Sounds like that Monty Python skit, "I'd like an argument, please!" If you're still interested in a thoughtful discussion, would you like to suggest a specific topic of debate, or perhaps ask a question?
[emoji4]
Then I'd like to thank you for helping me think this through. I have a better idea what forgiveness is than I had before. It was worth the effort to me.
[emoji4][emoji106]
LOL! Are you sure you disagree?
I mean, to forgive, one must use skill to attain a state is non-hate. Non-hate can be compassion, but can also be apathy. So why can't apathy be the sole cause of forgiveness, for the less compassionate among us?
Yes, you would think so. But Spock explains from time to time that Vulcans are capable of feeling emotions even more strongly than humans, hence their motivation to suppress them and develop the skill of apathy.
I agree with your premise about Buddha. I was having fun by using hyperbole...
Yes, you might be right. I think Muller found the word ambiguous when he translated it as love. You know (and I now know) that the word might just as well mean apathy. Perhaps he knew better but was trying to make the text more palatable to Christians of the time. [emoji849]
It would seem, then...
So it seems, then that the words of Buddha we are discussing are perhaps ambiguous, for they could mean:
"5. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time. Hatred ceases by non-hatred [which can be apathy, compassion or any other emotional state not having hateful emotions]."
Or am I making...
My apologies. I thought you were saying non-hate (or not hate) cannot be apathy, and apathy is hate. I now see you meant the opposite: Non-hate (or not hate) can sometimes be apathy, and apathy cannot be hate. Or am I still misunderstanding you?
You see? I'm thinking apathy cannot be hate, because hate requires hateful emotions, such as anger or resentment, but apathy is by its nature an absence of such emotions. Spock from Star Trek, who prides himself on his skill at suppressing all emotion, might be logically said to be apathetic...
Perhaps I'm speaking of apples and you're hearing oranges? When I use the word apathy, I'm speaking of an absence of any emotion, such as anger, resentment, empathy, concern, and the like. This would correspond to definition (1) given above, from dictionary.com.
So in the sense I'm using for...
Well, I thought apathy is a lack of compassion as well as a lack of hatred. It seems one who is apathetic is neither empathetic nor resentful--she simply doesn't care. I'm thinking that non-hatred is a lack of hatred. But are you saying this isn't what apathy is?
apathy
[ap-uh-thee]
noun...
If so, then I think Allfoak was paying me a compliment when he asked if I was a sociopath! For sociopaths are sometimes perpetually apathetic and feel neither compassion nor hatred. Who better to foster non-hatred then one who naturally feels nothing at all for anyone, even himself? One might...
Also, I'm willing to save time by considering the accuracy of the translation non-hate, without investigating the credentials of the translators, for now. Would you say that my inference made earlier about non-hate is correct?
That is, since non-hate is a lack of hate and a lack of love, is it...
My apologies. I thought those were phrases in a language other than English denoting maybe the religious group who uses the translations. Forgive my ignorant assumption. What do you know of these authors?
But please don't think I'm being bias against Buddhism. I use the same scrutiny when comparing translators of the Bible. Also, I recognize different sources and different methods of translating can result in contrary translations. For example, there are more literal translations of the Bible...