B.G 9.12

मोघाशा मोघकर्माणो मोघज्ञाना विचेतसः। राक्षसीमासुरीं चैव प्रकृतिं मोहिनीं श्रिताः॥१२॥

moghāśā moghakarmāṇo moghajñānā vicetasaḥ। rākṣasīmāsurīṁ caiva prakr̥tiṁ mohinīṁ śritāḥ॥12॥

Vain are their hopes, actions, and knowledge — undiscerning, they take refuge in a delusive, demoniac and asuric nature.

Gīta Bhāshya 9.12

Hating the Lord never results in a beneficial outcome. Kings like Śiśupāla, Pauṇḍra, and Śālva crossover the darkness because of their earlier devotion to the Lord, and not because of their constant hatred. Kind Lord never forsakes his devotees.

The result for them (who disregard the lord ) is stated in the verse 'moghāśā', i.e.'vain are their hopes'. Those who hate the Lord are futile in their efforts and achieve nothing they desire. Even their sacrificial acts are in vain, as is their knowledge. By no means - through Brahmā, Rudra, or others - can they attain any goals pertaining to the next world. It is further stated:

"I cast those who hate Me and are cruel into the cycles of worldly existence." (Bg 16-19)

- And so on.

And it is stated in the Mokṣa-dharma:

"One who hates the imperishable Viṣṇu by action, mind, or speech - his forefathers sink into hell for eternal years. He who hates Nārāyaṇa, Hari, the best among the gods - how could he not be hated till the very end?"

- stated thus.

"One whose knowledge and devotion are directed to Nārāyaṇa - the supreme, beginning with the lotus-seated Brahmā - is most exalted; but one who is filled with hatred toward Him is the lowest of all, a destroyer of the infinite embryos. Truly, there is none more inferior to him."

- stated thus in the Śāṇḍilya branch of the Sāmaveda.

"Due to hatred, kings like Caidya (Śiśupāla) and others [acted so]."

"Though filled with enmity, kings like Śiśupāla, Pauṇḍra, and Śālva - meditating constantly on His gait, grace, glance, and more, their minds fixed on His form even while lying or sitting - attained oneness with Him; what then of those whose minds are lovingly devoted to Him?"

It is stated thus to show the affection of the Lord for His devotees, and to extol His constant meditation. Sometimes, even if the person hates Him due to the power of a curse, the Lord grants the fruit of devotion only if that person is originally His devotee.

Śiśupāla and the others were indeed formerly devotees; due to the power of a curse, they became haters. This is understood from the earlier question and the narration of their former role as divine attendants and the curse. Otherwise, why would such an unrelated topic be brought up at all?

The Lord's declaration of impartiality, even towards haters, without emphasizing their hatred, is meant to show that He grants the fruit of prior devotion alone. For He will declare: 'My devotee is never destroyed' (Bg 9.31).

There is no contradiction with statements like "one's disposition causes the result", for it is logical that hatred results in hatred for those harboring hateful intent. Otherwise, even those who hate the Guru would attain exalted status, which would be an undesirable conclusion. Nor is there a lack of distinction merely due to external form or mental fixation, for those like Hiraṇyakaśipu are indeed recognized as sinful.

"Even Hiraṇyakaśipu crossed over the darkness though he disparaged the Lord, because of the influence of the devotion experienced by his son Prahlāda."

- stated thus.

Beginning with 'Because my father disregarded You,' it concludes, 'Therefore, may my father be purified from that endless, insurmountable sin.'

- thus, Prahlāda asked the boon from the Lord.

The disregarding of the Lord is censured at several places in many texts. But the contrary occurs only in a few places - this is the distinction. Wherever the contrary is stated, the censure of non devotion of the Lord is also mentioned. When a contradiction arises against a major principle, as noted earlier - among conflicting statements, only those supported by reasoning are strong. The logic has also been presented on the side of the others. And for these, there is no valid conclusion. Even when two statements are equal in authority, the one agreeable to common experience is stronger. And that which is agreeable to common experience is fondness for devotees, not its opposite. It has also been stated that those beings had former devotion:

I think the demons are actually devotees of the Lord, for their minds are deeply absorbed in the path of fury directed toward the Lord of the three worlds.

- Thus, and so on.

Therefore, it is established that those who hate the Lord have no spiritual destination. The cause of such hatred is stated to be a demoniac nature, i.e. 'rākṣasīm' in the verse.