|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 16 2007 : 10:28:58 PM
|
What is the purpose of people hating each other, or is it completely without purpose, and evil?
Is it caused by fear of disrespect, feelings of being trespassed?
Does it stem from original separation from God, and feelings that can resultwith an ego, such as feeling worthless, unloved, invisible?
I feel the desire people have to hate each other is behind the religious conflicts that have been going on forever, and it has more to do with this desire than the content of the scriptures themselves. After all, we know God didn't cause conflict.
Recently I've been thinking; when ideologies clash, there is really no way to "convince" the other side of anything. People think when they are arguing it is the issues and how they are presented that counts.
But I think this is rarely the case. What really counts is whether there is desire to hate each other, or not. |
|
|
Kyman
530 Posts |
Posted - Jan 17 2007 : 04:26:32 AM
|
'A Course in Miracles' has beautiful things to say about this subject.
There is a system to hatred. It must come from the pleasure and pain of controlling something. When you feel you have power over something there is pleasure, and you resist with great enthusiasm anything that gets in the way.
In a balanced community, everyone probably marches to the beat of the family drum. They draw deep spritual fulfillment from it, and so willingly play a role. With respect for others, there is not that much to fear, and little desire to control or attack.
A family in full union, or communion with/as god, would just move through the times with great courage, and would not attack that which is a perceived threat. But then there is some time when the people become somewhat like their enemy. Sinking down to the oppositions level means, quite literally, to hate them. Or to allow fear to create the perception of an enemy out of that which is an extension of yourself.
"Love thy enemy" means to commune with what you most certainly would hate otherwise, unless your sphere of hate inspired visions is narrowly confined (in-laws). Be in constant communion with god by including your enemies.
|
Edited by - Kyman on Jan 17 2007 05:10:08 AM |
 |
|
|
Wolfgang
Germany
470 Posts |
Posted - Jan 17 2007 : 11:23:41 AM
|
I found this on a website and I think it is quite fitting:
Quote:
Power is the energy that most opposes oneness. By exerting power, you isolate yourself from ‘the other’. By struggling for power, you distance yourself even more from home: the consciousness of unity. The fact that power leads you away from home, instead of bringing you closer, was hidden from you for a long time, since power is strongly interwoven with illusion. Power can easily hide its true face to a naïve and inexperienced soul. Power creates the illusion of abundance, fulfilment, recognition and even love. The ego-stage is an unrestricted exploration of the area of power: of winning, losing, struggling, dominating, manipulating, of being the offender and being the victim.
On the inner level, the soul gets torn apart during this stage. The ego-stage entails an attack on the soul’s integrity. By integrity we mean the natural unity and wholeness of the soul. With the entrance of ego-based consciousness, the soul gets into a state of schizophrenia. She loses her innocence. On the one hand, she battles and conquers, on the other hand, she realizes it is wrong to damage or destroy other living beings. It is not so much wrong according to some objective law or judge. But the soul subconsciously realizes that she is doing something that opposes her own divine nature. It is in the nature of its own divine essence to create and give live. When the soul operates from a desire for personal power, deep within a sense of guilt arises. Again, there is no external verdict on the soul which claims her to be guilty. The soul itself realizes she is losing her innocence and purity. While she pursues power on the outside, a growing sense of unworthiness is eating at her from the inside.
Quote end
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 17 2007 : 12:29:44 PM
|
What is the purpose of people hating each other, or is it completely without purpose, and evil?
Biologically, there are reasons for aggression, because it aids survival, particularly, ironically, in the presence of other aggressors! The relationship (and emotions) of hate seem to be a sort of holder for aggression: if you hate your enemy, well, you'll behave as if that is your enemy. That's some explanation for why it is there.
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 17 2007 : 9:05:40 PM
|
But I think hate and aggression are two different things. Hate is judging someone as being wrong, where aggression is more like actively defending your territory.
You would defend your territory from a friend, by pushing them away in a friendly way. But hate entails disliking the entire person, often because you think one aspect of them is inexcusable. If you hate someone, you don't push them away, then smile. You want them dead, or at least out of sight.
I believe this judgement of an entire being as bad because of only one portion is the kind of thinking that provokes religious conflicts.
And this type of judgement is a type of prejudice, or stereotyping.
In other words, one person might hate anyone who is black, or anyone who is gay, or anyone who is a muslim (or a christian).
My dad was a conscientious objector during world war two, and many people hated him because they believed it was necessary for their survival to kill their enemies, and he believed it was wrong to kill.
I don't think it is necessary to hate someone to defend myself if they attack me. I would hate that they had put me in the position of having to hurt them, but not necessarily hate them as a person; only their actions.
For someone to be your enemy, you have to expect them to endanger you in some way before it happens, don't you? So that would lead to the type of stereotypical thinking in wars, where you have to kill ALL of them to feel safe, (unless they surrender)or they have to kill ALL of you. (The 'having power over somebody' Wolfgang wrote about). The alternative, I think, is to peacefully wait for an attack, then defend yourself.
Wolfgang,
That quote makes a lot of sense.
What did it come from?
"While she pursues power on the outside, a growing sense of unworthiness is eating at her from the inside."
What does this mean? Does it mean hate is wrong and we feel guilty, or that this feeling of unworthiness somehow feeds the hate? Or maybe just that the quest for power is a vicious circle that leads us farther into illusion?
David,
Why would it be necessary to have a "holder of aggression?" Why not defend yourself as needed? In the animal world, prey animals try to stay away from predators, but they don't spend their lives figuring out how to get rid of ALL predators.
|
Edited by - Etherfish on Jan 18 2007 12:20:15 AM |
|
|
|
Wolfgang
Germany
470 Posts |
Posted - Jan 18 2007 : 04:55:35 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
Wolfgang,
That quote makes a lot of sense.
What did it come from?
Hi Ether,
I found it here: http://www.jeshua.net/lightworker/jeshua4.htm
it is quite a long page and you find it quite at the end.
Lots of other interesting stuff there, however I find it
difficult to believe that we all (or many of us) stem from the stars.
quote:
"While she pursues power on the outside, a growing sense of unworthiness is eating at her from the inside."
What does this mean? Does it mean hate is wrong and we feel guilty, or that this feeling of unworthiness somehow feeds the hate?
It certainly can feed hate, though it doesn't have to, we are the guru 
quote:
Or maybe just that the quest for power is a vicious circle that leads us farther into illusion?
I think this definitely hits the target  |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 18 2007 : 11:00:27 AM
|
Why would it be necessary to have a "holder of aggression?" Why not defend yourself as needed?
I wouldn't say "necessary" is the right word. Evolutionary history is a constant chronicle of 'it seemed like a good idea at the time'.  Keep in mind I am only suggesting why it evolved, not approving of it or suggesting that it should be maintained.
In the animal world, prey animals try to stay away from predators, but they don't spend their lives figuring out how to get rid of ALL predators.
Therein is the crux of the matter. Prey animals cannot defend themselves from predators. Their survival strategy is eat, run, and reproduce-before-getting-eaten. Psychologically they are tuned accordingly. An antelope comes within inches of death from a chase by a lion, and 25 minutes later, it has shrugged the whole thing off (it says, "whatever") and goes happily back to munching, no worries, good grass here, life is good. A human being is very different: if a death-threat shows up in your village, you will probably become obsessed with getting rid of it. It serves the antelope no purpose whatsoever to fret about the lion and obsess about getting rid of it, because it just can't do anything about it. A human being, on the other hand, can be served by being obsessed by someone's threat to it, because humans may be either able to eliminate the threat, or contain it.
Hate can be seen, for better or for worse, as an emotional system for keeping you attuned to the 'fact' (or fiction) that something is your enemy. When you can identify your enemy, you may be able to either destroy it, or keep it contained. Either way, given that it is your enemy, keeping in mind that it is your enemy "helps" you.
Of course, outside the world of hunter-gatherer-raiders (which is probably where a lot of our 'evolution' was done), and in more civilized society, these tendencies may be more harmful than helpful: the ability to remain constantly feeling that someone is your enemy becomes a hindrance to the possibility that they will no longer be.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Jan 18 2007 12:10:17 PM |
|
|
|
Doc
USA
394 Posts |
Posted - Jan 18 2007 : 11:53:01 AM
|
Clearly, in the long history of mankind, human beings tend by nature to be attracted to that which they desire, and repelled by that which they fear. As such, things are often psychologically and emotionally reduced to good and bad, aid and opposition scenarios. Simply stated, this means that whoever or whatever aids in realizing desire attractions is considered a valued asset or a friendly aid, and whoever or whatever threatens same is considered an opposing deficit or a feared enemy.
These value judements and personal discriminations are, of course, merely mental illusions which often defy any and all logical rationale, but no matter.
If anyone should even unintentionally and inadvertently say or do anything which activates fear feelings, they may automatically be seen as and responded to as a threat to personal wellbeing and the secure stability of valued assets. In so doing, whether intentionally or unintentionally, they become a feared enemy who generates a 'fight or flight' reaction.
Thus, opposition or enemies must be avoided and eluded, or escaped from, at all costs, and in the absence of any viable opportunity to do so, must be removed, eliminated, or destroyed at all costs in order to remove the imminent threaten they pose, and thus restore feelings of safety, security, and wellbeing.
In many instances, the value judgements and discriminations which initially shaped such fears and enmity pass from generation to generation for such a long time that neither camp even remembers what caused the original enmity, and don't care. You're either with us or against us. Period. End of discussion. Pretty sad, isn't it?
Hari OM!
Doc |
Edited by - Doc on Jan 18 2007 12:06:01 PM |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Feb 03 2007 : 07:40:44 AM
|
Hate is a method of excluding people from the group one feels comfortable with.
I think people have seen someone in the past step outside their comfortable territory
of "the right way to think", with negative consequences, and so they have decided that
no departure from their comfort zone is allowable.
The flaw in this thinking is that nothing happens the same way twice, so when a
thousand circumstances around us change, new ways of thinking work where they didn't before.
During the '60s of the last century, hippies went around professing love for everyone.
They ignored the "bad vibes" of anyone who had negative feelings for others.
This behavior left a bad taste in my mouth, because by ignoring people, they were
excluding them, but using a different method than those they disagreed with.
The only way that a connection can be made between enemies is by dialog, and
finding something in common with them. Then it is easier to disagree without
totally excluding them from your life.
With the popularity of the politically correct movement, people have found new
methods of excluding people from their lives. Now it is popular to call you an "anti-semite",
or "infidel", or "racist" as a method of excluding you from any further dialog on
the subject at hand. The person being called the name is often not what the name
describes at all, but once labeled that, the argument is won, and done with.
It's sort of like the salem witch trials, when so much fear was conjured from the
word "witch", that nobody realized who the real conjurers were. |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Feb 04 2007 : 3:06:45 PM
|
Etherfish said:
With the popularity of the politically correct movement, people have found new methods of excluding people from their lives. Now it is popular to call you an "anti-semite", or "infidel", or "racist" as a method of excluding you from any further dialog on the subject at hand.
Very true. It's a common phenomenon in human political movements that reformists are often embodying the very thing they purport to be against, but they cannot see it. The pilgrims came to America to escape religious persecution; once they got their colony set up, they got right to religious persecution, even going as far as to hang Quakers for preaching. Political correctness purports to be in opposition to hate and prejudice, yet hate and prejudice against the strong and established (on whatever issue you like), is I believe its defining characteristic. (Generally the politically correct have no idea they are manifesting hate; but they have a visceral and judgemental disposition against the strong and dominant, will find the strong guilty without proper trial, evidence or standards of truth or reason. And if you take a position against their findings, or even just their evidence, you are also guilty without trial).
Hate and prejudice, human problems as they are, will master us as people until we master them. Since they master us more if we cannot see them, I do think it is important, as a political being in the world, which we all are, to understand the mechanisms of hate and prejudice, and understand that they will arise in us until we master them. And Yoga can help greatly in directly eliminating these dark and blind mechanisms in us.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Feb 04 2007 3:17:14 PM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Why do people hate each other?
