Love your enemies

[Fool]

Love (or unconditional love) for your enemies does not mean accept their behavior, though.

i never said it did. but think of it like a baby.. if a baby bit you, would you hate it? if it continued to bite you, to attack you, would you realize that it doesn't understand? or would you simply see it as out to get you personally, and view it as an enemy?


again, it doesn't have to do with physiology. it's psychological

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why do we have to think like each other to have valid points, though?

If I had a child and someone killed that child, why would I need to feel like the other is an enemy because majority people should feel this too?

I liked what Amanaki said:

When it comes to people harming me or doing me wrong, i see it more as a karmic repayment for something i may have done in the past, so when i "suffer" from what others do to toward me, it is more as paying my karmic debt. So actually those who try to harm me, is helping me to learn not to do harm toward them

Love your enemy does not mean respect and accept their actions. It means don't treat them like a dog.

What does that say about us when we see someone else as an enemy insomuch we can't love them as a human being?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Remember, some people are just sick

Well just because they are "sick" does not mean we should harm them back, maybe there is a reason why they act as they do.

 

[Jainarayan]

I've always loved The Buddha's point of view on things. There's another that The Buddha mentions it is not the other person's actions that proves our compassion but our actions toward others that does. So, if we cannot forgive and treat others of compassion "for our" sake, what is that saying about us apart from the people with whom we disrespect?

I read another story in which he says that if I buy you a gift and you don't accept it, whom does it belong to? Me, of course. Likewise with anger and forgiveness. If I am angry with you, but you don't accept my anger, rather, you forgive me, whom does the anger belong to? Me.

Or something like that.

I know in the christian religion, having forgiveness to the point of death is ideal. While I'm not sure most people would die for others, the concept of it would make sense, right?

Yeah, that was the whole Jesus-dying-for-man's-sins gig.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I read another story in which he says that if I buy you a gift and you don't accept it, whom does it belong to? Me, of course. Likewise with anger and forgiveness. If I am angry with you, but you don't accept my anger, rather, you forgive me, whom does the anger belong to? Me.

I love this one. I read it awhile back.

 

[ChristineM]

Not the person but the action. I can't hate someone as a human being. Their behavior yes, their person, no. I had an issue with my father. I don't talk to him much. I try to put barriers between him and I. I still love him. When he calls, I still talk to him. Just some things I don't respect and I tell him this. It's hard to forgive him but he is not my enemy. I can stop talking to him for years and I'd still feel the same.

Maybe the majority wants everyone to think alike but some people just don't.

i don't know what your father has done to you bet there is animosity there. However he is not a child that you have gestated and birthed. It is a different scenario and until you experience it then i dont think you can be objective about what you would feel.

There are other scenarios too, one example @Audie has touched on above.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

i don't know what your father has done to you bet there is animosity there. However he is not a child that you have gestated and birthed. It is a different scenario and until you experience it then i dont think you can be objective about what you would feel.

There are other scenarios too, one example @Audie has touched on above.

(I read) But why would I need to feel what others feel and share their point of view, though?

I've been through a lot before and still feel the same way. What does that say about a person when you can't love that person "as a human being"?

You don't need to accept their actions. You don't need to like their actions. You can disrespect them, and if you choose to unfortunately, spit at them. Some people say they should be imprisoned for their actions. Which makes sense, because that's why people go to jail because of what they do not who they are.

If we can't tell the difference between an action and a person based on a horrific event, then what are we saying about ourselves?

 

[ChristineM]

Well just because they are "sick" does not mean we should harm them back, maybe there is a reason why they act as they do.

By sick, i did not mean ill but sadistic, gaining pleasure from sadistic acts designed to deliberately inflict hurt.

I am not talking about harming them, we are talking loving them on this thread.

When a person inflicts such pain you literally have no desire to forgive and love, the most you can do is hope to forget and hope the nightmares stop.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Hypothetical, if a sadist got hold of you and spent
considerable time taking obvious delight in torturing
you, do you think you could want to achieve unconditional love,
or would actually care about understanding their motivation?

Those who have not experienced such a thing are of course
not fully able to say, but still, what do you think?

I know the bible says something about it, but then, I dont
take a whole lot of my philo from the bible, and I dont
much think its advice is always necessarily sound.

The above would be ideal but in this day's society, we rather kill people first and forgive them later. Our criteria and morals are based on other people's actions not on our own. I think it's also influenced by christianity and inherited sin. People "deserve" to die for their actions and it is hard to die for other people (unconditional love) when their actions go against our criteria of love. That's why they say jesus died for people is because they take on all the crapola we "think" we are inherited with to sacrifice himself and die with it.

That's probably why christians are christians to get out of that type of thinking. Though not all christians follow christ in that they still blame a person for their actions. Kind of a reflection of how they see themselves. i.e. I'm not worthy of christ.

 

[ChristineM]

(I read) But why would I need to feel what others feel and share their point of view, though?

I've been through a lot before and still feel the same way. What does that say about a person when you can't love that person "as a human being"?

You don't need to accept their actions. You don't need to like their actions. You can disrespect them, and if you choose to unfortunately, spit at them. Some people say they should be imprisoned for their actions. Which makes sense, because that's why people go to jail because of what they do not who they are.

If we can't tell the difference between an action and a person based on a horrific event, then what are we saying about ourselves?

All i can say is that i cannot understand your distinction. It is the human being who carried out the action.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

By sick, i did not mean ill but sadistic, gaining pleasure from sadistic acts designed to deliberately inflict hurt.

I am not talking about harming them, we are talking loving them on this thread.

When a person inflicts such pain you literally have no desire to forgive and love, the most you can do is hope to forget and hope the nightmares stop.

It's not easy to forgive and love. It's probably something many people won't do to their worst enemy. The concept is still the same, though. People literally won't love their enemies because they think in doing so they accept their actions. I'm not sure if those who feel "they are their actions" can tell the difference.

 

[Spirit of Light]

By sick, i did not mean ill but sadistic, gaining pleasure from sadistic acts designed to deliberately inflict hurt.

I am not talking about harming them, we are talking loving them on this thread.

When a person inflicts such pain you literally have no desire to forgive and love, the most you can do is hope to forget and hope the nightmares stop.

it is possible to love the person but not their actions, but it is possible to forgive them, especially if they have a mental illness that make them not knowing what they do.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

All i can say is that i cannot understand your distinction. It is the human being who carried out the action.

Think of a child. If that child hits his brother, do you stop loving your child or do you correct him on his actions?

If that child keeps thinking their parent is telling him he is not worthy their love because of his actions, that child would go feeling that he is his actions (inherited sin). However, he is not.

The nature of the wrong and the age of the person doesn't excuse the point.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

it is possible to love the person but not their actions, but it is possible to forgive them, especially if they have a mental illness that make them not knowing what they do.

Which is a good point, actually. If people are willing to forgive a person with a mental illness but not a healthy person, that means they put criteria on love. It should be no difference between the two.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Which is a good point, actually. If people are willing to forgive a person with a mental illness but not a healthy person, that means they put criteria on love. It should be no difference between the two.

I believe it is fully possible to forgive anyone

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If so, would it make sense to call the person you love an enemy?

No, it wouldn't. I generally assune that anyone who says that they "love their enemies" doesn't actually love them.

 

[Iymus]

Do you believe you can love your enemies?

If so, would it make sense to call the person you love an enemy?

as in respect yes. Nations do "at least on the surface" based off Geneva Conventions

Do you love your enemies?

unable to answer in words.

 

[Audie]

The above would be ideal but in this day's society, we rather kill people first and forgive them later. Our criteria and morals are based on other people's actions not on our own. I think it's also influenced by christianity and inherited sin. People "deserve" to die for their actions and it is hard to die for other people (unconditional love) when their actions go against our criteria of love. That's why they say jesus died for people is because they take on all the crapola we "think" we are inherited with to sacrifice himself and die with it.

That's probably why christians are christians to get out of that type of thinking. Though not all christians follow christ in that they still blame a person for their actions. Kind of a reflection of how they see themselves. i.e. I'm not worthy of christ.

This does not address what I was asking about.
Also, I am definitely not a Christian and think the
"love / forgive" is not merely bonkers, but profoundly
against human nature. The bible gets a lot of things
wrong, that is another example.

I dont think it is ideal at all to try to coerce people to
deceive themselves into a stance that they do not
and cannot really have.

if you wish to addresss the substance of my post here
it is

Those who have not experienced such a thing are of course
not fully able to say, but still, what do you think?

 

[Audie]

No, it wouldn't. I generally assune that anyone who says that they "love their enemies" doesn't actually love them.

Not to be cynical, which I am in fat not being, but
to me, what I see is self deception. It may be
a serious try at nobility, and it may be virtue signaling.

But I do not believe it, unless the offense in minor

 

[Audie]

Which is a good point, actually. If people are willing to forgive a person with a mental illness but not a healthy person, that means they put criteria on love. It should be no difference between the two.

"Love" with no criteria is not love.