As I have tried to explain to you, the rigorous concepts of good and evil are themselves highly distorted, and when you find such a dilemma where goodness is one thing and evil another, and both contrary and separate, then you automatically separate them in your minds and in your feelings and in your fantasies. You do not seem at this point able to realize that what you call evil works for what you call good, or that both are a part of energy, and that you are using energy to form your reality, both now and after this life. This is because you deal with effects physically, as you see them. And until you divest yourself of such psychological behavior, it will always seem to you that good and evil are opposites, and you will treat them as such in your feelings and in your concepts and in your myths.

No! There are no forces outside of yourselves that in your terms cause you to do evil. Unfortunately, what you think of as good and evil reside within yourselves, and you cannot blame an evil force for the destruction that runs rampant across the earth. Again, in your terms, these are your problems, and no god or devil put them upon you, and there is no one to blame but yourselves. On the other hand, for the seasons and the idiot flower (looks at Joel H.), you have yourselves to thank. You are learning how to use the creative energy of which you are a part, and you are indeed quite isolated, so you cannot do much harm, in your terms. And so that the evil that you think you do is an illusion. And so that for the millions that you think you slay, you slay not one. And so that despite you and your concepts of value, creativity always emerges triumphant, and those that are killed in one war come back to fight against war the next time, and hopefully, you teach yourselves some lessons. And if you destroy your planet, you will have others to work with, and those that were destroyed are not destroyed. You are in a training system. The mistakes in the long run, and in your terms, will not count, but they are very real to you at this time.

However, there is something that you should know. Because you are physically oriented, you early got it into your heads that goodness must have a place in the physical universe and evil must have a place within it. And so you set up for yourselves the division of Heaven and Hell. In one story or another, it has existed far back into the annals of your time. Now give us a moment.

([Ron L:] “Is it ever justified to do evil for the sake of good?”)

[...] Your idea of the devil represents the same kind of process, except that it stands for your idea of evil or darkness, or abilities that you are afraid of. [...] I am not speaking of evil possibilities, but that man must realize that he is responsible for his acts, whether they are called good or evil.

Jehovah and the Christian version of God brought about a direct conflict between the so-called forces of good and the so-called forces of evil by largely cutting out all of the intermediary gods, and therefore destroying the subtle psychological give-and-take that occurred between them—among them—and polarizing man’s own view of his inner psychological reality.

You make your own reality, Man’s “evil” exists because of his misunderstanding of his own ideals, because of the gap that seems to exist between the ideal and its actualization. Evil actions, in other words, are the result of ignorance and misunderstanding. Evil is not a force in itself.

In your terms of time, man has always projected unassimilated psychological elements of his own personality outward, but in much earlier times he did this using a multitudinous variety of images, personifications, gods, goddesses, demons and devils, good spirits and bad. Before the Roman gods were fully formalized, there was a spectacular range of good and bad deities, with all gradations [among them], that more or less “democratically” represented the unknown but sensed, splendid and tumultuous characteristics of the human soul, and have stood for those sensed but unknown glimpses of his own reality that man was in one way or another determined to explore.

[...] Basically there is no evil action. [...] Within your field, within your moral field, you must indeed strike out against that which appears evil to you.

[...] Nothing here must ever be taken as a justification for evil, in humanity’s terms. For many practical reasons at this point, and please underline at this point, it is necessary that man fight against what he considers evil, for he strengthens himself immeasurably by so doing.

It is also true however, in a completely different framework, that evil is of his own creation, at least evil as he thinks of it. [...]

Good evening.

You will often condone quite reprehensible acts if you think they were committed for the sake of a greater good. You have a tendency to look for outright evil, to think in terms of “the powers of good and evil,” and I am quite sure that many of my readers are convinced of evil’s force. Evil does not exist in those terms, and that is why so many seemingly idealistic people can be partners in quite reprehensible actions, while telling themselves that such acts are justified, since they are methods toward a good end.

THE GOOD, THE BETTER, AND THE BEST.

[...]

Good evening.

(Good evening, Seth.”)

GOOD AND EVIL, PERSONAL AND MASS BELIEFS, AND THEIR EFFECT UPON YOUR PRIVATE AND SOCIAL EXPERIENCE

Heading for the chapter: “Good and Evil, Personal and Mass Beliefs, and Their Effect Upon Your Private and Social Experience.” [...]

Now: I outlined some opposing ideas held by many people — all involving concepts of good or evil being applied in areas in which they do not belong.

I bid you then a fond good evening. [...]

(9:30.) On the one hand, quite simply and in a way that you cannot presently understand, evil does not exist. However, you are obviously confronted with what seem to be quite evil effects. Now it has been said often that there is a god, so there must be a devil — or if there is good, there must be evil. [...]

PROBABILITIES, THE NATURE OF GOOD AND
EVIL, AND RELIGIOUS SYMBOLISM

The chapter heading: “Probabilities, the Nature of Good and Evil, and Religious Symbolism.”

[...] For this reason, the nature of good and evil is a highly important point.

[...] The intellect says, “If there is good, there must be evil,” for it wants things explained in neat parcels. [...] The inner self, however, realizes that in much larger terms, evil is simply ignorance, that “up” and “down” are neat terms applied to space which knows no such directions.

[...] If you believe, for example, that all good must be balanced by evil, then you bind yourself into a system of reality that is highly limiting, and that contains within it the seeds of great torment.

In such a system, even good becomes suspect, because an equal evil is seen to follow it. [...]

Quite simply, a belief in the good without a belief in the evil, may seem highly unrealistic to you. [...]

[...] Limited, dogmatic, or rigid concepts of good and evil can hold you back. [...]

[...] In such cases, through perhaps a group of existences, you will find yourself battling against ideas of good and evil, running about in a circle of confusion, doubt, and anxiety.

[...] I am telling you again, therefore, that many of your ideas of good and evil are highly distortive, and shadow all understanding you have of the nature of reality.

[...] Only true compassion and love will lead to an understanding of the nature of good, and only these qualities will serve to annihilate the erroneous and distortive concepts of evil.

[...] You deny yourself many of these advantages however through the artificial alienation that you have set up by your present wake-sleep patterns, to which, again, your ideas of good and evil are intimately connected.

[...] Your beliefs of good and evil will become much more clear to you, and you will no longer need to project repressed tendencies out upon others in exaggerated fashion.

[...] They will ascribe it to primitive or evil or unconscious sources, and even attempt to censor their dreams in that regard. [...] If sex is equated with evil, the other group will of course be considered evil.

Good evening.

[...] You will then consider goodness and powerlessness to be somewhat synonymous, and equate power with evil. Not wanting to face such “evil” in yourself, you may then direct it outward and transfer it to another area.

(Pause.) Love is propelled by all of the elements of natural aggression, and it is powerful; yet because you have made such divisions between good and evil, love appears to be weak and violence strong. [...] The “devil” becomes a powerful evil figure, for example. [...]

[...] (Pause.) If you accept the basic idea that evil is more powerful than good, then your beneficial acts will bear little fruit because of your own framework; you assign such small power of action to them.

[...] If you believe that wealth is evil, as an example, you automatically rob yourself of any ability that might bring you riches. Talents that are accepted as good in themselves may be inhibited simply because their fulfillment might lead to success in financial terms.

[...] Again, good and evil and the freedom of choice came to the species’ aid. The evil animal was the natural predator, for example. [...]

Good and evil then simply represented the birth of choices, initially in terms of survival, where earlier instinct alone had provided all that was needed. [...]

[...] Good and evil, the desirable and the less so, were invaluable aids then in helping form the basis for such separations.

[...] Many of my readers may have certain ideas about good and evil that are very hampering. [...]

If you see evil all about you in physical life, and if it seems to outweigh the good, then you are not ready. [...]

If your ideas of good and evil are rigorous, unbending, then you do not have the understanding that is necessary for any conscious manipulation in this other dimension. [...]

If you believe all men are evil, you simply will not experience the goodness in men. [...]

[...] If you are obsessed with the idea of evil, then you will meet evil conditions. [...]

[...] With the eraser the “evil hand” would try to rub out all of the good, and at the same time the “good hand” would be trying to erase all of the evil. [...] You will have a tendency to consider the body with its natural appetites wrong, and deny them, while at the same time the physical part of you will look upon your “good intents” as wrong, and infringements upon its own existence.

[...] A rigid, dogmatic concept of good and evil will force you to perceive physical existence as a battleground of opposing forces, with the poor unwary soul almost as a buffer. Or you will think of the poor soul as a blackboard eraser, slapped between two hands — one good and one evil.

In such a case, you will have already been convinced of the power of evil. [...] You may be filled with the feeling that you are in the midst of a great cosmic struggle between the forces of good and evil — and indeed, this often represents a valid picture of your own view of the world.

Now: Good evening —

[...] They were intense encounters with good and evil as you understood them at the time and when you acted, you acted according to your terms of good and evil. Therefore, be careful of those ideas now that you entertain of good and evil. [...]

[...] Now, I tell you, and I have told you many times, and regardless of how intellectually confusing it may sound to you in greater terms, there simply is no evil. And as long as you are aware of what seems to be evil effects then you are still in ignorance. [...] Whatever violence you did you did because you thought it was good and met a worthy end then; therefore, be careful of those ideas that you entertain now and what you will do to defend them. [...]

[...]  There is good without evil and this is simply the state of your understanding at this time. [...]

[...] Now you knew what you were supposed to do last week and it took you a good two hours to do it and now you want a medal. [...]

[...] Now you have some idea in your head that good is gentle and bad is violent and that no violence can be good and this is because in your mind, violence and destruction are the same thing. Now by this analogy, you see, the soft voice is the holy voice and the loud voice is the wicked voice and the firm step is the bad voice and the soft step is the good voice and a strong desire is the bad desire and a weak one the good one so that you become afraid of projecting ideas outward or desires outward, for in the back of your mind you think that what is powerful is evil and what is weak is good and must be protected and coddled and prayed for and begged for. [...]

[...] You were terrified of it because you are terrified of the idea that evil is more powerful than good, and that one stray violent thought of yours was more important and more powerful than the vitality of good. [...]

[...] The holy soul turned inside out is some fleshpot, let’s put it that way, but you have always been involved with questions concerning good and evil and you had two existences in two civilizations in Egypt. [...]

[...] Good, in your terms, can be as noisy as I can be noisy. [...] And now, after having said good evening many times, out of the goodness of my heart, for I am not weary, I bid you once again a blessed and violent good evening. [...]

[...] He believed in an idealized good, while believing most firmly and simultaneously that man was fatally flawed (loudly), filled with evil, more naturally given to bad rather than good intent. He believed in the absolute necessity of power, while convinced at the same time that he did not possess it; and further, he believed that in the most basic terms the individual was powerless to alter the devastating march of evil and corruption that he saw within the country, and in all the other countries of the world. No matter how much power he achieved, it seemed to him that others had more — other people, other groups, other countries — but their power he saw as evil. For while he believed in the existence of an idealized good, he felt that the wicked were powerful and the good were weak and without vigor.

Before we end this particular section of the book, dealing with frightened people, idealism, and interpretations of good and evil, there is another instance that I would like to mention. [...]

[...] The President felt threatened — and not only personally threatened, for he felt that the good for which he stood in his own mind was in peril (intently). And again, since the idealized good seemed too remote and difficult to achieve, any means was justified. [...]

So how can the well-meaning idealist know whether or not his good intent will lead to some actualization? How can he know, or how can she know, whether or not this good intent might in fact lead to disastrous conditions? [...]

[...] Acts which fit in with the good-intended universe, in which basically each life and detail, seeking its good, also works for the good of all others, bring forth what you call good acts—simple enough acts which are not well-intentioned in that light, toward the self or others “do not work right.” [...] They bring pain, sorrow, or illness to the self or to others, and they are often called evil acts. [...]

(As we were eating lunch today Jane said she thought Seth would discuss the question of good and evil, re our conversation on those subjects the other day. [...] Once I’d written it down, I saw that its subject matter fit in very well with the idea of good and evil, and told Jane I hoped Seth would use it in any discussion of his own.

You have been considering the nature of good and evil, and in your dream you presented yourself with a capsule demonstration. It is good to eat, and each creature seeks food. [...]

[...] The animals follow the rule of good intentions, in which unconsciously, in your terms, the good of one does serve the good of all.

[...] (Pause.) Dineen heartily believes in good and evil; so, being convinced that she was at the mercy of demoniacal forces, she began to pray. As Ruburt pointed out, however, the prayers themselves were merely a weak surrender to the idea that evil is so powerful. They were not based on any real belief in the power of good, but only upon a superstitious hope that if bad forces exist, good ones must also.

[...] She is a heroine, battling cosmic forces of good and evil, important enough so that another person even wants to control her. [...]

[...] The man who has believed that he was evil may now see the world, or persons of another faith or political affiliation, as evil instead. [...]

Good evening.

[...] You are terrified of the idea that evil is more powerful than good, that one stray violent thought of yours was more important and powerful than the vitality of good. [...]

[...] You have an idea that good is gentle and bad is violent. [...] By this analogy, you see, the soft voice is the holy voice and the loud voice is the wicked one, and a strong desire is the bad desire and a weak desire the good one. You become afraid of projecting ideas or desires outward, for in the back of your mind you think that what is powerful is evil.

You have always been involved with questions concerning good and evil, and you had two existences in two civilizations in Egypt. [...]

Instead, I am telling you that the universe is a good universe. [...] Your own nature is a good nature and you can trust it. Because something is difficult does not mean it is good.

[...] As mentioned earlier, good and evil effects are basically illusions. In your terms all acts, regardless of their seeming nature, are a part of a greater good. I am not saying that a good end justifies what you would consider an evil action. While you still accept the effects of good and evil, then you had better choose the good.

[...] Your conception of good and evil results in large part from the kind of consciousness you have presently adopted. [...]

In your terms, the ideas of good and evil help you recognize the sacredness of existence, the responsibility of consciousness. [...]

Good evening.