Is hatred always bad, if you hate what should be hated?

[perkele]

Schiff/Hoelzle 2020. Make America Smart Again.

I would campaign for hindsight 20/20.
Too bad I'm not American.

But who are Schiff and Hoelzle? Google won't tell me.

[lyndon taylor]

Greetings Alan,

But, are you really willing to sit, even when everything else is going to hell?

Not just sit, I'm also willing to support Trump.

...even when there are more things you can do to stop the world from going to hell?

I guess I could buy an official Make America Great Again hat to help contribute to his 2020 re-election. Thanks for the suggestion.



Metta,
Paul.

good example of why some things, not people have to be hated, evil has to hated if we are going to fight it, that doesn't mean hating evil people, but hating the evil within them.

[Stiphan]

"To loathe more evil and abstain from it, to refrain from intoxicants,[12] and to be steadfast in virtue — this is the greatest blessing." - Maṅgala Sutta, Khp 5.

It's good to loathe evil itself, but that loathing or hate should not be directed at a human or non-human being.

[DNS]

But who are Schiff and Hoelzle? Google won't tell me.

Adam Schiff is a liberal Congressman from California.
Hoelzle is some guy who takes great beach photos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Schiff
https://www.facebook.com/CoastalPhotogr ... lanHoelzle

[Sam Vara]

"To loathe more evil and abstain from it, to refrain from intoxicants,[12] and to be steadfast in virtue — this is the greatest blessing." - Maṅgala Sutta, Khp 5.

It's good to loathe evil itself, but that loathing or hate should not be directed at a human or non-human being.

I think it depends on what is meant by "loathe". In the context of the quoted sutta, the terms ārati and virati are used as a pair, and mean to abstain, avoid, or keep off or apart from. Thanissaro, for example, renders that particular line

Avoiding, abstaining from evil;

and Piyadassi

To cease and abstain from evil

and Dr. Soni

Avoiding evil and abstaining,

Narad Thera's translation of "to loathe more evil" seems in this context to be idiosyncratic or even possibly misleading. There is, as far as I can see, nothing of hating the evil, merely that the evil should be avoided; which means that the same strategy (ārati & virati) can certainly be applied to sentient beings. If there is anything in the Dhamma which is equivalent to the Christian idea of "Hating the sin, but loving the sinner", I haven't seen it yet. Are there any other candidates for it? Hating anything just seems to multiply the problem. In the context of meditation, physical pains or mental problems such as restlessness are made worse by hating them.

[Sam Vara]

good example of why some things, not people have to be hated, evil has to hated if we are going to fight it, that doesn't mean hating evil people, but hating the evil within them.

I would be interested to see whether there are any examples of things (presumably abstract qualities?) that the Buddha says have to be hated, and how we are supposed to do this. Normally he says that qualities are to be abandoned or avoided. Like other posters here, I can't recall the Buddha advocating hatred towards anyone or anything.

[dharmacorps]

Hate is intrinsically toxic and damaging to the mind. If you hate anybody, or anything, you are putting limits on your mind. If you limit your mind, you limit your wisdom.

Having hate in your heart is one thing. Believing in the righteousness in your hate is probably even worse-- delusion.

Trump or no trump, take care of yourself first. Before pointing out other's foolishness its best to start at home. I say that as someone with a long history of problems with ill-will/hatred.

[Stiphan]

Well, obviously, no reasonable person would love evil... if we are not to abhor evil, are we then to simply be equanimous towards it? By 'evil', I mean the evil things that people do. Evil, in the Dhamma of the Buddha is to be shunned and strongly criticized. I remember a sutta in which the Buddha noticed a worthless person in the community of monks and, I think Sariputta or Moggallana, grabbed him by the arm and threw him out. Didn't the Buddha "fight" with Māra and didn't He defeat him? Did the Buddha suffuse Māra with love? Or was he equanimous towards him? Perhaps the latter. But the Buddha also said that we should bear enmity towards none. I think evil - and the evil things people do - are to be abhorred and censured to the highest degree, for they lead to great harm to a large number of beings; but the evil people themselves are to be shown compassion - not hated - for they also harm themselves.

[Sam Vara]

Well, obviously, no reasonable person would love evil... if we are not to abhor evil, are we then to simply be equanimous towards it? By 'evil', I mean the evil things that people do. Evil, in the Dhamma of the Buddha is to be shunned and strongly criticized. I remember a sutta in which the Buddha noticed a worthless person in the community of monks and, I think Sariputta or Moggallana, grabbed him by the arm and threw him out. Didn't the Buddha "fight" with Māra and didn't He defeat him? Did the Buddha suffuse Māra with love? Or was he equanimous towards him? Perhaps the latter. But the Buddha also said that we should bear enmity towards none. I think evil - and the evil things people do - are to be abhorred and censured to the highest degree, for they lead to great harm to a large number of beings; but the evil people themselves are to be shown compassion - not hated - for they also harm themselves.

I can't see any distinction between how we are to treat evil people, and how we are to treat the evil qualities that motivate them and by which we know them. In the terms which you use above, both are to be shunned; both are to be strongly criticised; both are to be abhorred; both are to be censured. In terms that you don't use, both are to be avoided; abandoned; and given up. Some might see this lack of distinction as an aspect of the anatta doctrine. What being is there that is independent of their qualities? Some of course might not. In any case, in terms of the OP, I can't recall the Buddha advocating hatred for anyone or anything, including abstracted qualities such as intentions or predispositions or mind-states. Is there good dosa and bad dosa? I'm open to persuasion, especially by means of the suttas.

[Stiphan]

Well, obviously, no reasonable person would love evil... if we are not to abhor evil, are we then to simply be equanimous towards it? By 'evil', I mean the evil things that people do. Evil, in the Dhamma of the Buddha is to be shunned and strongly criticized. I remember a sutta in which the Buddha noticed a worthless person in the community of monks and, I think Sariputta or Moggallana, grabbed him by the arm and threw him out. Didn't the Buddha "fight" with Māra and didn't He defeat him? Did the Buddha suffuse Māra with love? Or was he equanimous towards him? Perhaps the latter. But the Buddha also said that we should bear enmity towards none. I think evil - and the evil things people do - are to be abhorred and censured to the highest degree, for they lead to great harm to a large number of beings; but the evil people themselves are to be shown compassion - not hated - for they also harm themselves.

I can't see any distinction between how we are to treat evil people, and how we are to treat the evil qualities that motivate them and by which we know them. In the terms which you use above, both are to be shunned; both are to be strongly criticised; both are to be abhorred; both are to be censured. In terms that you don't use, both are to be avoided; abandoned; and given up. Some might see this lack of distinction as an aspect of the anatta doctrine. What being is there that is independent of their qualities? Some of course might not. In any case, in terms of the OP, I can't recall the Buddha advocating hatred for anyone or anything, including abstracted qualities such as intentions or predispositions or mind-states. Is there good dosa and bad dosa? I'm open to persuasion, especially by means of the suttas.

One has to make a distinction, not treat them as if they were the same thing. How can you love the evil that evil people do? On the other hand, how can you hate a person or a being?

[Sam Vara]

One has to make a distinction, not treat them as if they were the same thing. How can you love the evil that evil people do? On the other hand, how can you hate a person or a being?

Of course, one has to treat them as separate things because - from our current perspective - that is what they are. But in many respects, they are the same, or at least the same things can be said of them. One of those things is that hatred should not be applied to either of them. Note that this does not mean that we have to love either or both of them. We are not asked to love the evil that people do. But on the other hand, we are not asked to hate it, either. That last sentence is my point, or rather my hypothesis: we are not asked or recommended by the Buddha to hate anything. As I said above, I'm happy to amend that hypothesis by means of quotes from the canon, or perhaps even commentaries which show that I have completely understood the meaning of certain terms.

[Stiphan]

One has to make a distinction, not treat them as if they were the same thing. How can you love the evil that evil people do? On the other hand, how can you hate a person or a being?

Of course, one has to treat them as separate things because - from our current perspective - that is what they are. But in many respects, they are the same, or at least the same things can be said of them. One of those things is that hatred should not be applied to either of them. Note that this does not mean that we have to love either or both of them. We are not asked to love the evil that people do. But on the other hand, we are not asked to hate it, either. That last sentence is my point, or rather my hypothesis: we are not asked or recommended by the Buddha to hate anything. As I said above, I'm happy to amend that hypothesis by means of quotes from the canon, or perhaps even commentaries which show that I have completely understood the meaning of certain terms.

You are 100% right there, maybe. I am also awaiting canonical quotations regarding whether we shouldn't hate anything, including evil or the evil things people do. I personally 'abhor' evil - I do not use the word hate, but it's more akin to 'disgust' or 'loathe'. However, I do not hate anyone. Also, do you not think you should oppose evil, in the name of good?

[Mr Man]

I personally 'abhor' evil - I do not use the word hate, but it's more akin to 'disgust' or 'loathe'. However, I do not hate anyone. Also, do you not think you should oppose evil, in the name of good?

Possibly related to this Stiphan?

The Guardians of the World

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... ay_23.html

[Sam Vara]

You are 100% right there, maybe. I am also awaiting canonical quotations regarding whether we shouldn't hate anything, including evil or the evil things people do. I personally 'abhor' evil - I do not use the word hate, but it's more akin to 'disgust' or 'loathe'. However, I do not hate anyone. Also, do you not think you should oppose evil, in the name of good?

Yes, depending on what it is, my understanding is that we should indeed oppose evil. The trick is, though, not to give in to hating as a means of getting rid of it.

[Stiphan]

I personally 'abhor' evil - I do not use the word hate, but it's more akin to 'disgust' or 'loathe'. However, I do not hate anyone. Also, do you not think you should oppose evil, in the name of good?

Possibly related to this Stiphan?

The Guardians of the World

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... ay_23.html

This is a great article by my teacher. It is about moral shame and fear of the consequences of wrongdoing, two qualities which prevent one from engaging in evil actions done by oneself, whereas I gather we are talking here about evil done by other people, those same people and our attitude of love, hate or equanimity towards those. But also evil in general, so that includes one's own unwholesome actions and their avoidance.