出典(authority):フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』「2019/10/19 10:16:57」(JST)
EVIL | |
---|---|
プロフィール | |
リングネーム |
EVIL 渡辺 高章 |
本名 | 渡辺 高章 |
ニックネーム |
キング・オブ・ダークネス 若き闘将 |
身長 | 178cm[1] |
体重 | 106kg[1] |
誕生日 | (1987-01-26) 1987年1月26日(32歳) |
出身地 | 静岡県三島市 |
所属 | 新日本プロレス |
スポーツ歴 | 剣道 |
トレーナー |
アニマル浜口 天山広吉 内藤哲也 |
デビュー | 2011年5月13日 |
テンプレートを表示 |
EVIL(イービル、1987年1月26日 - )は、日本の男性プロレスラー。静岡県三島市出身。血液型O型。新日本プロレス所属。本名及び旧リングネームは渡辺 高章(わたなべ たかあき)。
幼少期、約10年間に渡り剣道に打ち込む[2]。高校卒業後、神奈川県横浜市に所在する医療専門学校に入学するも、わずか半年で中退[2]。専門学校中退後、アニマル浜口レスリング道場に入門し[2]、プロレスラーになる事を志す(同期に中之上靖文がいた)。2007年2月に入門テストに参加するも不合格に終わった。2009年12月に再度挑み、合格を果たして2010年2月に新日本プロレスに入門した[2]。
2011年5月13日、新宿FACEで開催されたLife Goes on!で高橋広夢と対戦し、プロレスデビューを飾るが敗戦した。デビュー後、しばらくは前座として活動。7月13日、KUSHIDAとタッグを組んで三上恭佑 & 高橋と対戦して勝利し、プロレスラーのキャリアにおいて初勝利を飾った。2012年には先輩レスラー達の胸を借りて試合をこなす。
2013年1月、初の他団体参戦となるNOAHに小島聡、永田裕志と共に出場。出場した全試合ではいずれも勝利を得る事ができなかったものの平柳玄藩、ランス・ブラバド、マーシャル・フォン・エリックといった相手とシングルマッチを行った。NOAH参戦後、新日本では田中翔、小松洋平などの後輩レスラーには勝利するものの自身より先輩のレスラー達には勝利ができずにいた。9月より永田とタッグを組んで出場、同月22日にはNOAHに永田と再び参戦してモハメド・ヨネ & 小川良成と対戦するが敗戦した。10月14日、KING OF PRO-WRESTLINGにて天山広吉をパートナーにK.E.S.(ランス・アーチャー & デイビーボーイ・スミスJr.)と対戦するが敗戦した。
2013年10月、海外武者修行によりアメリカへ遠征。同月18日、NWA加盟団体であるNWAヒューストンのイベント、NWA Invasion Houstonに参戦。外道とタッグを組んでキング・オブ・ザ・アンダーグラウンド(スコット・サマーズ & ライアン・ジェネシス)と対戦し、勝利した[3]。26日、PWS(Pro Wrestling Syndicate)のPPVであるRetaliationに出場し、アノアイ・ファミリーの一員であるランス・アノアイと対戦するが敗戦した。
2014年2月22日、ROHに初参戦。テレビ番組であるROH on SBGに出場してダークマッチでの4wayマッチにてサイラス・ヤング、カプリス・コールマン、マット・ターバンと対戦するが勝利を飾る事ができなかった。5月4日、カナダのオンタリオ州を拠点とする団体であるSMASHのイベントであるSmash Goldに出場。SMASH王座争奪トーナメントにエントリーして一回戦にてアレックス・ベガに勝利。決勝である5wayイリミネーションマッチにてマット・クロス、クリス・ヒーロー、ジョシュ・アレキサンダー、ケビン・スティーンと対戦するがベルトを奪取するに至らなかった。同月9日、カナダのオンタリオ州を拠点とする団体であるBCW(Border City Wrestling)のイベント、East Meets Westにて棚橋弘至とタッグを組んでジョー・ドーリング & タイソン・デュークスと対戦するが敗戦。5月10日、ROH & 新日本プロレスによる共催イベントであるGLOBAL WARSに出場し、マイケル・エルガンと対戦するが敗戦した。同月17日、同じくROH & 新日本プロレスによる共催イベントであるWAR OF THE WORLDSにてフォーエバー・フーリガンズ(アレックス・コズロフ & ロッキー・ロメロ)と組んでトマソ・チャンパ & マット・ターバン & ACHと6人タッグマッチを行うが敗戦した。同月31日、ミシガン州を拠点とするXICW(Xtreme Intense Championship Wrestling)に参戦。XICWライトヘビー級王座を保持するオーランド・クリストファーに挑戦するもベルトを奪取するに至らなかった。
6月8日、SMASHのイベントであるRival Schoolsにてクリス・ヒーローと対戦するが敗戦した。同月14日、ニュージャージー州を拠点とするJCW(Jersey Championship Wrestling)にて、JCWエクストリーム王座4wayマッチを行い、バンディード・ジュニア、リンセ・ドラド、リッチ・スワンと対戦するが王座を奪取するに至らなかった。同月22日、ROHのBest in the World 2014にてROH世界TV王座挑戦権争奪6人メイヘムマッチに出場し、BJホイットマー、ACH、タダリアス・トーマス、カプリス・コールマン、トマソ・チャンパと争うが挑戦権を得る事ができなかった。7月20日、SMASHのSmashapaloozaにてクリストファー・ダニエルズと対戦して勝利し、金星を得る。8月15日、ROHのField of Honorにてマーク・ブリスコと対戦するが敗戦した。9月6日、ROHのAll Star Extravaganza VIにてカプリス・コールマンと組んで4コーナーサバイバルタッグマッチを行い、ムース & RDエヴァンス、ザ・ディケード(アダム・ページ & BJホイットマー)、モンスター・マフィア(イーサン・ガブリエル・オーウェンス & ジョシュ・アレキサンダー)と対戦するが勝利を得る事ができなかった。
2015年7月4日、ROH on SBGにてダルトン・キャッスルと対戦して前半こそ攻めたがローリング・クレイドルを仕掛けられた事をきっかけに攻勢を逆転され、最後にバン・ア・ランを決められ敗戦した[4]。同月11日、ジェフ・ジャレットが主宰するGFWに参戦。真田聖也と組んでBULLET CLUB(カール・アンダーソン & ドク・ギャローズ)と対戦するが敗戦した[5]。8月22日、ROH Field of Honor 2015にてROH世界TV王座挑戦権争奪9wayガントレットマッチにて最後に登場してセドリック・アレキサンダーに裏投げを決めて勝利し、挑戦権を得た[6]。10月10日、ROH on SBGにてROH世界TV王座を保持するジェイ・リーサルに挑戦。最後にトゥルース・マルティニの介入からレフェリーが目を逸らしたところへリーサルから金的攻撃を喰らうとリーサル・インジェクションを決められ敗戦した[7]。
10月12日、KING OF PRO-WRESTLINGの舞台で、東京ドーム・IWGPヘビー級王座挑戦権利書を賭けて棚橋と対戦した内藤哲也の「パレハ(スペイン語で「相棒」の意)」として登場した[1]。試合終盤リング内に乱入すると、棚橋にジャーマン・スープレックスを繰り出し、試合後には棚橋の救出に駆けつけた後藤洋央紀に対して変形大外刈りを見舞い、K.O.に追い込むと内藤と肩を組みながら退場。バックステージでは内藤より「彼の名前は"キング・オブ・ダークネス"EVIL(イービル)だよ」と紹介されリングネームを変更、怪奇派レスラーとして内藤と結託した[8]。
11月7日、POWER STRUGGLEにて後藤を相手に凱旋試合を行いシングルマッチで対戦。EVILも試合終盤に後藤の昇龍結界を極められピンチに陥るが、入場ゲートから内藤が登場して試合に乱入した。内藤は後藤に急所蹴りを見舞いデスティーノを炸裂させると、状況を見かねたレフェリーより反則裁定が下り、更に遺恨を深める結果となった[9]。
同月21日、EVILは内藤とのタッグでWORLD TAG LEAGUE 2015に出場し、Bブロックにエントリーされた[1][10]。22日豊橋大会にて、内藤と長期欠場中のBUSHIらと共にロス・インゴベルナブレス・デ・ハポン(Los Ingobernables de Japón、略称 : L・I・J)を結成した[1]。公式リーグ最終戦の12月6日では、因縁深い後藤 & 柴田勝頼組を相手に勝利を収め、5勝1敗という結果で決勝進出を果たす[11]。同月9日、優勝決定戦にてG・B・H(真壁刀義 & 本間朋晃)と対戦、EVILは試合開始早々に場外戦に持ち込みラフプレーで攻め立て、中盤にはセコンドに付いていたBUSHIが真壁の顔面に毒霧を吹きかけるアシストを見せるなど試合を優位に進めるが終盤にG・B・Hの合体技、こけしインパクトが内藤に被弾したことから形勢が逆転し始めた。BUSHIが再度真壁に対し毒霧を仕掛けようとするもラリアットで返り討ちに遭わされ、本間のスライディングこけしロケット、真壁のキングコングニードロップと繋げられ、最後に本間からこけしを決められ敗戦した。結局は準優勝という結果に終わった[12]。
2016年3月3日、NEW JAPAN CUPに初出場を果たし一回戦でCHAOSの石井智宏と対戦した。最後は石井の垂直落下式ブレーンバスターを決められ敗戦するもEVILは何度も石井を追い詰める場面を見せつけ、ポテンシャルの高さを知らしめた。その後もEVILは石井を付け狙い同月12日、BUSHIと組み石井 & YOSHI-HASHI組と対戦しBUSHIの毒霧のアシストを経てラリアット、EVILを決めて石井から勝利を収め、EVILは試合後に石井の保持するROH世界TV王座を手に取り挑戦をアピールした。同月20日、EVILはRoad to INVASION ATTACK 2016尼崎大会にて石井とROH世界TV王座を賭けて対戦し、20分を超える激闘を繰り広げたものの敗戦した。
5月3日、レスリングどんたく2016にて後藤と対戦、EVILも序盤から場外戦になると鉄柵への攻撃を何度も繰り返して怯ませると、椅子を首に掛けてもうひとつの椅子で殴打してダメージを負わせた。しかしリングに入ると後藤は復活し打撃戦へと展開するが、EVILも後藤の攻撃を受け止めるとカウンターのラリアット、ローリングエルボーへと繋げた後にダークネスフォールズで追撃し、そして最後にEVILを決めて完勝した[13]。G1 CLIMAXにも初出場したが、4勝5敗で終わった。
11月5日、柴田の保持するNEVER無差別級王座に挑戦し最後は柴田からピンフォール勝ちを収めて第13代王者に戴冠したが、15日に柴田とのリマッチに敗れ同王座から陥落した。この柴田との闘いは、シングル戦線におけるステップアップになったと後にEVILは振り返っている。
11月7日、WORLD TAG LEAGUE2016にてEVILはSANADAとタッグを組んで出場したが、5勝2敗の予選落ちに終わった。
2017年1月4日、WRESTLE KINGDOM 11 in 東京ドームでEVILはSANADA、BUSHIと共にNEVER無差別級6人タッグ選手権試合・ガントレットマッチに参戦、三番手として登場し高橋&ファレ&ペイジ組と小島&リコシェ&フィンレー組を破り第9代王座に戴冠したが、5日の後楽園ホール大会にて中西&棚橋&田口組を相手に防衛に失敗し、同王座から陥落しわずか一日天下となってしまった。
8月5日、G1 CLIMAX27にて、IWPGヘビー級王者であり6勝0敗中のオカダ・カズチカから勝利を奪い連勝をストップさせる。
10月9日、両国国技館大会にて、G1の結果を受けオカダとIWPGヘビー級選手権試合を行うが敗北。
11月、WORLD TAG LEAGUE2017にSANADAとタッグを組んで出場。ブロックはAで昨年と同じく5勝2敗だったが、最多得点だったため、優勝決定戦進出が決定。
12月11日、福岡国際センターで行われた優勝決定戦でBブロック1位のタマ・トンガ、タンガ・ロアのG.O.Dと対戦し、タマにEVILを決め優勝した。
2018年1月4日、K.E.SとIWGPタッグ選手権試合を行い、SANADAとともに第79代王者となる。その翌日、シングル王座との二冠になるため、後藤洋央紀の持つNEVER無差別級王座に挑戦をアピールした。
2月10日、NEW BEGINNINGにて後藤の持つNEVER無差別級選手権試合に挑戦。後藤はこの一戦を「EVILの除霊マッチ」と称し、巨大な数珠を持ち込む。試合中にも数珠を奪い合っての攻防も行った末EVILは敗れた。しかし除霊マッチ敗北後の現在もEVILとして活動している。
2月20日、新日本プロレス公式サイトにて左眼窩庭骨折による欠場を発表。「旗揚げ記念シリーズ」「旗揚げ記念日」全戦欠場した。そしてNEW JAPAN CUPも不参加となった。その後、3月30日の後楽園ホール大会で復帰した。
4月29日、グランメッセ熊本にて前王者組のK.E.SとIWGPタッグ選手権試合を行い防衛に成功。
6月9日、DOMINIONでヤング・バックスとIWGPタッグ王座3度目の防衛戦を行う。試合はパートナーのSANADAがピンフォールを取られ、王座から陥落した。その後、アメリカ・サンフランシスコ大会でリマッチを行うも、掟破りのEVILからのメルツァードライバーを食らい、王座戴冠とはならなかった。
試合後、IWGPインターコンチネンタル王座から陥落し、その試合で王者になったクリス・ジェリコに滅多打ちにされる内藤を救出する。
7月、G1 CLIMAX28にエントリー。開幕戦でマイケル・エルガンに敗れるも、そこから4連勝をする。しかし、鈴木みのる、棚橋弘至、オカダ・カズチカに立て続けに連敗してしまい、優勝決定戦進出のチャンスを失う。8月10日、日本武道館での最終公式戦で6勝しているジェイ・ホワイトと対戦。ジェイの反則殺法に翻弄され、あわやパイプ椅子攻撃を食らうかという所でEVILを炸裂させ勝利、5勝4敗で勝ち越した。
9月、DESTRUCTIONのシリーズを通しザック・セイバー Jr.との抗争が始まる。17日の別府大会でのタッグマッチではジャックナイフ式エビ固めで敗れ、その後のアメリカ大会でのタッグマッチでも回転足折り固めで敗れてしまい、タッグマッチではあるが2回もピンフォールを取られてしまう。
10月8日、両国国技館大会でザックとのスペシャルシングルマッチが組まれる。が...試合開始前にクリス・ジェリコに襲撃され、戦闘不能状態となり試合はノーコンテストのなってしまった。この結果に対戦相手のザックが激怒し、ジムブレイクス・アームバーをやられるも内藤が救出に入った。
11月3日、IWGPインターコンチネンタル王者であるジェリコに挑戦するも、ウォール・オブ・ジェリコで凱旋してから初のギブアップ負けを喫した。
11月17日、SANADAとともにWORLD TAG LEAGUE2018にエントリー。総当たりリーグ戦で10勝3敗という結果となり、リーグ2位で優勝決定戦に進出が決定(勝ち点20でG.O.Dと並んだが、予選で敗れてしまったため、2位となった)。12月9日、岩手産業文化センター・アピオで1位であるG.O.Dと対戦。最後はパートナーのSANADAがラウンディングボディプレスを決め史上2組目の2連覇を果たす。試合後、G.O.Dの持つIWGPタッグ王座への挑戦をアピールすると、大阪城ホール、サンフランシスコで敗れているヤング・バックスも現れ、「ヤング・バックスにも借りがあるからな。まとめてやってやるよ!」とマイクをし、翌年のIWGPタッグ選手権試合は3WAYマッチとなった。
2019年1月4日、G.O.D、ヤング・バックスとIWGPタッグ選手権試合3WAYマッチを行い、目まぐるしい戦いを制し、2度目のIWGPタッグ王座を戴冠。翌5日、鈴木みのるとザック・セイバーJr.が王座挑戦をアピール。
2月2日、北海きたえーるでタッグ選手権の前哨戦としてザック・セイバーJr.とのシングルマッチが組まれ、丸め込みを切り返してEVILを決めて勝利する。翌3日のタッグ選手権試合でも、EVILでザックを戦闘不能にし、SANADAが鈴木みのるからフォールを取って初防衛を果たす。
2月23日、後楽園ホールでリマッチをアピールしていた前王者組のG.O.Dと対戦。最後はSANADAがスーパーパワーボムでピンフォールを取られ、約1か月半で王座陥落。
3月、2年ぶりにNEW JAPAN CUPにエントリー。11日、ベイコム総合体育館で札幌大会でシングルマッチを行ったザック・セイバーJr.と対戦。試合はザックの関節技にギブアップ負けを喫し、
1回戦敗退に終わった。
4月6日(日本時間4月7日)、マディソン・スクエア・ガーデンでIWGPタッグ王座とROH世界タッグ王座のダブル選手権試合にSANADAとともに挑戦するも勝利とはならなかった。
レスリングどんたくのシリーズ中は石井智宏との抗争に入る。きっかけはNEW JAPAN CUP決勝戦で組まれたタッグマッチで抗争が勃発。試合後もコメントブースで殴り合いにまで発展。
そして5月4日の福岡大会セミファイナルでスペシャルシングルマッチが決定した。石井とのシングルマッチは3年ぶり3回目である。4月26日の広島大会のタッグマッチではシングルマッチ前にピンフォール勝ちを取るも、福岡大会では垂直落下式ブレーンバスターをくらい敗北。
6月9日、IWGPタッグ王者組のG.O.Dに挑戦。途中、邪道の介入あったが、BUSHIが毒霧で排除。リマッチ成功かと思われたが、タマ・トンガに横入り式エビ固めで丸め込まれ、王座奪還とはならなかった。
7月、G1 CLIMAX 29にエントリー。結果は4勝5敗と3年ぶりに負け越しで終わったが、その後優勝した飯伏や、タッグパートナーのSANADAに勝利するなどインパクトを残す。
9月16日、ディストラクション鹿児島大会にて、IWGPヘビー級王座挑戦権利証を防衛した飯伏幸太の前に現れ、挑戦を表明する。
[ヘルプ] |
|
|
|
|
Evil, in a general sense, is the opposite or absence of good. It can be an extremely broad concept, though in everyday usage is often used more narrowly to denote profound wickedness. It is generally seen as taking multiple possible forms, such as the form of personal moral evil commonly associated with the word, or impersonal natural evil (as in the case of natural disasters or illnesses), and in religious thought, the form of the demonic or supernatural/eternal.[1]
Evil can denote profound immorality,[2] but typically not without some basis in the understanding of the human condition, where strife and suffering (cf. Hinduism) are the true roots of evil. In certain religious contexts, evil has been described as a supernatural force.[2] Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its motives.[3] Elements that are commonly associated with personal forms of evil involve unbalanced behavior involving anger, revenge, fear, hatred, psychological trauma, expediency, selfishness, ignorance, destruction or neglect.[4]
Evil is sometimes perceived as the dualistic antagonistic binary opposite to good,[5] in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.[6] In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving Nirvana.[6] The philosophical questions regarding good and evil are subsumed into three major areas of study:[7] Meta-ethics concerning the nature of good and evil, Normative ethics concerning how we ought to behave, and Applied ethics concerning particular moral issues. While the term is applied to events and conditions without agency, the forms of evil addressed in this article presume an evildoer or doers.
Some religions and philosophies deny evil's existence and usefulness in describing people.
The modern English word evil (Old English yfel) and its cognates such as the German Übel and Dutch euvel are widely considered to come from a Proto-Germanic reconstructed form of *ubilaz, comparable to the Hittite huwapp- ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European form *wap- and suffixed zero-grade form *up-elo-. Other later Germanic forms include Middle English evel, ifel, ufel, Old Frisian evel (adjective and noun), Old Saxon ubil, Old High German ubil, and Gothic ubils.
The root meaning of the word is of obscure origin though shown[8] to be akin to modern German Das Übel (although evil is normally translated as Das Böse) with the basic idea of transgressing.[9]
As with Buddhism, in Confucianism or Taoism there is no direct analogue to the way good and evil are opposed although reference to demonic influence is common in Chinese folk religion. Confucianism's primary concern is with correct social relationships and the behavior appropriate to the learned or superior man. Thus evil would correspond to wrong behavior. Still less does it map into Taoism, in spite of the centrality of dualism in that system[citation needed], but the opposite of the cardinal virtues of Taoism, compassion, moderation, and humility can be inferred to be the analogue of evil in it.[10][11]
Benedict de Spinoza states
1. By good, I understand that which we certainly know is useful to us.
2. By evil, on the contrary, I understand that which we certainly know hinders us from possessing anything that is good.[12]
Spinoza assumes a quasi-mathematical style and states these further propositions which he purports to prove or demonstrate from the above definitions in part IV of his Ethics :[12]
Friedrich Nietzsche, in a rejection of Judeo-Christian morality, addresses this in two works Beyond Good and Evil and On the Genealogy of Morals where he essentially says that the natural, functional non-good has been socially transformed into the religious concept of evil by the slave mentality of the weak and oppressed masses who resent their masters (the strong).[citation needed]
Carl Jung, in his book Answer to Job and elsewhere, depicted evil as the dark side of God.[13] People tend to believe evil is something external to them, because they project their shadow onto others. Jung interpreted the story of Jesus as an account of God facing his own shadow.[14]
Even though the book may have had a sudden birth, its gestation period in Jung's unconscious was long. The subject of God, and what Jung saw as the dark side of God, was a lifelong preoccupation. An emotional and theoretical struggle with the core nature of deity is evident in Jung'’s earliest fantasies and dreams, as well as in his complex relationships with his father (a traditional minister), his mother (who had a strong spiritual-mystical dimension), and the Christian church itself. Jung's account of his childhood in his quasi-autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (New York: Vintage, 1963; henceforth MDR), provides deep, personal background about his early religious roots– and conflicts.
In 2007, Philip Zimbardo suggested that people may act in evil ways as a result of a collective identity. This hypothesis, based on his previous experience from the Stanford prison experiment, was published in the book The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.[15]
Most monotheistic religions posit that the singular God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and completely good. The problem of evil asks how the apparent contradiction of these properties and the observed existence of evil in the world might be resolved. Scholars have examined the question of suffering caused by and in both humans and animals, suffering caused by nature (like storms and disease). These religions tend to attribute the source of evil to something other than God, such as demonic beings or human disobedience.
Polytheistic and non-theistic religions do not have such an apparent contradiction, but many seek to explain or identify the source of evil or suffering. These include concepts of evil as a necessary balancing or enabling force, a consequence of past deeds (karma), or as an illusion, possibly produced by ignorance or failure to achieve enlightenment.
Non-religious atheism generally accepts evil acts as a feature of human actions arising from intelligent brains shaped by evolution, and suffering from nature as a result of complex natural systems simply following physical laws.
The Bahá'í Faith asserts that evil is non-existent and that it is a concept reflecting lack of good, just as cold is the state of no heat, darkness is the state of no light, forgetfulness the lacking of memory, ignorance the lacking of knowledge. All of these are states of lacking and have no real existence.[16]
Thus, evil does not exist and is relative to man. `Abdu'l-Bahá, son of the founder of the religion, in Some Answered Questions states:
"Nevertheless a doubt occurs to the mind—that is, scorpions and serpents are poisonous. Are they good or evil, for they are existing beings? Yes, a scorpion is evil in relation to man; a serpent is evil in relation to man; but in relation to themselves they are not evil, for their poison is their weapon, and by their sting they defend themselves."[16]
Thus, evil is more of an intellectual concept than a true reality. Since God is good, and upon creating creation he confirmed it by saying it is Good (Genesis 1:31) evil cannot have a true reality.[16]
Christian theology draws its concept of evil from the Old and New Testaments. The Christian Bible exercises "the dominant influence upon ideas about God and evil in the Western world."[1] In the Old Testament, evil is understood to be an opposition to God as well as something unsuitable or inferior such as the leader of the fallen angels Satan [17] In the New Testament the Greek word poneros is used to indicate unsuitability, while kakos is used to refer to opposition to God in the human realm.[18] Officially, the Catholic Church extracts its understanding of evil from its canonical antiquity and the Dominican theologian, Thomas Aquinas, who in Summa Theologica defines evil as the absence or privation of good.[19] French-American theologian Henri Blocher describes evil, when viewed as a theological concept, as an "unjustifiable reality. In common parlance, evil is 'something' that occurs in the experience that ought not to be."[20]
In Mormonism, mortal life is viewed as a test of faith, where one's choices are central to the Plan of Salvation. See Agency (LDS Church). Evil is that which keeps one from discovering the nature of God. It is believed that one must choose not to be evil to return to God.
Christian Science believes that evil arises from a misunderstanding of the goodness of nature, which is understood as being inherently perfect if viewed from the correct (spiritual) perspective. Misunderstanding God's reality leads to incorrect choices, which are termed evil. This has led to the rejection of any separate power being the source of evil, or of God as being the source of evil; instead, the appearance of evil is the result of a mistaken concept of good. Christian Scientists argue that even the most evil person does not pursue evil for its own sake, but from the mistaken viewpoint that he or she will achieve some kind of good thereby.[citation needed]
There is no concept of absolute evil in Islam, as a fundamental universal principle that is independent from and equal with good in a dualistic sense.[21] Although the Quran mentions the biblical forbidden tree, it never refers to it as the 'tree of knowledge of good and evil'.[21] Within Islam, it is considered essential to believe that all comes from God, whether it is perceived as good or bad by individuals; and things that are perceived as evil or bad are either natural events (natural disasters or illnesses) or caused by humanity's free will. Much more the behavior of beings with free will, then they disobey God's orders, harming others or putting themselves over God or others, is considered to be evil.[22] Evil doesn't necessarily refer to evil as an ontological or moral category, but often to harm or as the intention and consequence of an action, but also to unlawfull actions.[21] Unproductive actions or those who do not produce benefits are also thought of as evil.[23]
A typical understanding of evil is reflected by Al-Ash`ari founder of Asharism. Accordingly, qualifying something as evil depends on the circumstances of the observer. An event or an action itself is neutral, but it receives its qualification by God. Since God is omnipotent and nothing can exist outside of God's power, God's will determine, whether or not something is evil.[24]
In Judaism, evil is not real, it is per se not part of God's creation, but comes into existence through man's bad actions. Human beings are responsible for their choices, and so have the free will to choose good (life in olam haba) or bad (death in heaven). (Deuteronomy 28:20) Judaism stresses obedience to God's 613 commandments of the Written Torah (see also Tanakh) and the collective body of Jewish religious laws expounded in the Oral Torah and Shulchan Aruch (see also Mishnah and the Talmud). In Judaism, there is no prejudice in one's becoming good or evil at the time of birth, since full responsibility comes with Bar and Bat Mitzvah, when Jewish boys become 13, and girls become 12 years old.
Evil in the religion of Ancient Egypt is known as Isfet, "disorder/violence". It is the opposite of Maat, "order", and embodied by the serpent god Apep, who routinely attempts to kill the sun god Ra and is stopped by nearly every other deity. Isfet is not a primordial force, but the consequence of free will and an individual's struggle against the non-existence embodied by Apep, as evidenced by the fact that it was born from Ra's umbilical cord instead of being recorded in the religion's creation myths.[25]
The primal duality in Buddhism is between suffering and enlightenment, so the good vs. evil splitting has no direct analogue in it. One may infer from the general teachings of the Buddha that the catalogued causes of suffering are what correspond in this belief system to 'evil'.[26][27]
Practically this can refer to 1) the three selfish emotions—desire, hate and delusion; and 2) to their expression in physical and verbal actions. See ten unvirtuous actions in Buddhism. Specifically, evil means whatever harms or obstructs the causes for happiness in this life, a better rebirth, liberation from samsara, and the true and complete enlightenment of a buddha (samyaksambodhi).
"What is evil? Killing is evil, lying is evil, slandering is evil, abuse is evil, gossip is evil: envy is evil, hatred is evil, to cling to false doctrine is evil; all these things are evil. And what is the root of evil? Desire is the root of evil, illusion is the root of evil." Gautama Siddhartha, the founder of Buddhism, 563–483 BC.
In Hinduism, the concept of Dharma or righteousness clearly divides the world into good and evil, and clearly explains that wars have to be waged sometimes to establish and protect Dharma, this war is called Dharmayuddha. This division of good and evil is of major importance in both the Hindu epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata. The main emphasis in Hinduism is on bad action, rather than bad people. The Hindu holy text, the Bhagavad Gita, speaks of the balance of good and evil. When this balance goes off, divine incarnations come to help to restore this balance.[28]
In adherence to the core principle of spiritual evolution, the Sikh idea of evil changes depending on one's position on the path to liberation. At the beginning stages of spiritual growth, good and evil may seem neatly separated. Once one's spirit evolves to the point where it sees most clearly, the idea of evil vanishes and the truth is revealed. In his writings Guru Arjan explains that, because God is the source of all things, what we believe to be evil must too come from God. And because God is ultimately a source of absolute good, nothing truly evil can originate from God.[29]
Nevertheless, Sikhism, like many other religions, does incorporate a list of "vices" from which suffering, corruption, and abject negativity arise. These are known as the Five Thieves, called such due to their propensity to cloud the mind and lead one astray from the prosecution of righteous action.[30] These are:[31]
One who gives in to the temptations of the Five Thieves is known as "Manmukh", or someone who lives selfishly and without virtue. Inversely, the "Gurmukh, who thrive in their reverence toward divine knowledge, rise above vice via the practice of the high virtues of Sikhism. These are:[32]
In the originally Persian religion of Zoroastrianism, the world is a battleground between the god Ahura Mazda (also called Ormazd) and the malignant spirit Angra Mainyu (also called Ahriman). The final resolution of the struggle between good and evil was supposed to occur on a day of Judgement, in which all beings that have lived will be led across a bridge of fire, and those who are evil will be cast down forever. In Afghan belief, angels and saints are beings sent to help us achieve the path towards goodness.
A fundamental question is whether there is a universal, transcendent definition of evil, or whether evil is determined by one's social or cultural background. C. S. Lewis, in The Abolition of Man, maintained that there are certain acts that are universally considered evil, such as rape and murder. The numerous instances in which rape or murder is morally affected by social context call this into question. Up until the mid-19th century, the United States—along with many other countries—practiced forms of slavery. As is often the case, those transgressing moral boundaries stood to profit from that exercise. Arguably, slavery has always been the same and objectively evil, but men with a motivation to transgress will justify that action.
The Nazis, during World War II, considered genocide to be acceptable,[35] as did the Hutu Interahamwe in the Rwandan genocide.[36][37] One might point out, though, that the actual perpetrators of those atrocities probably avoided calling their actions genocide, since the objective meaning of any act accurately described by that word is to wrongfully kill a selected group of people, which is an action that at least their victims will understand to be evil. Universalists consider evil independent of culture, and wholly related to acts or intents. Thus, while the ideological leaders of Nazism and the Hutu Interhamwe accepted (and considered it moral) to commit genocide, the belief in genocide as fundamentally or universally evil holds that those who instigated this genocide are actually evil. Hitler considered it a moral duty to destroy Jews because he saw them as the root of all of Germany's ills and the violence associated with communism.[38] Osama bin Laden found it moral to kill all Christians and Jews because he saw Islam as under attack by Western and US influence, accusing the US and Israel of forming a Crusader-Zionist alliance to destroy Islam, and considering US troops in Saudi Arabia infidels in the land of Islam's two holiest sites. He therefore considered non-Muslims and Shiite Muslims evil people intent on destroying Islamic purity and therefore heretic.[39]
Given his mixed record of efforts to give the Cuban people free-of-charge healthcare and education as well as opposing US hegemony in Latin America, while crushing all opposition and wrecking the Cuban economy, Fidel Castro saw himself as a Caribbean Robin Hood who considered the US and capitalism evil, while anti-Castro Cuban Americans, Cuban dissidents, and other anti-communists saw Castro as the personification of evil in late 20th-century Cuban and Latin American history, viewing his Castroist ideology as just as evil as any other form of communism and bashing him for locking up dissidents and killing innocents by firing squads, while creating mayhem in the developing world by working to foment violent communist revolutions in the Americas and many African countries.[40][41][42]
Views on the nature of evil belong to the branch of philosophy known as ethics—which in modern philosophy is subsumed into three major areas of study:[7]
One school of thought that holds that no person is evil and that only acts may be properly considered evil. Psychologist and mediator Marshall Rosenberg claims that the root of violence is the very concept of evil or badness. When we label someone as bad or evil, Rosenberg claims, it invokes the desire to punish or inflict pain. It also makes it easy for us to turn off our feelings towards the person we are harming. He cites the use of language in Nazi Germany as being a key to how the German people were able to do things to other human beings that they normally would not do. He links the concept of evil to our judicial system, which seeks to create justice via punishment—punitive justice—punishing acts that are seen as bad or wrong.[citation needed]He contrasts this approach with what he found in cultures[which?] where the idea of evil was non-existent. In such cultures[citation needed] when someone harms another person, they are believed to be out of harmony with themselves and their community, are seen as sick or ill and measures are taken to restore them to a sense of harmonious relations with themselves and others.
Psychologist Albert Ellis agrees, in his school of psychology called Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy, or REBT. He says the root of anger, and the desire to harm someone, is almost always related to variations of implicit or explicit philosophical beliefs about other human beings. He further claims that without holding variants of those covert or overt belief and assumptions, the tendency to resort to violence in most cases is less likely.
American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.[43] The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.
According to Peck, an evil person:[43][45]
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.
Martin Luther argued that there are cases where a little evil is a positive good. He wrote, "Seek out the society of your boon companions, drink, play, talk bawdy, and amuse yourself. One must sometimes commit a sin out of hate and contempt for the Devil, so as not to give him the chance to make one scrupulous over mere nothings ... "[48]
According to the "realist" schools of political philosophy, leaders should be indifferent to good or evil, taking actions based only upon advantage; this approach to politics was put forth most famously by Niccolò Machiavelli, a 16th-century Florentine writer who advised tyrants that "it is far safer to be feared than loved."[49]
The international relations theories of realism and neorealism, sometimes called realpolitik advise politicians to explicitly ban absolute moral and ethical considerations from international politics, and to focus on self-interest, political survival, and power politics, which they hold to be more accurate in explaining a world they view as explicitly amoral and dangerous. Political realists usually justify their perspectives by stating that morals and politics should be separated as two unrelated things, as exerting authority often involves doing something not moral. Machiavelli wrote: "there will be traits considered good that, if followed, will lead to ruin, while other traits, considered vices which if practiced achieve security and well being for the prince."[49]
Anton LaVey, founder of the Church of Satan, was a materialist and claimed that evil is actually good. He was responding to the common practice of describing sexuality or disbelief as evil, and his claim was that when the word evil is used to describe the natural pleasures and instincts of men and women or the skepticism of an inquiring mind, the things called and feared as evil are really non-evil and in fact good.[50]
Notes
Further reading
Look up evil in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Evil |
Good and evil | |
---|---|
Theories |
|
Ethics | |
---|---|
Theories |
|
Concepts |
|
Philosophers |
|
Applied ethics |
|
Meta-ethics |
|
Related articles |
|
|
Hamartiology | |
---|---|
| |
|
全文を閲覧するには購読必要です。 To read the full text you will need to subscribe.
拡張検索 | 「Bourneville disease」「Bourneville's disease」「Bourneville-Pringle disease」 |
[★] 結節性硬化症、ブルヌヴィーユ・プリングル病、ブルヌヴィーユ病
[★] 結節性硬化症、ブルヌヴィーユ・プリングル病、ブルヌヴィーユ病
.