Angel Side, Meet Devil Side.

I have been told so often that within every human being is both an angel and a devil, a good side and a bad side; a negative and a positive or a light side and a dark side. I have been told these two "poles" are constantly at war with one another, constantly in a dance for supremacy... constantly climbing up and or retreating back down. Yet, what are these "polarities" within the human? So far, all I have ever been told was that the "dark side" is every negative emotion and the "light side" is every positive one. If that was true, then there could be no "dark" nor could there be "light" within human beings; it would just be another illusion because "emotional dark" and "emotional light" are intertwined. Love brings hate and hate brings love. From love is despair, likewise from hatred. From joy there is pain and sorrow and from fear there is born hope. To flavor emotion as either positive or negative is to place a value judgement on emotion, making one "feeling" more important than another when all "feelings" make up "self" and the experience of life.

Then there is another duality, the twin currents that run through human bodies; the positive and negative or the twin serpents of kundalini. If you move your hands together until they touch, then slowly move them away from each other, then bring them closer without allowing contact, you can feel this energy; like two magnets. One pushes the other away, though if you shift your energy, they can likewise attract one another.

So what then is this "dark side" and "light side" I keep hearing and reading about? Some claim it is actions as well, that certain actions can define a particular "side" to the human condition. For example, to steal something when you know stealing is wrong and you do it not for survival, that is considered an action of the "dark side" by some. However, stealing is only wrong because society has made it wrong. Why is stealing okay if it means obtaining bread for your starving family or even yourself? This is a value judgement again and it does not seem absolute enough to be able to justify the existence of a "dark side" or "light side" within all human beings.

Some figure killing for any reason is evidence of the "dark side" in humans. Others feel evidence for the "light side" is in acts of charity or selflessness. For example, saving a child from a burning building, helping an elderly woman across the street, giving change to a street person, saving someone from choking... drowning... having a heart attack. Saving someone from a break-in... being raped... being mugged. The list goes on of course. Is any of this evidence for a "light side" though? Is compassion evidence? What if there is no "light side" or "dark side" within each human being as it is understood?

There is selfish and selfless? Inaccurate, there is only selfish. It is personality that defines whether someone finds pleasure from helping others or... at an extreme... torturing them. Selflessness does not exist, so "light" can not be based on that either and that means there is no "light side" to the human being based on being selfless or altruistic; altruism likewise is fiction. If a man helps someone, they do it to feel good about it... because they have been told all their lives it was the "right" thing to do... for guilt... for social status. There are many reasons to "help" someone, not all of them have been mentioned here either. For example, a wealthy man might give money to charity to lower his taxes... A murderer might save a child from a burning building. Again, there are many reasons.

I think its more complex that just two sides. There is a lot of grey area. I havent completely formed my beliefs yet on everything, but I do know you reap what you sew. I think people do good just for the betterment of mankind. I do see some people who only do it to look good, but I have definitely met people that do it just out of love. Men definitely die for a cause greater than themselves. That is a good act. Joseph Campbell tells of the police man in Hawaii who nearly died from falling off a bridge because he tried to save the life of a man he didnt know. The young man was jumping, the cop tried to save him and his collegue had to pull both of them up. The cop who jumped said that he would not have been able to live another day if he had not tried to save the other man. He connected with the Force, he realized he was one with the man. He had no ulterior motive for jumping, if anything he probably expected to die. Theres more to it than simply human desire I think.

Also, stealing is never right people just try to justify it. I feel like you are giving more of like a definition of the mainsteam Western world right now and that is not the direction our race should be going. We are capable of experiencing a lot more than what is "accepted' there are just a lot of things we cant explain and instead of embracing that as I do (and almost all humans used to do) society refuses to acknowledge it.

Those who do "good" out of "love" or to "serve a cause greater than themselves" are still being selfish. The very act of serving a cause greater than self is selfish, as it denotes meaning to the life of the doer. This "meaning" is like merit... a reward for doing the action. If Joe saved his troops by sacrificing his life, his life was given greater meaning. This is the idiotic reasoning of those programmed to "die for the cause"... of the so-called heroes of war who kill and die for their given scrap of land. These types are trained to be "Good Americans/Europeans/Iranians... etc..." through promising greater meaning to their lives... to give them a cause greater than themselves to have died for. Somehow that is logical? Ridiculous! To save the stranger from falling off a bridge is to give yourself a "good feeling" about doing "something important". The issue here, saving a life is hardly important and it certainly does not give any great meaning to life. At least, it does not unless you believe in it and then... that is just delusion.

There is always the choice to look at things from one perspective or the other. (and many times from multiple perspectives)

You could also say that by doing things for others we avoid subjecting our self to the self guilt we would feel by not helping those that were in need. Thusly it could be construed as a selfish act or an act of self preservation. All self preservation can be seen as “selfish”. But I do not believe that all acts of selflessness are acts of selflishness. For instance, sacrificing oneself to save another… you are not going to feel good about your sacrifice because you will not be alive to feel at all. One could argue that you will feel good knowing your sacrifice will save another, but if it is something reactionary, like a parent putting themselves in harm’s way to save their child.

But what I guess would be more to the point, is it worse to harm others for your own satisfaction or to benefit others for your own satisfaction? Would it not be better for the group as a whole if people did things to feel good about that helped others?

With nature taking aim at us and doing it’s thing to limit the population, what benefit do we serve to by promoting our own destruction?

Mortose,
It would seem that much of the argument being presented here is dealing in absolutes. Nothing can ever be entirely good or bad, Angel or Devil. It is entirely dependent on one's perspective.

If I were to become famous and use my influence to make millions of dollars, some people would call me selfish. I could donate all of that wealth to a charity helping children, and the children would believe I am generous. However, a cancer patient might believe that I should have donated my wealth to them instead, and feel that I wasted my money on the children.

Ultimately, it is up to an individual to decide what is good or bad, selfish or selfless at any given time. If the cop was motivated by a "need to save lives," so be it. The other person's life was saved regardless of the motivation. That other person might hate the cop for saving him as he was trying to commit suicide. As they say, "no good deed goes unpunished."

Every person must decide for themselves how to act in each individual situation based on their current motivation. Sometimes we don't have time to consider these motivations, so we just "do". Good or bad, light or dark, selfish or selfless are just judgments placed on these actions by others after the fact. You can choose to find meaning and relevance in them or not.

Mortose wrote: I have been told so often that within every human being is both an angel and a devil, a good side and a bad side; a negative and a positive or a light side and a dark side.

Is this a Ying Yang question? If it is that's the answer.

The Angel/Devil, Dark/Light, negative/positive, the story of the Two Wolves . These are all representations of the duality of life. Two parts of the same whole. Two sides of the same coin. How would you know what is "Right" if you didn't know what was "Wrong"? What is "White" without "Black"? And it's ALL based off of perspective and situation. Most Americans would probably say "It is wrong to kill people." However, I make a living off of it. Killing the 'bad' guys. (Bad being another matter of perspective)

This I think is why I like the idea of Dharma. That you earn Karma based off of what is proper for your path and phase in life.

It is real easy to sit and talk to yourself about the things that are ultimately right, and ultimately wrong. But those perspectives rarely survive the encounter of other people and their own perspectives and life experiences. This was a luxury I only had when I was young.

Going back to the killing idea, I believe it is wrong to take a life unnecessarily. And I am willing and able to defend, so I do. I am willing to do what I feel is 'wrong', and take the life of another human being to protect those who do not have the capabilities to do it themselves.

I want to live my life in service. In any way. I believe that "service" is giving of oneself. Either in aid (financial/emotional/physical), in teaching, in defense, or any other way you can think of. I don't feel this makes me any more or less than anybody else. I simply feel that this is where I 'fit'. I take pride in my work. I enjoy that feeling. This can make me "Selfish" from that perspective. But I also don't feel like I'm being "Selfless". Honestly, when I am serving, I simple 'am'.

Kamizu wrote: It is real easy to sit and talk to yourself about the things that are ultimately right, and ultimately wrong. But those perspectives rarely survive the encounter of other people and their own perspectives and life experiences. This was a luxury I only had when I was young.

I agree with Kamizu on this one, personally I think the Demon and Angel in all of us can only be determined by oneself. As stated already, but just kind of agreeing. That the acts of one individual might be selfish to some but not others. But if the intention was there for good, it should really only matter what the individual who acted thought. Weather what they were doing was right in their mind was right.

The angel and demon are ultimately what we make them to be in our own minds. And where the demon might seem bad, well, sometimes one must dawn the demon to assist like a Angel.

TheImpailerXx wrote: sometimes one must dawn the demon to assist like a Angel.

Well stated. Another way of exploring the idea that "the ends justify the means".

I always liked the phrase "the game of black and white" that Alan Watts uses.

Light and dark...good and bad...positive and negative...angel and devil...

It's a game we play...some play it more rigidly than others of course. Some will say "this is light, and this is dark" - others will say "light and dark are on a spectrum with lots of grey stuff in-between" - both are part of the game. And I'm not being accusatory - I'm constantly playing along too. I don't know whether it's possible to completely escape it when we are taught to play the game from the moment that we are born.

I'm not sure that either exists at all. There is what you do, think and feel, and there is what you don't do, think and feel. Light and dark are just words that we use to make sense of these things - to compare them with whatever moral and ethical code we try to impose on ourselves, and with that of the world at large.

That's not to say it is wrong to have a self-imposed light and dark, right and wrong...there is a good case for arguing that it's actually a desirable code to have. Could society even function without it? Maybe, maybe not. But then, I guess that depends whether you think that having a functioning society is a good or bad thing...and there goes the game again...