user14862: Someone, possible thought it might be compassionate, stated:

Also (next to compassion), when you spread loving kindness, do NOT spread it to yourself. No where in any discourse does the Buddha says to spread loving kindness to your self. All the places when Buddha talks about metta, he says to spread loving kindness to all beings in each directions.

Possible to have real compassion or/and goodwill, not to speak about mudita and upekkha, without having one self floated with it.
So is this true or the very base not traced? Possible Nihilist-Trap? Possible that certain Kings at Buddhas times have been wiser and more compassionate as intellectuals may ever be? Possible not seen the qualities of Ariyasāvakas and thought in common terms?
[Note: this question is one of compassion and not thought for trade, exchange, stackes, Buddh-ism, or whatever binds to the low.]

user14789: Samma sankappa, thought of renunciation, and samadhi is compassion and goodwill for oneself. It is how you behave when you are alone, so according to people who translate sila as morality, that's not sila (but it is indeed sila).
For other people, you have thought of non-arming, thought of amity, metta, mudita and so on.

user254: There's a modern metta gatha which is discussed here and which begins ...

May I be free from enmity and danger  

... so I think that's considered normal these days.
I think I read that the rationale is that you should call to mind metta for yourself or your own friends and family -- i.e. people you can easily feel metta towards -- before trying to apply it to people you don't know, and/or to people you feel emnity towards.
Perhaps this strategy is incompatible with trying to practice anatta but I'm not sure that everyone tries to do that anyway -- but see also Metta meditation ever taught to householders?
Also Dhammapada 129:

All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

That seems to assume that people will inherently refrain from being hurting themselves.
Still I'm not sure metta is really applicable to oneself: partly, because I don't see how that doesn't encourage self-view and clinging; partly, because I suppose that might result in over-indulgence (i.e. accepting your own faults instead of making an effort to correct them), though you might counterargue that true metta would involve properly following the path; and partly, because of think of metta (brahmaviharas generally) as primarily social:

They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact


There's doctrine called "stages of metta".
For example the article -- The Six Stages of Metta-Bhavana -- references the Visuddhimagga (Chapter 9) as its source, and includes ...


Toward oneself
Toward our loved ones
Toward neutral beings
Toward those with whom we are in conflict
Toward all sentient beings


... or another source says six stages:


All four of the above
The whole unverse


You might see the Visuddhimagga for more detailed advice -- it is quite detailed (15 pages) and begins something like this:

Here is what it says after that, about developing it towards oneself:


(this was quoting The Path of Purification translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli, from the Buddhist Publication Society). 

user10400: I would agree with others who say that it is often taken for granted in the Suttas that one is already dear to oneself.  The lesson the Buddha adds is that we should extend this regard to others.  When one regards others' lives as significant as one's own, this extension becomes natural.

Searching all directions with your awareness, you find no one dearer than yourself. In the same way, others are thickly dear to themselves. So you shouldn't hurt others if you love yourself.

Ud 5:1 The King (Rājan Sutta)
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.01.than.html

user11674: The metta sutta was probably addressed to monks because the stanza opens with already being established in the noble eightfold path, as follows:

This is what should be done
      By one who is skilled in goodness,
  And who knows the path of peace:
      Let them be able and upright,
  Straightforward and gentle in speech,
      Humble and not conceited,
  Contented and easily satisfied,
      Unburdened with duties and frugal in their ways.
  Peaceful and calm and wise and skillful,
      Not proud or demanding in nature.
  Let them not do the slightest thing
      That the wise would later reprove.
  Wishing: In gladness and in safety,
      May all beings be at ease.

Also, the Buddha indeed mentioned to care first for oneself and then for others. This is not egoism, but intelligent self-care. The dhammapada states:

One should first establish oneself in what is proper; then only one should teach others. A wise man should not incur reproach.

Dhammapada 158

By oneself indeed is evil done and by oneself is one defiled; by oneself is evil not done and by oneself is one purified. Purity and impurity depend entirely on oneself; no one can purify another.

Dhammapada 165

For the sake of another's benefit, however great it may be, do not neglect one's own (moral) benefit. Clearly perceiving one's own benefit one should make every effort to attain it.

Dhammapada 166
Also, the Buddha was a proponent of flexibility in his approach. You might know this as conventional language (to lay people) and absolute (to monks). The teachings on both addressee vary. Sometimes, the Buddha remained even silent because it was not connected to the goal, i.e., reduce suffering (& Nibbana).
Take  for example MN 20 or Capala Sutta AN 7.58. In both suttas Buddha gave a number of strategies that can be employed. The idea is to be flexible and to see what works in any given time. 'Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't'. 'If it doesn't, let me use this instead'.

14862: <p>Someone, possible thought it might be compassionate, stated:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Also (next to compassion), when you spread loving kindness, do NOT spread it to yourself. No where in any discourse does the Buddha says to spread loving kindness to your self. All the places when Buddha talks about metta, he says to spread loving kindness to all beings in each directions.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Possible to have real compassion or/and goodwill, not to speak about mudita and upekkha, without having one self floated with it.</p>

<p>So is this true or the very base not traced? Possible Nihilist-Trap? Possible that certain Kings at Buddhas times have been wiser and more compassionate as intellectuals may ever be? Possible not seen the qualities of Ariyasāvakas and thought in common terms?</p>

<p><em>[Note: this question is one of compassion and not thought for trade, exchange, stackes, Buddh-ism, or whatever binds to the low.]</em></p>
 14789: <p>Samma sankappa, thought of renunciation, and samadhi is compassion and goodwill for oneself. It is how you behave when you are alone, so according to people who translate sila as morality, that's not sila (but it is indeed sila).
For other people, you have thought of non-arming, thought of amity, metta, mudita and so on.</p>
 254: <p>There's a modern metta gatha which is <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/13883/254">discussed here</a> and which begins ...</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>May I be free from enmity and danger  </p>
</blockquote>

<p>... so I think that's considered normal these days.</p>

<p>I think I read that the rationale is that you should call to mind metta for yourself or your own friends and family -- i.e. people you can easily feel metta towards -- before trying to apply it to people you don't know, and/or to people you feel emnity towards.</p>

<p>Perhaps this strategy is incompatible with trying to practice anatta but I'm not sure that everyone tries to do that anyway -- but see also <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/31159/254">Metta meditation ever taught to householders?</a></p>

<p>Also Dhammapada 129:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>That seems to assume that people will inherently refrain from being hurting themselves.</p>

<p>Still I'm not sure metta is really applicable to oneself: partly, because I don't see how that doesn't encourage self-view and clinging; partly, because I suppose that might result in over-indulgence (i.e. accepting your own faults instead of making an effort to correct them), though you might counterargue that true metta would involve properly following the path; and partly, because of think of metta (brahmaviharas generally) as <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel006.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">primarily social</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<p>There's doctrine called "stages of metta".</p>

<p>For example the article -- <a href="http://www.embodiedphilosophy.com/six-stages-metta-bhavana-loving-kindness/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Six Stages of Metta-Bhavana</a> -- references the <em>Visuddhimagga</em> (Chapter 9) as its source, and includes ...</p>

<blockquote>
  <ol>
  <li>Toward oneself</li>
  <li>Toward our loved ones</li>
  <li>Toward neutral beings</li>
  <li>Toward those with whom we are in conflict</li>
  <li>Toward all sentient beings</li>
  </ol>
</blockquote>

<p>... or another source says six stages:</p>

<blockquote>
  <ol start="5">
  <li>All four of the above</li>
  <li>The whole unverse</li>
  </ol>
</blockquote>

<p>You might see the <em>Visuddhimagga</em> for more detailed advice -- it is quite detailed (15 pages) and begins something like this:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/n9m6Y.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/n9m6Y.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>Here is what it says after that, about developing it towards oneself:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/C9FmP.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/C9FmP.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/cLvvl.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/cLvvl.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>(this was quoting <em>The Path of Purification</em> translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli, from the Buddhist Publication Society). </p>
 10400: <p>I would agree with others who say that it is often taken for granted in the Suttas that one is already dear to oneself.  The lesson the Buddha adds is that we should extend this regard to others.  When one regards others' lives as significant as one's own, this extension becomes natural.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Searching all directions with your awareness, you find no one dearer than yourself. In the same way, others are thickly dear to themselves. So you shouldn't hurt others if you love yourself.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Ud 5:1 The King (Rājan Sutta)</p>

<p><a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.01.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.01.than.html</a></p>
 11674: <p>The metta sutta was probably addressed to monks because the stanza opens with already being established in the noble eightfold path, as follows:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>This is what should be done
      By one who is skilled in goodness,
  And who knows the path of peace</strong>:
      Let them be able and upright,
  Straightforward and gentle in speech,
      Humble and not conceited,
  Contented and easily satisfied,
      Unburdened with duties and frugal in their ways.
  Peaceful and calm and wise and skillful,
      Not proud or demanding in nature.
  Let them not do the slightest thing
      That the wise would later reprove.
  Wishing: In gladness and in safety,
      May all beings be at ease.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Also, the Buddha indeed mentioned to care first for oneself and then for others. This is not egoism, but intelligent self-care. The dhammapada states:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>One should first establish oneself in what is proper; then only one should teach others. A wise man should not incur reproach.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Dhammapada 158</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>By oneself indeed is evil done and by oneself is one defiled; by oneself is evil not done and by oneself is one purified. Purity and impurity depend entirely on oneself; no one can purify another.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Dhammapada 165</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>For the sake of another's benefit, however great it may be, do not neglect one's own (moral) benefit. Clearly perceiving one's own benefit one should make every effort to attain it.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Dhammapada 166</p>

<p>Also, the Buddha was a proponent of <strong>flexibility</strong> in his approach. You might know this as conventional language (to lay people) and absolute (to monks). The teachings on both addressee vary. Sometimes, the Buddha remained even silent because it was not connected to the goal, i.e., reduce suffering (&amp; Nibbana).</p>

<p>Take  for example MN 20 or Capala Sutta AN 7.58. In both suttas Buddha gave a number of strategies that can be employed. The idea is to be flexible and to see what works in any given time. 'Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't'. 'If it doesn't, let me use this instead'.</p>
