The Buddhist teaching that applies most directly to others is that of compassion, which literally means “suffer with.” It does not mean condone, forgive, understand, have sympathy for, or any of the other dozens of sentimental connotations it is given in the West. We speak of “practicing” compassion, which indicates that it is something we think we have a choice about, to either suffer with something or somebody or not, depending on our preference case-by-case. But this is a misconception; we actually have no choice — we suffer with others regardless of our personal preference, often in ways that are not obvious. For example, that some resort to stealing means that others must lock their doors. Both are forms of suffering.

In that it is built-in, compassion itself is neutral. But its poorly thought-out, intentional application can have unintended consequences that are not. Neutral, that is. If we lean toward empathy for victims, we err in punishing criminals. If we have too much sympathy for the criminal, what does that say about our compassion for the victims? In today’s climate, we suffer an ever-burgeoning prison system, with calamitous results for state budgets, for one result. This is a result of our way of practicing compassion for victims and their criminals, exacerbated by the ubiquitous profit- and politics-driven mentality. There are no easy answers here, and Zen does not pretend to offer any. It is a huge mess, a koan of epic proportions.