Timeline for 'Metta' versus 'passive acceptance for the wicked'?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2015 at 21:23 | comment | added | ChrisW♦ | @IanTaylor In case the distinction matters, imo that DN 24 is another example of condemning behaviour (in this case, a wrong or evil view) and not condemning the person who has that behaviour (unless you think that reproving someone by calling them "foolish" is a condemnation). | |
| Jun 19, 2015 at 21:06 | vote | accept | Ian Taylor | ||
| Jun 19, 2015 at 20:54 | comment | added | yuttadhammo | @IanTaylor answer updated. | |
| Jun 19, 2015 at 20:54 | history | edited | yuttadhammo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
update from comments
|
| Jun 19, 2015 at 19:24 | comment | added | Ian Taylor | appreciate this answer. clarification request: though anger towards evil may be something to be unconditionally avoided, is there any concept of "condemnation with metta"? my problem is that metta seems "naive" in that it appears to ignore things which are bad. | |
| Jun 19, 2015 at 18:43 | history | edited | yuttadhammo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Jun 19, 2015 at 17:43 | history | answered | yuttadhammo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |