True Left

I feel like it’s hard to square our endorsement of hatred for enemies with the Buddhist texts, which instruct the opposite: to remove hatred and ill will, even towards bad people. One of the most famous quotes passed around is (from the Dhammapada) “Hatred cannot cease through hatred. It can only cease through non-hatred”.

I personally am still trying to figure out what I think of hatred, and whether (if at all) it should ever be accepted as an emotion for me to feel. You don’t necessarily need to feel hatred towards your enemies to fight against them. Although I think there’s a potential latent danger in destroying all feelings of hatred as a Buddhist monk might do, since you’re more likely to forget WHY evil needs to be opposed or fought against in the first place. That hatred is, if anything, a reminder

Also, I feel like the Buddhist concept of karma disincentives people from carrying out our version of ahimsa. From what I’ve gathered from the Pali Canon, karma is an amoral force, and isn’t supposed to necessarily be “fair” (one of the many reasons why Buddhists want to transcend samsara in the first place). So you might be in a situation where you logically deduce that ending someone’s life is the best option, even a justifiable one on a theoretical level, but the act of killing always puts you in a bad mind state and accrues negative karma. So if you want to carry out ahimsa, then you must be prepared to make a karmic sacrifice and (likely) end up suffering in one of the hell realms when you’re reborn

This conception of “karmic sacrifice” is probably how a lot of Buddhists justified participating in wars (including purely defensive ones). I’m not saying that the law of karma is wrong or doesn’t exist. I think it’s likely that the universe really DOES work this way. But I think it might sow doubt in a lot of people. Because if you’re about to carry out ahimsa KNOWING that you’ll suffer immensely for it and be tortured in the next life, then you’re obviously going to be a lot more hesitant than someone who follows a religion or philosophy where karma isn’t really a concept. Granted, the Buddhist hell realms are temporary, but you’re still supposedly there for a long time before being reborn again

It appears that the verse in question isn’t referring to dveṣa/dosa, as in one of the Three Poisons. The verse in question uses the word “vera” instead, which also means hatred:

https://dictionary.sutta.org/browse/v/vera/

The original quote below:

“Akkocchi maṁ, avadhi maṁ, ajini maṁ, ahāsi me”,
“He abused me, he struck at me, he overcame me, he robbed me,”

ye taṁ na upanayhanti veraṁ tesūpasammati.  [4]
those who do not bear ill-will towards this their hatred is appeased.


Na hi verena verāni sammantīdha kudācanaṁ,
For not by hatred do hatreds cease at any time in this place,

averena ca sammanti, esa dhammo sanantano.  [5]
they only cease with non-hatred, this truth is (surely) eternal.

Note that you’re specifically instructed to do this, even if the person actually did wrong against you. I feel like the Buddha just didn’t really care about justice or retribution. He only really seemed to care about eliminating suffering in the victims of samsara, and helping them to leave as quickly as possible

Let me illustrate the difference between hatred (good) and vera (bad) using a simple example. If X initiated violence against Y and Y decides to retaliate, but before being able to do so X is already killed by Z, if X felt hatred towards Y, X will be grateful towards Z (because Z gave X what X deserved), but if X felt vera towards Y, X will redirect the vera towards Z (because Z denied Y the chance for victory over X*).

(* This is a frequent wuxia trope.)