Hate

An idea: Lovingkindness meditation may be effective as a treatment. It starts with visualizing positive memories or a memory, then focusing on that. Then you focus on observing positive things about yourself and loving yourself, then focusing on someone you like and love, then focusing on more people and things that you like and loving them. Generally you work at radiating love. I tried it a little bit and found it was helpful to me, even though I wasn't very good at focusing. I can see how it might be a very powerful tool for snuffing out pain and rage. There is a youtube howto video about it, which I think explains it well.
 
Hate is one of the spiritual viruses that produces the disease known as evil.
 
This thread raises a very interesting point about the utility of negative emotions.

On the one hand, hate could be seen as a source of evil deeds and thoughts, a purely counter-productive emotion. Yet on the other hand, hate could be viewed as a tool with which to motivate the elimination of injustices, whereby it becomes an extremely powerful, potentially productive emotion.

While a world of pure love would lack injustice, such a world does not yet exist (and most likely never will). Therefore, we must combat such injustices - and love is not often viewed as an emotion conducive to combat.

I believe it boils down to intent. If one is using hate for selfish reasons and personal gain (the sort of hate that bhaktajan describes) than it serves no greater purpose. However, if one focuses hatred towards evil, then it may have its uses.

An argument would be that intent to combat injustice could be generated through the use of love alone - that hate is unnecessary, and may even warp you into the enemy you first sought to defeat.

Personally, I do not believe that love can overcome hate on the battlefield. Yet it is also my opinion that fighting fire with fire will only generate a more intense blaze.
 
fighting fire with fire will only generate a more intense blaze
Click to expand...

Military Tanks are covered with 'exploding plates' --that will neutralise the impact of missles that land upon the tank.

combat injustice could be generated through the use of love
Click to expand...

There is No love in the material world ---there is only mutaul consent to exchange of 'give and take'. That is why there are Laws & Labor Unions & Legal Representatives & Democractic constitutions.


we must combat such injustices
Click to expand...

I have been wondering if 'Justice' is just an after thought and NOT an actual state of affairs. IOW, it is not a NOUN; it is an adjective.

I have been thinking that what we are really refering to when the watchword, "Justice" march around is, "LAW AND ORDER".

"Order" should, ideally incorporate 'Justice' as a concominant factor ---yet "Order" would be the primary guage for a functioning society or business model or bank talley or scheduled laundry visit.
 
Ravanosh said:
On the one hand, hate could be seen as a source of evil deeds and thoughts, a purely counter-productive emotion. Yet on the other hand, hate could be viewed as a tool with which to motivate the elimination of injustices, whereby it becomes an extremely powerful, potentially productive emotion.
Click to expand...
Hello, Ravanosh. Some others have also posted that hatred can be useful, and some even feel it can be compartmentalized or limited to one thing or another. Each person's experiences are different. What you are saying sounds good though. What you are saying about society has an analogue in individual psychology: There is something psychologists call sublimation, in which negative emotions are forced away from conscious thought and forced into the subconscious where they can break down and become a sort of creativity.

Ravanosh said:
I believe it boils down to intent. If one is using hate for selfish reasons and personal gain (the sort of hate that bhaktajan describes) than it serves no greater purpose. However, if one focuses hatred towards evil, then it may have its uses.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying here. We should take hatred and divert it into some useful flow. I'm just not sure that just anybody is prepared to do that. A person that can channel hatred is strong, and yes everyone should be that strong. For those that aren't strong enough or that don't channel it, it sits in place and burns through the person.

An argument would be that intent to combat injustice could be generated through the use of love alone - that hate is unnecessary, and may even warp you into the enemy you first sought to defeat.

Personally, I do not believe that love can overcome hate on the battlefield. Yet it is also my opinion that fighting fire with fire will only generate a more intense blaze.
Click to expand...
Although letting hate in is inadviseable, I admit that a truly wise person can temporarily use their own hatred like a super power. How many people do you know that are able to do that? Still, that is not the same thing as holding onto it or letting it in.

Thanks
 
Ravanosh said:
On the one hand, hate could be seen as a source of evil deeds and thoughts, a purely counter-productive emotion. Yet on the other hand, hate could be viewed as a tool with which to motivate the elimination of injustices, whereby it becomes an extremely powerful, potentially productive emotion.

While a world of pure love would lack injustice, such a world does not yet exist.... Therefore, we must combat such injustices - and love is not often viewed as an emotion conducive to combat.
Click to expand...

I don't label myself "Christian," but I very much revere the esoteric teachings of the Master Jesus. Fortunately, some of his quoted lessons were more on-the-surface, such at this one: Love the sinner, but hate the sin.

When hate is viewed in this context, I think that it's worthwhile in some fashion. But I also think that what you think about, you become. So if you focus on hate--even the "justifiable"/"righteous" kind--it will still consume you over time; thus, it's much better to focus on qualities that you love about a thing, person or situation. And if you can't find something to love about it/him/her, then it's time to set your sights (thoughts) elsewhere.

With regards to love not being conducive to combat, I think that it eradicates the need for it (when employed properly, that is).

I believe it boils down to intent. If one is using hate for selfish reasons and personal gain (the sort of hate that bhaktajan describes) than it serves no greater purpose. However, if one focuses hatred towards evil, then it may have its uses.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with these points, but I still contend that one is better off setting his/her focus on love, rather than hate--even the justified kind. Be angry with the action, not the one who committed it. Use the feeling of hate as a momentary catalyst that spurs you to a greater action; do not wallow in it.

...I do not believe that love can overcome hate on the battlefield. Yet it is also my opinion that fighting fire with fire will only generate a more intense blaze.
Click to expand...

When faced with a literal battle scene, I think that it's necessary to fight. But don't do it with hate/malice in your heart. Do it because you believe that it's your duty to protect--especially others and/or your country.

As for "fighting fire with fire," I think that such a mentality leads to strong karmic ties (and not in a good way).
 
Interesting thread.

Like Greymare and some others, I do hate at least one person. For a time I allowed that hate to consume me, probably because there was nothing I could do. I was, and still am, helpless about the situation. After a time I realized the futility, and now that hatred is set aside to simmer on a back burner where it can be watched by a calmer head.

I think hatred requires a degree of care or concern or some other emotional connection. One needs to have a really strong emotional attachment to truly hate. And that strong emotional attachment can theoretically be turned into love, but I cannot say that from experience other than how I can so often love and hate the same person at the same time. But that hate is different than the hate I spoke of first, and yet I can't really describe the difference...whether degree, intensity or kind. For example...I love my mom (who doesn't?), but there are times when I really really struggle to remind myself that I love my mom. She's not the person I hate, BTW.

I think hate also gets confused with prejudice (like the term "hate crime"). Prejudice can feed hate, but the two really are different altogether. I have seen, and am occasionally guilty of, prejudice with absolutely no trace of hatred.

I am inclined to think the state of mind that is the greater sin than hate is apathy. At least with hate there is still an underlying emotional concern. With apathy, there is nothing, there is no emotional state left to work with. Having said that, there are two persons in my life towards whom I am completely apathetic. I don't hate them at all. I don't wish them harm, I don't wish them ill. I simply want nothing to do with them. And I sleep quite well at night.

In case anyone should wonder...the person I hate I don't even know, I have no face and no name. But that person stole the life of a person very near to me. They murdered in cold blood a person whom I love dearly. My hate fuels my demand for justice, not revenge.

Hate can make people react in stupid and unthinking ways. But so can all emotions. Our acts are never so blind as those committed under the influence of rage, or love.
 
juantoo3 said:
Would you say that of the mother-child bond, whether human or animal?
Click to expand...

I'd just like to note that in the case of a mother who has a certain type of personality disorder, there is no genuine love extended to the child. Instead, the child is expected to fulfill the mother's perceived "black hole" of needs. I know of what I speak.... :(

To answer your question, it is possible for the mother-child bond to not be a bond at all, but rather a one-sided system. In such a situation, the mother typically swings erratically between an outward show of love (for appearances sake) and a private expression of hostility (whenever she perceives her child as failing to meet her needs).

It is for this reason that I personally struggle with/vascillate between the feeling of hate for a person and for the person's behavior.
 
Would you say that of the mother-child bond, whether human or animal

Yes. In the same way that Buddhist doctrine explains how the ego is predicated upon "stuff" that we so-call "possess".

As a steward of our alloted obligations ---We are required to preform our duties, otherwise we can be arrested for "neglect". Thus causing shame.

But good steward-ship will lead to pride. So similarly so many good sons were sent off to war ---and their mothers/Fathers beheld that all their up-bring was meant for a wider-panorama beyond their local influences.

It is all an ego-construct, where the ego drives us; where the ego sustains us; where the ego commands us ---yet the ego is Temporal.

But also:
A crime victim is experiencing a "what goes around-comes around phenomena" [aka, bad-karma ~ 'ugra-karma'] ---yet, the policeman MUST instantly & selflessly pursue the criminal without misgivings for what may lay ahead during the pursuit; If the policeman neglects his duty to selflessly re-store civic order ---he will be guilty of a sin.
 
I've thought more on this:

"Love" IMO, is a 'Verb', an Action(s). Not a Noun.
"Devotion" is real love, in active apllication & practice.
"Un-conditional love" is 'selfless devotion' to duty.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
In Regards to "Mother's Love" and this forum site of 'High-minded' thinkers:

(Except for bonefide vegetarians) For Cow-flesh eaters ---after the Cow dries-up and stops giving milk ---this "mother-of-Human-society" may be eaten?


This is what passes for modern thought with integrity?
If one answers Yes, one would think there would be no reason for labor-union organisations; that it's a 'dog-eat-dog' world and that's the goal of it all.
 
Eating a cow is not dog-eat-dog, it's human-eat-cow. Different thing, entirely. I don't subscribe to the superstition that people are reborn as cattle or cattle reborn as people.

And given your assent to the amorality of Hare Krishna regarding lying, I have no need to believe that you believe it or anything else you post, either.
 
Eating flesh is not the same as 'flesh-eaters-eating-other-flesh-eaters" ---it's "flesh-eater-eats-grass-eaters".

The superstition that people are reborn as cattle or cattle reborn as people is only one possible senario out of millions of schools of fish in the cosmic ocean, along with just being obese, poor, uneducated and a refugee in a third world nation during any of the past several thousand human years.


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
And given your assent to the amorality of Hare Krishna regarding lying, I have no need to believe that you believe it or anything else you post, either.
Click to expand...

I have given no citation for whatever you trying to say "without saying" ---law courts around the world are filled with clientele that are not HARE KRISHNA MAHA-MANTRA Chanters. No.

Dogbrain, You are fully offensive and specious. You are being sophmoric and apparently no one is telling you so.

It should be obvious that my revolutionary propositions are presented my myself alone without aide form other posters.

If society's intelligensia had taken heed to THE HARE KRISHNAS ---they would still be free to pass out samples of India's Vedic literatures ---instead of full-body-searches FOR ALL!!!!

Again, Dogbrain, you are avoiding all the requisite protocol of bonefide scholarly argumentation. You are out of my league, Dogbrain. Thus your postings are all offensive without redeeming social value. You should be banned from posting anything anymore at this Interfaith Web Site, IMO.
 
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured. -- Mark Twain
 
Dream said:
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured. -- Mark Twain
Click to expand...
Exactly...once you understand the chemicals that your organs are creating to sustain hate and anger...it really questions the logic.

But I feel better when I vent/release/shout... No you don't. You are satisfying an addiction. You feel temporarily better, but succumbing your addiction to those chemicals which actually harm your body, only increases your reliance on feeding that addiction.

I prefer to be happy.

'But you'll be a door mat, you'll be taken advantage of by everyone'

that is a lack mentality proposition...and it doesn't happen. Well it may happen to an extent...to the extent you allow it....but that extent is so easy...allows me to live so much more happily....and doesn't last long...

When the cat doesn't run, the dog quits chasing it.
 
17th Angel said:
I find anger/ hate I guess you could call it, easier. It takes effort for me to be jolly, and majority of the time I simply CBA.
Click to expand...
Do you remember the scene in 'what the bleep' where it identifies the chemicals and how the cells become dependent on them...and then your individual cells send out signals requesting more of the chemicals...but the chemical or electroneuropeptide whatever it was would only be created by the anger/hate response...so it caused your body to start looking for things to lash out against.

To me a clear indication of how the angry old men and Mother Teresas are created...

Make the choice now how you want to be in your old age...when you are steeped in the addiction it will be a lot harder to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top