty of mind is not Iike it.... "
"Upali,... I lay down that deed of mind is the more blamable. deed of body is not like it, deed of speech is not like it."
(Upali Sutta, M.S. II, 37)
This contrast between the Jain emphasis on results and on the physical act, and the Buddhist emphasis on the deed and mental or emotional state, is clearly explained in several other places in the Nikayas. Therefore, the Buddhist practice is not based on the idea of "Kamma, Rebirth and Samsara"; rather, it is Jainism and other such religions that do so.
What this means is that the emphasis of the Buddha is not on the circumstances but on the attitude to circumstances. “Punishment and reward” refers to the circumstances one is in, and reacting to the circumstances by lamenting or being delighted about them. Action or kamma refers to one’s attitude to the circumstance, whether good or bad. If one is in bad circumstances, and one responds to it in the proper way, it can be turned into a profitable circumstance, and be happy as a result. A good example is the life of Abraham Lincoln. Another is the life of Nicky the man who was born without hands or legs, who became a millionaire