Greeting forum ,
Tanha or longing are opposite of vyapada or illwill , right ? Are both of same or different category ? Is it appropriate to regard vyapada as a kind of tanha . Please explain .
Thanks in advance
2 Likes
Welcome to the forum Virya! 
Thank you for your question.
According to the PTS dictionary
vyÄpÄda
Is â making bad, doing harm: desire to injure, malevolence, ill-willââŚthe opposite would be non-ill-will or avyÄpÄda
On the other hand tanha
Is generally translated as â thirstâ, â cravingâ,â wantingâ etcâŚa sense on desiringâŚâŚnot necessarily as something âgoodâ or non-ill-will.
Yes, we can long for âgoodâ things, like wishing someone good health or good fortune.
But we can have tanha for bad things too, we can long for something bad to happen to someone we donât like, for example.
(I donât know the PÄli word for the opposite of tanhÄâŚ? Help anyone )
So I donât think they are related as opposites as you describe.
But I see how ill-will can be a type of craving, or a desire for harm or aversion against something/someone/a state of beingâŚ.but thatâs just my interpretation 
There are many knowledgeable users on the forum who can help you!
7 Likes
How I see is that craving is more fundamental.
Usually, it is sensual desire/lust which is paired with ill-will. As these 2 are the factors eradicated by non-returners.
Sensual desire is very much tied up with ill will, when we donât get what we want, we resent the things which prevents us from getting what we want.
Also the proper opposites to ill will is metta, good will, loving kindness, and the proper opposite to sensual desire is renunciation. To lust, it can be seeing repulsiveness/ugliness (for the renunciation of lust).
Yet, a non-returner can have craving. Craving for form realm, formless realms.
In terms of 3 types of craving, craving for sensual desires, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming. A rough match can be craving for sensual desires= sensual desires, craving for non-becoming (in terms of suicide) can be aversion towards self (ill-will).
7 Likes
@Ficus @NgXinZhao
Thks to both .
Can tanha be categorised under lobha ? And vyapada under dosa and dosa under lobha ? Is dosa the opposite of lobha ?
I think itâs:
lobha and dosa are subsets of tanha. Yes, vyapada is part of dosa.
Opposite in terms of good, no. I say itâs more of pairings for dosa and lobha, they usually come together. If you donât have attached love for the girl, you canât hate the girl after rejection/ breaking up/ divorce. Opposite usually denotes the good/ wholesome counters to these unwholesome states.
Lobha and dosa are two roots of defilements , but are Tanha root of defilements ?
Not necessarily , if a muslim or christian doesnt know about buddhism and never like buddhism they still can hate it .
1 Like
On rootsâŚ
Lobha and dosa both require the delusion as their base.
Ignorance is what enables delusion of not seeing impermanence, suffering, not self.
Ignorance via the dependent origination links conditions craving to arise.
A Muslim or Christian who hates Buddhism might do so out of attachments to their idea of whatâs true. They attach to the One true God, which Buddhism doesnât have any role for it. Or they attach to their own faith, label of religion, fearing to be converted to Buddhism (and miss out on eternal heaven to go to eternal hell), a hatred might be generated to distance themselves from other religions.
Itâs my own experience that when I didnât attach to the label of being a Buddhist, I am not so averse to other faiths. Doesnât mean I think that they are right, but the value of truth doesnât have to be linked to emotional response.
3 Likes
With this you meant craving would includes ignorance lobha and dosa in the link ?
That is non sequitur , your previous premise is the girl being loved therefore being hates . Buddhism as the object of being loved first therefore being hates later doesnt follows .
Tanha (pulling in) and vyapada (pushing away) both require attachment. There is a third option which is to let go.
4 Likes
7 posts were split to a new topic: What is the PÄli wordfor âletting goâ?
One doesnât have to have the same object being attached to to have the same object being aversion to.
Letâs go deeper. Hate/ aversion is towards whatever which we perceive prevents us from what we attach to, we attach to whatever thing because we think that would bring us happiness.
In the case of romantic love, the attachment is to the girl, for mistakenly believing that if only if she would get together with me, I would be happily ever after. The object of hate arises when the relationship cannot be formed. Either towards another suitor, or herself, for she herself denied this happiness towards me.
In the case of religion, the object of attachment is oneâs own current faith, which one believes would lead one to eternal happiness if one continues to believe. Say if another person of another faith comes in and claim: everyone should believe in my religion, all others are false, only mine is true. It could be seen as an attempt to separate oneself from the attachment which leads to eternal happiness.
I think itâs very hard to think of craving without greed or hate, as itâs very subtle, non-returner stage then can see it.
1 Like
Probably you missed out , earlier you was saying that one has to first get to love the girl then upon break up it turns to hate . But that shouldnt be the case , a person can hate the girl without loving her first . For example , i am capable of hating you without knowing you personally , why , no need to love you in the first place , i have hatreds in myself that may turn towards anyone . If you still dont see the differences , thats ok . Anyway thanks for your responses .
Ah I see.
I think the sentence above is case specific. The case would be a boy gets into relationship with a girl without attachment, so that when the girl breaks it up, he didnât get upset about it. Canât hate what you didnât (attached) love in the first place.
Your example of hating people you donât know is more likely of one aspect of their personality or what they represent which you hate, due to the view that this part of them causes harm/ suffering to my/the world.
Then it might call for more metta practise. Part of how hate can build up is due to internal suffering, and aversion towards it.
1 Like