Good, Evil and Suffering in Buddhism

Suffering and evil are connected, but they are not identical. A hateful action can cause suffering, whereas experiencing suffering does not itself make someone evil.

Attachment and the Three Poisons

Attachment is clinging to something as though our happiness depends on possessing or keeping it. Enjoying something is not necessarily the same as being attached to it. The problem develops when desire controls our responses: we constantly want more, cannot tolerate loss or are willing to harm others to obtain what we want.

For example, wanting a possession can turn into resentment towards someone who owns it. If that resentment leads to theft, the desire has produced harm to another person as well as dissatisfaction in the person stealing.

Buddhism identifies three deeply connected causes of suffering, called the Three Poisons:

• Greed is selfish craving and the ongoing desire for more. It can encourage exploitation or theft because getting what we want becomes more important than others’ welfare.
• Hatred is anger, intense dislike or wishing others harm. It can encourage cruelty and retaliation, creating further suffering rather than resolving it.
• Ignorance is failing to see things as they really are. Someone may wrongly believe that endless possessions will guarantee happiness, or fail to recognise how their actions harm others.

These poisons reinforce one another. Ignorance can support greed; frustrated greed can develop into hatred. Understanding this connection helps explain why Buddhism places importance on changing the mind, not merely stopping one outward action.

Generosity challenges greed, loving-kindness challenges hatred, and wisdom challenges ignorance. Studying Buddhist teachings and putting them into practice can therefore help people reduce the causes of harmful behaviour. Buddhists do not all interpret or respond to these teachings in exactly the same way.

Mara: temptation and resistance

Mara is a figure associated with temptation and obstacles to enlightenment. Mara can also be understood as representing forces such as craving that prevent people from freeing their minds.

The Dhammapada compares someone absorbed in pleasure and lacking self-control to a weak tree blown down by a storm: Mara can overpower that person. By contrast, someone practising restraint and earnest effort is compared to a rocky mountain that the storm cannot move. Elsewhere, it describes resisting Mara with the ‘sword of wisdom’ and remaining unattached.

These images connect Mara with the Three Poisons and attachment. The emphasis is not simply on an outside force causing evil: people can strengthen their resistance through wisdom, self-control and effort.

Free will and responsibility: Dhammapada 12:165

Free will concerns people’s ability to choose how to act. In this Buddhist context, the important question is whether people can resist harmful impulses and develop better habits. Greed or anger may influence someone, but the teaching encourages effort rather than treating harmful conduct as unavoidable.

Dhammapada 12:165 states:

‘By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure.’

It concludes that ‘no one can purify another’. Here, becoming pure means overcoming harmful states of mind and conduct, not physically cleaning the body. A teacher can offer guidance, but cannot make someone practise generosity or abandon hatred on their behalf.

The verse supports both responsibility and hope. People are responsible for their harmful actions, but they can also stop doing harm. They are not presented as permanently incapable of goodness.

A strength of this approach is that it encourages active moral change rather than blaming temptation or waiting for someone else to solve the problem. Its limitation is that personal responsibility alone does not explain every experience of suffering. Someone may suffer because of another person’s actions. The verse should therefore be applied to responsibility for conduct, not used to assume that every sufferer caused their own pain.

Zen Story 9: ‘The Moon Cannot Be Stolen’

Ryokan, a Zen master, lives simply in a hut at the foot of a mountain. A thief enters but finds nothing to steal. When Ryokan returns, he offers the thief his clothes as a gift so that the visitor will not leave empty-handed. The bewildered thief takes them and leaves. Sitting naked and looking at the moon, Ryokan wishes he could have given the thief the beautiful moon too.

The contrast is between the thief’s pursuit of possessions and Ryokan’s generosity and lack of attachment. Ryokan does not answer greed with hatred. His response suggests that wellbeing need not depend on owning material goods.

The moon can be interpreted as representing beauty or insight that cannot simply be stolen and possessed. Giving the thief clothes is possible; handing over Ryokan’s understanding is not. This connects with Dhammapada 12:165: another person can offer help, but cannot accomplish someone’s inner transformation for them.

Ryokan’s response provides a powerful example of resisting hatred. However, the story does not show that the thief permanently changes. Generosity may challenge greed, but the thief must still choose how to respond.

Zen Story 63: ‘Killing’

Gasan teaches that those who oppose killing and wish to spare conscious beings are right. He explicitly includes protecting animals and insects. He then asks about people who ‘kill time’, destroy wealth or damage the political economy. Finally, he describes someone who preaches without enlightenment as ‘killing Buddhism’.

The story moves from literal killing to metaphorical destruction. ‘Killing time’ concerns wasting time; destroying wealth and the political economy points towards damage to resources and economic life. ‘Killing Buddhism’ warns that teaching without genuine understanding can damage the religion.

Gasan’s point is that avoiding one obvious form of harm is not enough. People should also examine less obvious ways in which their actions waste opportunities, damage collective wellbeing or mislead others. The warning about preaching connects particularly with ignorance: speaking confidently is not the same as understanding.

This broad approach makes moral responsibility more demanding and encourages reflection beyond physical violence. However, its metaphors need careful interpretation: wasting time is not literally the same act as taking a life. A justified judgement can recognise Gasan’s wider warning about harm while preserving distinctions between different actions and their consequences.

• Dukkha: suffering and dissatisfaction; not identical to evil.
• Attachment: clinging to possessions or pleasures as the basis of happiness.
• Three Poisons: greed, hatred and ignorance encourage harmful actions and suffering.
• Mara: temptation and obstacles to enlightenment; resisted through wisdom, restraint and effort.
• Free will: moral choice allows people to resist harmful impulses and change their conduct.

Sources to recall

• Dhammapada 12:165: ‘By oneself is evil done’ and ‘no one can purify another’. Personal responsibility and change require individual effort.
• Zen Story 9: Ryokan gives a thief his clothes and wishes he could give him the moon. Generosity and non-attachment contrast with greed; insight cannot simply be handed over.
• Zen Story 63: Gasan protects living beings, then extends ‘killing’ metaphorically to wasted time, damaged wealth and economy, and preaching without enlightenment.

Evaluation links

• Personal responsibility encourages change, but does not mean every sufferer caused their suffering.
• Generosity can challenge greed, but the thief’s lasting transformation is not shown.
• Gasan broadens awareness of harm, but metaphorical ‘killing’ must be distinguished from taking life.