How many degrees away can you be, from the clearly transgressional, to be not morally culpable at all? For example, if you are a gangster’s driver, are you kind of a gangster too, encouraging in spirit at least? If there are varying degrees we can be from the wrong, may we be as many degrees away as possible, to be as blameless as possible, if blameworthy at all.
What if you are working undercover, trying to gain trust of gangsters to infiltrate and take down the gang? Can you be enabling evil while saving from the evil at the same time? Where is the line to draw between being good or evil? Or is it a ‘dotted’ line at times? There should be aim, to be as skilful as possible, to seem ‘gangsterly’ perhaps to blend in, yet never really harming anyone.
If even organised criminals operating in the dark have their gangster codes sworn by to ensure warped ‘honour’ among thieves, all the more must secretly functioning Bodhisattvas have a stricter code, moral precepts and vows to live and die by, with understanding of their nuanced principles in practice. Those with their codes loyally abided by will ‘win’ Buddhahood for one and all in the long run.
Again, to resolve the moral koans of what to do and not in very murky situations, a sharp vision of the Bodhisattva Precepts for clarifying blurred lines is essential. Back to culpability, the constant turning of a blind eye to a transgression, especially if recurring in nature, is itself a recurring transgression too. It is passive enabling of continual crimes, by constantly letting criminals off the hook for more evils.
Related Teachings:
《楞严经·四种清净明诲章》第四重戒
Śūraṅgama Sūtra’s Section On Four Kinds Of Clear Instructions On Purity: Fourth Heavy Precept
https://purelanders.com/2021/05/15/fourth-heavy-precept
《梵网经菩萨戒本》
Brahma Net Sūtra’s Bodhisattva Precepts’ Text
https://purelanders.com/pusa