🌐 Unite the World
← Explore the story library

Full article

Non-hatred and loving-kindness in Buddhist teaching

Dhammapada 1:5 says hatred is not ended by hatred. The Karaṇīyamettā Sutta develops an expansive practice of goodwill toward living beings.

Pāli Dhammapada; Pāli Karaṇīyamettā Sutta · 2026-10-29

<!-- Generated from ../atlas-50-fifth-2026-10-29.mjs and ../undefined; edit those sources, not this file. -->

Non-hatred and loving-kindness in Buddhist teaching

Traditions: Pāli Dhammapada; Pāli Karaṇīyamettā Sutta Motif: Hostility answered through a cultivated wish for others’ welfare Connection verdict: Related ethical teachings within the Pāli tradition; no direct quotation shown Article status: Expanded Date: 2026-10-29

Summary

Dhammapada 1:5 says hatred is not ended by hatred. The Karaṇīyamettā Sutta develops an expansive practice of goodwill toward living beings.

Read the two scenes

The Dhammapada’s opening verses attend to the mind and to the cycles that follow hostile speech or action. Its non-hatred line interrupts retaliation in a compact, memorable form. The Metta Sutta asks a practitioner to extend goodwill widely, without restricting it to people already close or agreeable. It is not simply the Dhammapada verse with more words: the second text describes a disciplined cultivation of attention. Reading them together shows how a brief maxim and an extended practice can illuminate one another within Buddhist ethics.

What connects—and what does not

The verse states a concise principle; the sutta gives a sustained pattern of attitude and practice, including the famous maternal comparison.

Shared ethical direction is clear, but one text need not be a retelling of the other; their forms and immediate goals differ.

Why read them side by side?

The connection asks what it takes to move from agreeing with non-hatred to training a durable response to others.

Sources and reading notes

Research limit

A named parallel can establish literary reuse or related tradition; a general resemblance alone cannot prove borrowing. Linked editions and translations vary. Where a source is identified as secondary orientation, the comparison does not claim direct close reading of that tradition’s primary text.