A sage according to Hinduism must have unlimited love for all critters in the world. You may not agree with the idea. In 'Advaita' too (non-duality) which is my professed belief, we consider everything in the universe, living or non-living, to be composed of one entity, Brahman, Technically I am you and you are me. So harming any life is unthinkable.
As for my signature, I am no sage, but just an ordinary critter. I have my prejudices. A sage will not like my nationalism. Sage Tulsidas said:
"Sabai bhumi Gopāl ki, yā men atak kahān; jā ke man men atak hai, so hi atak rahā."
(All land belongs to God, where is hindrance in that? But they who have hindrance in their souls are hindered.)
My view, and please think nothing of it.
I think the difference in view here is to see Hinduism a monolithic thought structure. Rather than one religion, Hinduism is a label given by foreigners to the various religious traditions in India. For Christians it was inconceivable that so many different religions could live peacefully together as Christians were endlessly genociding each other over small differences in interpretation. That is why they considered all traditions part of a rather messy religion without any obvious structure. That is how Hinduism is still described in the Catholic Encyclopedia.
To me, your religion is not Hinduism but Advaita. Which is a highly philosophical tradition with a distinct purpose that attracts a certain kind of people of a certain nature who seek the same thing in life. But it would be wrong to see Advaita and its ideas as defining Hinduism at large.
As far as I can see, the idea that a Sage MUST have UNLIMITED love for all critters in the world fits perfectly with Advaita philosophy. To love all beings is basically the same as to hate all beings, it means that one treats all beings with the same equanimity. This is part of the detachment that people seek that want to break the cycle of Live. If one wants to return to Brahman, one has to let go of all bonds and everything that distinguishes, that creates individuality, as in Brahman these things no longer exist. It is like dissolving salt in water, making it lose all structure and identity. But that ideal in life is only an ideal that attracts a limited group of people.
In my view Sages as not such people. Sages are not striving to end their life cycles, on the contrary. Why do people want to leave existence? There can be two reasons. One: they have satisfied every possible desire and existence no longer has anything to offer for them, they have come to a natural end of their life cycles. Two: They overindulged in captivating experiences and lost the path and created so much negative karma that they are overcome with suffering and no longer want to live further any more. These people seek release. They want to leave existence through the emergency exit. They want to be taken out of the game. There is such an exit for people also known as the mercy of God. This path we find in Christianity, Buddhism and Advaita etc.
In my opinion that is not the path of Hinduism at large. When we read the Mahabharata. This is the path that is shown to Arjuna and only Arjuna by Krishna, because Arjuna is overcome with sorrow. It is a path that is an escape for the warriors in particular, because warriors are generally egotists that create huge amounts of negative karma. Krishna did not teach this path to other people. The Bhagavad Gita is meant as secret writing as is mentioned in the text. But religions bringing release are the most proselytizing of all as they like to spread teachings to "save" other sufferers from further suffering.
As I understand it, the normal path that is shown in the Ramayana and Mahabharata is the path of Dharm. Dharm as way to create a happy existence and continue on the path of evolution. For normal people do not want out of the game, but they want to continue playing and evolve in the process. But to successfully do that they need to follow the path of Dharma. Only the right behavior creates results that makes existence a happy affair and worthwhile. It is the people that have grown weary of existence that say: There is no happiness in existence, suffering is an iron chain, and joy a golden one. Indeed, for them it has become this way, for them only the thought of being released in Brahman gives joy.
I do not think Sages are like that. Sages are people who through thousands and thousands of generations of highly dharmic behavior have evolved to a very high level of consciousness from which they guide others. Yes they wish all beings well. That is not so special as you may think. Even a thought is an action and negative thoughts are negative actions that create negative results. It is common sense to wish all others well, just like it is common sense not to want to hurt others. Anyone bright enough to understand the workings of Karma will try to improve his future happiness, and thus destiny. Sages are more aware of that as they are cleaner. One sees a spot much easier on a clean white cloth.
But will sages lovingly embrace the evil? As I see it, that is a mistake. It reminds me of a story of Ramakrishna about a disciple that had learned from his master that Brahman is in all beings. Fully emerged in this happy thought he saw an elephant running wild coming down the road. A caretaker shouted to get out of the way. But he wanted to embrace this Divine creature. Alas instead it grabbed him, shook him wildly and left him broken and half dead in the bushes. When his master found him he asked why he had not fled to safety. The disciple answered that he wanted to embrace the elephant as the Divine was in him. Then the master said. The Divine is also in the caretaker and he told you to take cover.
I find that is the problem with philosophies that promise release, Mosksha, Nirvana, they are highly idealistic and to some extend Utopian. But religion is not primarily for escapists who want out, it is also for the people who want to make the most out of existence.
As I see it, some people may think that returning to Brahman is the highest goal, but that goes against Brahman itself. Because Brahman manifests itself in existence and us, and as Brahman can not go against its own longing, existence must surely be what is meant to be. To reject existence in the name of Brahman is a contradiction. That is why all religions reject suicide, it can never be what was meant to be. The purposely ending of ones life cycles is an even more definite form of suicide. However this death is one that also belongs to nature. In Nature we see that some species can no longer continue their life-cycles and become extinct. But this return to Brahman is rarely considered a happy thing.
To my knowledge, in the Ramayana and Mahabharata we read of Sages whose bloodline ended because they were unintentionally shot while being in animal form. Those sages did not lovingly bless their attackers because they were released from Earthly existence and also must always love all creatures as you claim. No they cursed them (most noble people) in the most horrible way. One can say these Sages acted wrong but I would be careful judging people with many times higher consciousness than mine.
So, your idea may be perfectly in line with your special tradition, but to say this is a moral imperitive in Hinduism in general seems to me a contradiction to how I understand it. But then again my ideas carry no weight for others, and should be taken lightly.
