View Single Post
Old 06-24-2007, 02:39 PM   #4 (permalink)
milligal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 112
milligal is a splendid one to beholdmilligal is a splendid one to beholdmilligal is a splendid one to behold
Default

I have to agree with that. In the same sense there are behaviors that must be controlled and some stopped because of the outcome they would have if let go.

I definitely think that many christian religions do not see the moral in the story and take these commands literal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Og View Post
I believe the point here is similar to buddhist detachment. Jesus has another quote in luke that says you should hate your mother/father/children/friends and your own life to be his follower.



I think that this is part of the philosophy of detachment. Find that middle path and don't let forces of fear and desire drive your psyche. Neither attachment or renunciation is the solution. Both of these actions tie you to an idea. But the middle path of negating the effect of external forces on your psyche is the fundamental point of what buddhism (and in my opinion, christianity) is speaking to.

Hate your loved ones and love the ones you hate. It's like the notion of the cyclone of samsara in hinduism where the point of enlightenment and attainment of nirvana is the calm eye of the storm where opposing ideas have no meaning (i.e. how jesus transcended heaven and hell with the ressurection).

I don't think that it means to literally love your enemies. I think they can still be your enemies but you must remove acts of malice in your classification of them as enemies.

There's a neat story about a samurai who's master was killed by a man. The samurai hunted this man down for vengeance. When the samurai finally had the man cornered and disarmed and had his sword drawn, the man spit in his face. The samurai sheathed his swords and walked away leaving the man alive.

The point was that his act would have been tainted by his own malice towards the man for spitting on him and not as an act of retribution and honor in respect for his master.

It doesn't mean that the two weren't enemies. It means that the behavior was rational instead of driven by fear and desire. This is the essence of enlightenment in the christian and buddhist sense.



So i would say that the answer is yes to the above. The point is to have rational reasons based on compassionate approach to all things in order to call them your enemy. Enemy does not have to be something that you HATE. It can be something that you are set against for very good reasons. Being an enemy of ignorance, for example.
milligal is offline   Reply With Quote