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.
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Only part way through the video. But I think? I partly disagree with him, if I'm understanding him correctly. Anger can arise out of identification with a group too. So the reason for anger isn't an injustice towards you but towards a group you identify with. You may feel compassion for yourself and others in the group but then anger arises towards the perpetrator of that injustice.
My earlier point of wrathful deities is that the anger is actually compassion it just appears as anger because that is what is most effective.
@Dakini, maybe the only difference here is semantics though. I consider action based out of a response towards injustice should be determination driven by compassion and appear as anger. Maybe that is what you are saying too, but using the word anger to describe that initial small feeling that is the source of action?
Oh, hm, food for thought, @person. I'd like to say, ok, we're on the same page, but I don't think it's just semantics. Don't you feel angry when you see someone in any position of power, even just a salesperson or bus driver (let alone a police officer) be rude or hostile toward someone of a minority ethnicity? I do, and I use that anger to speak up for the wronged individual, or to help him/her in the situation. I act on the anger immediately, and always in a positive way. I still think the discussion boils down to a difference in how we're defining anger. Anger doesn't equate with blowing up. What do you think?
About identifying with a group, I'm not sure on what level any identification would occur. For example, if you learn about discriminatory practices being applied toward an ethnic group to which you don't belong. Where would any identification with them come from? If your theory were to be applied to something like that (did Mother Teresa identify with the Untouchables she ministered to?), the identification with an out-group would only come from a deep sense of commonality with all human beings. That's certainly possible, but I don't think it's what you meant. Do animal rights people identify with the animals? Maybe they do. This is what loving-kindness meditation would have us do.
And conversely, do people then ignore examples of appalling violence perpetrated toward groups they don't identify with? Are men indifferent to the bride-burning cases in India, or to the abortion-ban movement?
I think you've raised some important points that are worth exploring.
My teacher explained once that anger is in essence you can think of it.... a clear NO. The recipient normally gets angry in return, but they have a chance to see the needs of the person who said no. For example if a I am playing tennis (I was interested in sports once) and my shot is out and I disagree with their call I can get angry which I may or may not be able to use to motivate the rest of the play. For example Jimmy Connors would get pumped up. But holding a grudge against the other player and there is a chance missed to express each person's need. Or even for someone to point out quote 'their flaw'. In that case anger at the criticism might obstruct the clear vision to see if: one they had a good point and two the relationship could escalate into more suffering and distortion of the Buddha nature or a further lapse in practice. Bad karma.
Anger doesn't burn us if we use it skillfully.
before we do anything (skillful or unskillful) with anger it burns us
and then
we want (again we are burning) to do 'this or that'
for example:
check what would happen to us (anyone of us) while reading this post
if we are mindful we do not get angry (unskillful thought) so there is no burning
if not the 'feeling doesn't give us pleasure', what is it? burning
(both lust and anger burn us, but we do not see it unless we pay attention and try to see)
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited March 2012
Oh, hm, food for thought, @person. I'd like to say, ok, we're on the same page, but I don't think it's just semantics. Don't you feel angry when you see someone in any position of power, even just a salesperson or bus driver (let alone a police officer) be rude or hostile toward someone of a minority ethnicity? I do, and I use that anger to speak up for the wronged individual, or to help him/her in the situation. I act on the anger immediately, and always in a positive way. I still think the discussion boils down to a difference in how we're defining anger. Anger doesn't equate with blowing up. What do you think?
Yes I do get angry. I do think though that acting out of anger and not compassion though would maybe help the victim, compassion is for him. But what about the perpetrator? I'm not saying this is easy or what I do, but I think that's the intended goal in Buddhism.
About identifying with a group, I'm not sure on what level any identification would occur. For example, if you learn about discriminatory practices being applied toward an ethnic group to which you don't belong. Where would any identification with them come from? If your theory were to be applied to something like that (did Mother Teresa identify with the Untouchables she ministered to?), the identification with an out-group would only come from a deep sense of commonality with all human beings. That's certainly possible, but I don't think it's what you meant. Do animal rights people identify with the animals? Maybe they do. This is what loving-kindness meditation would have us do.
And conversely, do people then ignore examples of appalling violence perpetrated toward groups they don't identify with? Are men indifferent to the bride-burning cases in India, or to the abortion-ban movement?
I guess I wasn't trying to talk about every situation. But I'm thinking of like political protestors who get angry. I'm turned off by angry activists. They may be concerned about the plight of a particular group but again what about the perpetrators? I think about a group like PETA in particular, they are compassionate towards the animals and angry at the perpetrators of animal cruelty. Because of their anger towards the perpetrators, eg. most people, they act in ways that turn a lot of people off to their larger message making the actions not as effective.
hm...more food for thought! What about the perpetrator? In some incidents, there hasn't been time to address the perpetrator, in my experience, but sometimes it's possible to involve the perpetrator in the solution. Definitely, there's an opportunity to expand practice, by including the perpetrator. Gandhi addressed this; he said a movement based on compassion affects the perpetrators as much as the victims. Gotta chew on that awhile...
define your true needs. anger is merely a sign we are not viewing the world clearly, not conducting our relationships correctly, not communicating with others clearly, etc
Comments
My earlier point of wrathful deities is that the anger is actually compassion it just appears as anger because that is what is most effective.
@Dakini, maybe the only difference here is semantics though. I consider action based out of a response towards injustice should be determination driven by compassion and appear as anger. Maybe that is what you are saying too, but using the word anger to describe that initial small feeling that is the source of action?
About identifying with a group, I'm not sure on what level any identification would occur. For example, if you learn about discriminatory practices being applied toward an ethnic group to which you don't belong. Where would any identification with them come from? If your theory were to be applied to something like that (did Mother Teresa identify with the Untouchables she ministered to?), the identification with an out-group would only come from a deep sense of commonality with all human beings. That's certainly possible, but I don't think it's what you meant. Do animal rights people identify with the animals? Maybe they do. This is what loving-kindness meditation would have us do.
And conversely, do people then ignore examples of appalling violence perpetrated toward groups they don't identify with? Are men indifferent to the bride-burning cases in India, or to the abortion-ban movement?
I think you've raised some important points that are worth exploring.
Nice discussing with you, @person.