if there is no distinction between right and wrong, good and
evil….reasoning would lapse into extreme point of neutrality or
balance or emptiness where right/ wrong, good/ evil becomes
meaningless as they are created out of judgemental elements of the
mind.
To accept whatever outcome is as it is without division between
subject-object, than to intend what should be or ought not to be,
i.e. to take sides according to weighted reasoning and the intended
best outcome; which may be right in one perspective, but wrong from
another perspective.
Once there is such clear distinction, this would help resolve
human (subjective) problems at hand due to “utmost necessity”, but
violate the (objective) truth of emptiness – the human realm vs
emptiness realm….it is a distinction necessary towards human
engagement to solve human problems only…
it is a challenge …but one which needs a new adaptation…i would
coin it
Humanistic (Subjective) Buddhism; or in other words, it is also
widely known as Pragmatic Buddhism ..but somewhat different…
If i were to violate the so called objective truth to save a
person’s life, should i not?
