Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Why isn't there a precept that says you may not get angry?

JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
edited December 2011 in Buddhism Basics
What do people think? I'll give my answer later..

Comments

  • SileSile Veteran
    edited December 2011
    IMO, anger is a natural human emotion. It's not the emotion that determines anything, necessarily, but what we do with it.

    The Tantric approach is to acknowledge the anger you feel, and then try to use the energy for something good instead of something bad.
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    Being angry is just as normal as being happy. It's just an emotion, like other emotions contigent, impermenant and not-self. Making a precept against it would somehow categorize, in a negative sense, that which we feel. One might then imagine it is something to push away or suppress.
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    Because anger can be constructive, if used mindfully. Don't you have a teaching from your lama saying that on the Trungpa thread?
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    edited December 2011
    Well, precepts are warnings about avoiding certain actions, about what you should not do, not how you should feel or think.

    The Dhammapada talks about anger and thoughts that lead to anger.

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited December 2011
    My answer would be that the transformation of anger is no small feat and just having a precept 'don't' it would not actually be constructive.

    It would be like having one precept: 'Be enlightened'.

    I think many who practice dharma and many who don't have experienced transforming anger and it just sort of shifting again into coolness of mind. I have actually when my ex picked up another guy at a pool hall (we weren't an item at but still I was pretty pissed). I have had several other experiences of getting space with anger and transforning the situation, my brother is a great opportunity to practice. Thats the third noble truth and then the fourth is all of the mind training and insight through all the skandas and links that we transform into their enlightened aspect.
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    The Dhammapada talks about anger and thoughts that lead to anger.
    Can you give us a link to that?

  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    What do people think? I'll give my answer later..
    But there is! It is part of the Ten Grave Precepts of Zen. It is number 9.

    "I vow to not give in to anger" or "I vow to not give way to anger" or "I vow to not indulge in anger"

    Which really does not say "Don't get angry to begin with" because that is not always possible. But the point of it is to kill anger when it arises and not feed it, etc.
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    Interesting precept quotes, @seeker242, in light of the discussion that just developed on the Chogyam Trungpa thread. I notice the words "give in to", "give way to" and "indulge in". These all indicated a loss of control or a wallowing in or attachment to anger. There is such a thing as mindful anger, I believe. Or as Jeffrey put it, anger redirected into a positive direction. I've read accounts of Zen masters who used anger judiciously, as a tool to aid the student's awakening. If we narrowly define anger as a form of passion, and therefore indulgence or loss of control, then by definition it's bad. But I see that definition as far too narrow.
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    “Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.”
    Buddha quotes (Hindu Prince Gautama Siddharta)

    Not a precept...but pretty clear view.

  • ajnast4rajnast4r Veteran
    What do people think? I'll give my answer later..
    because anger is a defilement. you can not simply choose not to get angry.
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    Because it is listed clearly as one of the 3 poisons of the mind, which are pretty heavy in the eyes of the buddha. If you study the entire dharma, there is no need for this precept to be added IMO
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    edited December 2011
    The Dhammapada talks about anger and thoughts that lead to anger.
    Can you give us a link to that?

    One good translation is at http://www.angelfire.com/ca/SHALOM/dhammapada.html but there are many more. An example:

    Chapter One The Twin Verses

    We are what we think.
    All that we are arises with our thoughts.
    With our thoughts we make the world.
    Speak or act with an impure mind
    And trouble will follow you
    As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.
    We are what we think.
    All that we are arises with our thoughts.
    With our thoughts we make the world.
    Speak or act with a pure mind
    And happiness will follow you
    As your shadow, unshakable.
    "Look how he abused me and hurt me,
    How he threw me down and robbed me."
    Live with such thoughts and you live in hate.
    "Look how he abused me and hurt me,
    How he threw me down and robbed me."
    Abandon such thoughts, and live in love.
    In this world
    Hate never yet dispelled hate.
    Only love dispels hate.
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited December 2011
    The above quote seems to define anger as hate. I think anger can be defined many ways. There is anger that arises from compassion, like when we see injustice, and are moved to do something about it. I don't think anger is inherently good or bad, it is what we make it. Anger can be skillfully applied or unskillfully. It depends on the awareness we bring to it. (or lack thereof)

    It's great to see this topic come up again. When I had a thread on anger, the consensus was that anger is only about losing control, destructive anger. But I think there are many kinds of anger, a spectrum ranging from annoyance, to righteous indignation, all the way to rage. Rage is a very different ball of wax from indignation, which can motivate us to make positive change in the world. Rage lacks mindfulness.

    You may not be able to choose not to get angry, but you can choose how to handle it when it arises.

    It's good to see a broader spectrum of opinions coming up this time. Great thread, JEffrey. :)
  • RavenRaven
    Anger in itself is not automatically a negative thing: it all depends on what you do with it. Get angry and hit someone, get angry and say something hurtful, get angry and say nothing, get angry and be mindful, get angry and have compassion, get angry and effect change... The choice is yours in each moment.
  • Telly03Telly03 Veteran
    "In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves"

    Buddha Qoutes, Brainyquotes.com
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    Thanks for the link Telly.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    [ Anger - ego ]= cutting through wisdom of Manjushri
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    jealously, arrogance, hate, desire, lonliness, selfishness = ego
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited December 2011
    .
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    Interesting precept quotes, @seeker242, in light of the discussion that just developed on the Chogyam Trungpa thread. I notice the words "give in to", "give way to" and "indulge in". These all indicated a loss of control or a wallowing in or attachment to anger. There is such a thing as mindful anger, I believe. Or as Jeffrey put it, anger redirected into a positive direction. I've read accounts of Zen masters who used anger judiciously, as a tool to aid the student's awakening. If we narrowly define anger as a form of passion, and therefore indulgence or loss of control, then by definition it's bad. But I see that definition as far too narrow.
    In response to the question: "Is any anger acceptable in Buddhism?' the Dalai Lama answered:

    "Buddhism in general teaches that anger is a destructive emotion and although anger might have some positive effects in terms of survival or moral outrage, I do not accept that anger of any kind as a virtuous emotion nor aggression as constructive behavior. The Gautama Buddha has taught that there are three basic kleshas at the root of samsara (bondage, illusion) and the vicious cycle of rebirth. These are greed, hatred, and delusion--also translatable as attachment, anger, and ignorance. They bring us confusion and misery rather than peace, happiness, and fulfillment. It is in our own self-interest to purify and transform them."

    I personally think that after it has been transformed into something positive, it can no longer be called anger. :)
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    My own take is that anger is just anger, an emotion. Thus it is interwoven among all the other skandhas of the mind. Do not let emotions control your actions, and do not harbor thoughts that trigger emotions such as anger. You are not your thoughts or beliefs, and likewise you are not your emotions.
  • MountainsMountains Veteran
    Why? Is there any precept that says you "can't" do anything? That's one of the things I like best about Buddhism... It says what we should do, not what we must do, and definitely not what we cannot do.

    Besides, telling someone they're not permitted to get angry is the best way to piss hem off!
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    edited December 2011
    Anger is one of the” three poisons”; greed anger and ignorance; as was mentioned before.
    The implication of the word “poison” is that it’s something to keep out of your system or it will cause harm.

    I think that’s true. When someone is structurally angry he may develop an ulcer. So anger really is a poison.

    But when we suppress our anger it’s not gone! It will harm us even more!

    So I think the smart thing to do is to welcome the anger, so we are sure we don’t suppress it.
    And then we work with it. We have a close look at it.
    We accept and understand the anger and we find a way to “discharge” it in a not (too) harmful way; like in a game of American Football. :sawed:
  • I_AM_THATI_AM_THAT Veteran
    It okay to express your emotions in the moment you are feeling them... just don't get attached to them. Let them ebb and flow... and then move on.
  • Bodha8Bodha8 Veteran
    Anger, has never been listed as one of the 3 poisons, is not included in the 5 poisons, is not one of the 6 Defilements of Vasubandhu or as any english translation of the kleshas. Anger is to be examined through mindfulness and emptiness as mearly an impermanent emotion and not regarded as "my" anger or "I'm angry", just anger. Ergo, there is no more need for a precept for anger than there is any other emotion.
  • driedleafdriedleaf Veteran
    It is too difficult to abstain from getting angry. We want to keep virtues (precepts) that is within our reach so that our meditation is more wholesome. Patience will naturally come after understanding how our own mind works.
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    I personally think that after it has been transformed into something positive, it can no longer be called anger. :)
    You might be right. Nifty DL quote, too.

    I wasn't able to post the Tsem Tulku Rinpoche talk in which he discusses anger, ego, and the difference between egoic anger and "divine anger". I agree with his position (anger that moves you to practice more intensely and become a better person, or that moves you to help others is "divine anger", not arising from ego), and I see his position differs from the DL's. So that's interesting by itself. Sorry we can't have the youtube video here to discuss.

Sign In or Register to comment.