Thank you for reading Shy Guy Meets the Buddha: Reflections on Work, Love, and Nature. If you enjoy these mindfulness-themed biographical essays and would like to show your support, please consider becoming a valued patron for only $5 a month or a one-time donation of $50. Or if you like, you could “Buy me a coffee.” Thank you! 💚
It occurred to me the other day that a very human assumption, one that few of us question, is that moral behavior such as empathy and generosity, kindness and forgiveness, are virtues that are prescribed from a higher power or authority. I think even those of us who don’t believe in God still hold onto this feeling that there is fundamentally a right and a wrong way to behave, that karma is more than just logic.
I was journaling about this recently, and since I’ve been very busy with my day job as a remodeling carpenter and haven’t had time to publish a well-wrought essay for a couple of weeks, I thought I would share my [lightly edited] journal entry with you, rough and unchallenged though it may be.
Sept 20, 2025—I think we humans have mistakenly assumed that the things we think are good are not just good, they’re divine. Embodying virtues like love, respect, compassion, empathy, and generosity always leads to a more satisfying and fulfilling life, this is true, but that doesn’t mean these things are ordained from a higher, metaphysical source. Of course, biologically speaking, the actions that lead to more life and well-being are good—for us and others—and the things that lead to less life and well-being are not good (intentionally staying away from the term “evil”).
But when we decided that this logical system of conditions-and-consequences wasn’t good enough because not everyone cared to pay attention to the consequences of their actions, we invented religion. Now, we thought, we could make everyone be good. If they didn’t, they’d be punished with infinite suffering in the afterlife. (Ignoring for the moment the power religion gave to those not intent on practicing virtues.)
Eventually the average person assimilated the subtle and unquestioned assumption that being good is commanded somehow, rather than simply chosen, that there is some authority over and above the individual or the population that makes the rules.
I think there are no divine rules; only evolved, nature-based ones. I submit that being good is naturally good for us, and that is all we can and need to know. But we are for the most part not actually learning that simple lesson because of all our disparate, dysfunctional spiritual beliefs and assumptions.
The other day I heard on the radio that citizens of Gaza City are encountering a new threat to their lives: booby-trapped robots, sent in by Israel to force them into displacement (and obviously to kill them).
Any person or population that spends millions of dollars inventing explosive-laden robots for the sole purpose of killing large numbers of unarmed and unaware people at no threat to themselves is a group that has no understanding of love, compassion, and empathy, nor of how peace is obtained. Which is fascinating to consider, since the answer is so obvious; peace is obtained by being peaceful. It doesn’t take a complicated historical infrastructure of scripture and belief, bibles and temples, gods and angels—it doesn’t take any system at all—to understand that you create love by loving and war by warring.
It's our concepts and ideas that get us into trouble, in my opinion; that lead us to do the opposite of what is good for us. Concepts like nobility, piety, self-righteousness, superiority, nationalism, racism. And all of these concepts come about from belief. Belief that there is a certain way that we are supposed to be (by whose edict?), and that one group or system or idea fundamentally represents that way better than another.
Note that most rulers who reign over death and suffering believe they’re doing the “right” thing by their people or their religion, their country or their ideals. They are not, in their own minds, evil, psychopathic, or even criminal. They believe in something and will stop at nothing to achieve it or maintain it. (Granted, some leaders are just mentally ill, but most are recklessly trying to impose their idea, their belief regarding order or morality.)
I think we’d be better off if we dispensed with belief altogether. It only leads to division, because there is no way to prove one belief is right and the other wrong. Most likely, they are all wrong. Why do I say this? Because, say there are 99-trillion possible beliefs one could have regarding God, morality, and all those big life-and-death questions. If only one of those options is right, then the chances that one’s own belief happens to coincide with the “truth” are one in 99-trillion. That math doesn’t work at all, does it? Believing in anything spiritual, prescriptive, or dogmatic regarding the right and the wrong way to live doesn’t seem helpful or necessary to me.
I personally do not have any beliefs (if I say, “I believe people should treat each other with respect, what I really mean is that there is evidence to support my theory that treating others with respect is best for everyone; it’s not adherence to a faith-based morality that requires I believe something I can never know) but I’m not judging those who do; I’m judging when the believer takes on the role of enforcer of that belief. That always leads to violence and suffering.
I think all wars are religious wars because they always come down to two or more leaders engaging in a so-called battle of good versus evil, my idea versus your idea of how things should ultimately be.
We can live without all these “shoulds.” We are a rational race for a reason; we’ve evolved a sense of logic because it helps us survive. We can trust in the science (always with the awareness that theories can be disproven and replaced) and in our own powers of observation: Does my opinion about how my friends should treat me lead to warmth and understanding or to resentment and hurt feelings? Does my faith cause me to judge others’ behavior? Does smiling and patience and respect cause others to feel bad or good? And how does that make me feel? If I yell at my wife, who benefits?
It's so simple but we humans just insist on making things complicated with our opinions and beliefs and moral codes, don’t we?
“Simplify, simplify, simplify!” said Henry Thoreau, and there’s a reason such an unsophisticated quote has endured for over 170 years.
I’ll just repeat: We create peace by being peaceful, we cultivate love by loving, and we promote war by acting with aggressiveness and violence.
I know that I want to live in a world of peace and love, so my job is obvious, how about yours?
DB 🙏💚
I have thought for a long time now that the greatest threat to most relationships is the concept of how it "should" be.
I like how you basically turn this into a theory of everything.
Most (all?) of our conflict are primarily differences in our visions of "should".
Thanks!
I agree completely. I have a dear friend who is intensely religious and through him I first encountered the idea that people are only good in this life if threatened with a horrible afterlife. That is so far from true (and of course I could not convince him any more than he could “save” me.)
“Virtue is its own reward” sounds so pompous - both “virtue” and “reward” have a lot of baggage - but the sentiment is true. Loving and being loved in return is indeed more rewarding than a promise of something eternal after I die could ever be. Give me my instant gratification 😉
I think where it gets complicated… and I learned this April 25, 2025 so it’s very new and quite seared in the brain… is there’s a huge subset of the population with a different definition of “good” and “not-good” (your word not theirs). Good is what serves them. “Not good” is what doesn’t serve them- and not good has no scale of grandness - a small mistake they made that they must fix is “not good”. And everything else is acceptable. Even war, genocide, natural disasters, so long as it doesn’t affect them. These people are miserable. But because of how they measure “good” are much more likely to be in charge because the votes and status are so inherently “good” in their world view that they seek it. The criticism is “not good” so they punish it. And the massive problems cause no concern because housing/food/security doesn’t impact them.
This definition of “good” is not its own reward. The rewards are external and must forever increase and are never enough to bring happiness.
So even the simple good and not-good causes a huge division. I don’t have the solution. But the understanding helps. Which leads to more compassion and kindness and love. Which makes me happier while living in this world. So while it’s not a “solution” to the world’s ills, it is the solution to my own contentment and I’ll accept that.