Is it possible to be

[George-ananda]

but if there’d been a Martin Luther King or Mahatma Ghandi among Germany’s spiritual leaders in the 1930s, perhaps the Nazis never would have held on to power.

My thought is that there probably were those with the potential to be Ghandi or King in Nazi Germany but they were easily imprisoned and killed by the intolerant regime. They never had the chance to become a big social deal. Countries like Britain and America were more tolerant/liberal places.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I believe it is more easy for one who stay away from society to do what OP ask

Yeah exactly, but I don't know if that's a challenging achievement exactly , if you manage to do that. People who manage to escape society probably find it wonderful for exactly that reason , that they get the boundary to where they can respect others more fully, but barely anyone can get the skill set to live like a hermit or nomad and survive. So it's a challenging physical and mental achievement, probably, to live like that, but it obviates the challenge of relating to others, because you no longer do it much

Now if you are entangled with people, like I am, it gets a bit harder. When you have kooky family that you are entangled with, and hard to deal with coworkers, and don't have the resilience or skill to live out on the road, or in the wild.. Then that is where I try to develop all of those social coping skills, because I have to.

 

[InChrist]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

The Bible encourages Christians to live peaceably with everyone as much as it depends on yourself, if it is possible to do so. For the most part I don’t think that it is difficult to be at peace with others.
Yet, there are those times when one much break off relationships if peace and/or safety is not possible. For example: with abusive or dangerous people.

Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Romans 12:17-18

 

[ajay0]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

Yes, the enlightened sage can be at peace with everyone, and can convert even diabolical beings into angels with his very presence.

There are stories of ashrams in India inhabited by enlightened sages both in the past and present. In the vicinity of these ashrams extending to a certain radius, it has been found that even predator animals exhibiting a nonviolent nature. People walking in these areas are found to have good thoughts and performing good actions spontaneously.

This is because of the positive energies and vibes in these areas which have been consolidated for a long time, exerting an influence on other beings.

In my own region, there is a nearby village where a female enlightened master lived for a period of time in the previous century. An interesting fact of this village is that the crime rate is pretty low along with lesser incidents of natural disasters and greater overall prosperity, compared to other villages around. There is a lot of positive vibes in this region, which made it a tourist destination of sorts in recent years.

 

[Jim46]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

I don't think it's possible for everyone to feel friendly and have friendly intentions towards me. I think that it's possible for me to feel friendly and have friendly intentions towards everyone else. Not saying that I've ever actually succeeded in doing that.

 

[RestlessSoul]

My thought is that there probably were those with the potential to be Ghandi or King in Nazi Germany but they were easily imprisoned and killed by the intolerant regime. They never had the chance to become a big social deal. Countries like Britain and America were more tolerant/liberal places.

Fair point. It’s easier to challenge injustice in a society that tolerates challenge to power, than in one which allows no questioning of authority.

In the other hand, intolerant regimes may ultimately be more vulnerable to challenge than those which are willing to listen to dissenting voices from within.Perhaps Nelson Mandela and apartheid South Africa might be a better example in this context

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Hating his guts almost certainly isn't good for yours.

Living next to him isn't either. You have no idea what we need to deal with almost every day. They are a bunch of loud, dirty, smelly bums with 0 respect for neighbors. They make our lives pretty miserable.

The second we find another suitable home, we'll buy it and move the hell out.
Living next to those bums is just a source of immense stress.

People "hate" for much less.

 

[George-ananda]

Fair point. It’s easier to challenge injustice in a society that tolerates challenge to power, than in one which allows no questioning of authority.

In the other hand, intolerant regimes may ultimately be more vulnerable to challenge than those which are willing to listen to dissenting voices from within.Perhaps Nelson Mandela and apartheid South Africa might be a better example in this context

Hitler would have had his Mandela 'disappear'. There was international attention supporting Mandela that South Africa cared about.

 

[Twilight Hue]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

No. So I don't worry about it.

That's why I'm at peace with it.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Living next to him isn't either. You have no idea what we need to deal with almost every day. They are a bunch of loud, dirty, smelly bums with 0 respect for neighbors. They make our lives pretty miserable.

The second we find another suitable home, we'll buy it and move the hell out.
Living next to those bums is just a source of immense stress.

People "hate" for much less.

Ouch. Sounds grim. Good luck.

 

[blü 2]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Only in theory. I can't think of any practical way to bring all human views and needs to a single reconciliation.

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

And not be a psychopath or narcissist? I very much doubt it.

In fact I can't see why it'd be a good idea anyway ─ when trying to understand things, one should approach them with a skeptical outlook, including towards oneself.

 

[robocop (actually)]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

Yes, just be a peacemaker. Metallica said, "He tried to please them all, this bitter man he is." I have always wanted to be better than Metallica and have spent most my life trying to please everyone.

 

[Deeje]

In your own view, is it possible to be at peace with everyone?

Is it even possible to never have a negative thought about others or once self?

If yes, how?
If no, why?

In a perfect world...yes it would be possible.....

But in this one, there is no way because it would mean sanctioning evil things for the sake of peace. Martyrs have died standing up to powerful bullies who tried to stop them spreading God’s message of a peaceful world to come......a place where such men would never be invited....I’ll wait...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't see what morality has to do with not loving a child murder.

As i said. You cannot blame a wall for the builder

Personally, I hold dislike for a person as a response to trauma. When I'm no longer in danger and I cannot control the other person's actions and feelings, the dislike affects me. I'm neutral about it. I have no reason to like or dislike a person when their behavior no longer puts me in danger to have strong emotions against that person (it's harming me not that other person).

Dislike in this case doesn't mean liking chocolate over strawberry. It's more holding a grudge against someone(s) and when that grudge isn't lifted to many in trauma it does worse. Best to assess one's feelings and drop the grudge/dislike. Doesn't mean the other gets a flying pass, just means one isn't affected by it.

 

[ChristineM]

Personally, I hold dislike for a person as a response to trauma. When I'm no longer in danger and I cannot control the other person's actions and feelings, the dislike affects me. I'm neutral about it. I have no reason to like or dislike a person when their behavior no longer puts me in danger to have strong emotions against that person (it's harming me not that other person).

Dislike in this case doesn't mean liking chocolate over strawberry. It's more holding a grudge against someone(s) and when that grudge isn't lifted to many in trauma it does worse. Best to assess one's feelings and drop the grudge/dislike. Doesn't mean the other gets a flying pass, just means one isn't affected by it.

Some things affect you for life, i guess you have never been there yet, lucky you

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Some things affect you for life, i guess you have never been there yet, lucky you

Yes. I have. But my trauma was child upbringing and teen years. I'm safe now and can see things a bit more clearly than I would have then.

I've never used I dislike a person before that I remember. I've always said... I dislike how I was treated, dislike how I was seen, and so forth.

It's always been about the action.

If your experiences still affect how you see those to blame that's something you may or may not need to work through. If not, so be. Trauma affects people differently.

Don't let other people's behavior define your character.

Or does it?

 

[ChristineM]

Yes. I have. But my trauma was child upbringing and teen years. I'm safe now and can see things a bit more clearly than I would have then.

I've never used I dislike a person before that I remember. I've always said... I dislike how I was treated, dislike how I was seen, and so forth.

It's always been about the action.

If your experiences still affect how you see those to blame that's something you may or may not need to work through. If not, so be. Trauma affects people differently.

Don't let other people's behavior define your character.

Or does it?

It is the person who deals the action. The action may be the cause of the hurt but the person dishing out that action is why.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It is the person who deals the action. The action may be the cause of the hurt but the person dishing out that action is why.

Yes. It's fine to dislike. I just see it defined how I see people in general (my morals) there's a problem. I'm indifferent now. If I experienced something else later in life due to human nature of course there would be dislike and hate.

What I don't like personally is choosing to make someone suffer because of one's experiences. Some people come to forgiving their child's murderer (probably rare) and go on with their lives.

Trauma does change our character to an extent. Depends on how you channel your dislike on a person.


-
My point is if dislike changes your character there's no place for it. Long as you're safe body and mind it's all good. It has its place

 

[ChristineM]

Yes. It's fine to dislike. I just see it defined how I see people in general (my morals) there's a problem. I'm indifferent now. If I experienced something else later in life due to human nature of course there would be dislike and hate.

What I don't like personally is choosing to make someone suffer because of one's experiences. Some people come to forgiving their child's murderer (probably rare) and go on with their lives.

Trauma does change our character to an extent. Depends on how you channel your dislike on a person.


-
My point is if dislike changes your character there's no place for it. Long as you're safe body and mind it's all good. It has its place

Nothing to do with morality in my view

Forgive or not, one still goes on with their lives

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Nothing to do with morality in my view

Forgive or not, one still goes on with their lives

It's individual. Trauma affects people differently. It never disappears just our perspective ideally would be different as we age and realize we can channel that energy in more helpful ways.

It's fine at a time of crisis to say you want someone dead for harming a child.

It's another to say everyone should be dead for harming children.

The second one is when you made that dislike/grudge/whatever apart if your morals. Your value for children safety is to take out the people who harm them.

It's a highly individual matter. No one should judge what is trauma to another nor how it "should" affect people and how they interpret life because of it.