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.
Perhaps your right. Perhaps the stereotype of the Catholic Priest is unfair or perhaps all the catholic priests that are convicted are done so based on slander?
G: Now its days later and I have been suffering from the shame…
S9: One of the newer findings in psychology is that our emotional mind is actually separate from our intellectual mind, literally, and even has its own memory.
I read somewhere that often the intellectual mind may not remember in any detail an emotional event, or even have any memory of the event at all. Yet, strangely enough, when they were somehow induced into being very emotional again, similar to when the event took place, that the memory came back to them ever so clearly.
This puts a whole n’other wrinkle on “being of two minds.”
Because of this split, we are more like a group of minds or a committee (who knows how many minds actually reside within us). In which case perhaps, it is better to wait and not make a hasty decision emotionally, or intellectually, but let our multiple minds have time to voice their side of any issue. In this way we may please all sides of our self, or harmonize more of all of our wishes for particular outcomes. This being a kind of coming together, (with our selves), or a healing of purpose, in order to make us once again whole. Smile!
Perhaps your right. Perhaps the stereotype of the Catholic Priest is unfair or perhaps all the catholic priests that are convicted are done so based on slander?
I don't know.
I do think much of the higher Catholic world is a conspiracy, but not all of it...
I am winging it here, as to ‘the why’ of a scholarly grouping of anger and greed under the same heading, but perhaps it may be because, they (anger and greed) are both birthed by the same mother, (aka fear).
Greed being a lack of trust, or the fear that you won’t have enough in order to be fully satisfied or happy...fearing a lack or emptiness at some level.
Anger, on the other hand, being the fear that what you have, either your self definition, your wealth, or even your bodily well being, can be ripped away from you by circumstance or another.
So we have greed grabbing and anger pushing away (a kind of yin/yang) in order to acquire safety.
Do you think that that has anything to do with it?
Peace and love,
S9/Leslie
Well, actually, anger and greed, though related as part of the raga-dosa complex, are grouped separately. What surprised me was that envy and stinginess are under the anger heading, rather than the greed heading. That said, your reasoning still works.
First, we need to understand the words as the Buddha and early Buddhists used them. There are three groups of defiled, afflictive, or unwholesome volitional states -- the greedy, attachment or attraction states; the angry or aversive states; and the ignorant or stupid states.
Anger or aversion refers to feeling repulsed or hostile; a dislike for something. The root of the anger states is given variously as dosa {hatred, annoyance, unhappy}, patigha {anger, as in striking out against}, arati {aversion}, vyapada {enmity}, kupito {offended, provoked, irked}, and khoda {rage, fury, wrath}. There are other nuances of hated and anger; I listed some of those. These can be treated as synonyms in general use, but each has its own shade of meaning.
If I did not read the Theravadin Abidhamma, I would instinctively group envy {issa / irsya} and stinginess {macchariya / matsarya} with the greedy states. Now why are they are considered angry states? Envy is wanting what others have; stinginess is declining to share what one possesses. Furthermore, envy tells us we can only get it by taking it away from the other person. Stinginess tells us if we share it, we will lose it and they will keep it. I guess I see the anger element there?
Anyway, the greedy states are the opposites of the angry aversive states; they refer to feelings or emotions of attraction and attachment. The root is given as lobha {avarice, cupidity}, kama {lust, sensual desires}, or raga {passionate attachment, ardent affection, possessiveness, selfish interest}. Mana-mada {pride, arrogance, vanity} and dhitthi {opinionated views} are also listed under the greed heading.
Kukkucca, meaning worry and anxiety, is grouped with the angry states. I would intuitively place it under the third heading; given as nescience {avijja / avidya}, ignorance {annana / ajnana}, or confusion {moha}. I would also tend to put dhitthi; which is listed as a greedy state, under the ignorance heading.
By the way, the abhidhamma list of ignorance / stupidity group includes:
Moha: Confusion, delusion, foolishness. Also given as avidya or ajnana.
Ahrika: Heartlessness, lack of moral conscience; lack of empathy for others.
Anottappa / anotrapya: Unscrupulousness; lack of moral concern for consequences.
This is all rather advanced theory, but it is useful to contemplate. I do not have it sorted out yet. I should probably talk about the practical ways of dealing with anger. Like the first entry:
What can you do, when someone's up in your face saying really nasty things, pushing you and not stopping or laughing at you etc. Do you just stand there and take it?
What can you do, when someones up in your face saying really nasty things, pushing you and not stopping or laughing at you etc. Do you just stand there and take it?
The first thing to do, is try to avoid being provoked? Beyond that, it really depends on a lot of specifics. Who is doing that, where, and why? Do we attract that carp? Did we provoke the hostile person? Does the hostile person have some serious mental health issues? Is the hostile person a genuine threat to life, limb, or property? Can we calm them down? Can we walk away? Do we need to defend ourself or summon professional help? Do we need to help get them in a treatment program?
Will we have to deal with the person regularly? The practice called 'metta bhavana' can be very powerful in resolving conflicts. There is a four-fold endeavor meditation: Blocking and abandoning the unwholesome anger state; while cultivating and maintaining 'metta.' Also, chanting the Metta Sutta, the Chant of Metta, or the compassion mantras related to Avalokiteshvara and Green Tara
The other thing is to work on being very calm and objective in sizing up the situation. Chanting Nichiren school Daimoku, the Manjushri Mantra, or the Heart Sutra can clear the mind. Also, sitting concentration meditation to clam down, and 4-fold mindfulness meditation to become more discerning.
There are many useful Buddhist practices we can try out and see what works for us.
Well, actually, anger and greed, though related as part of the raga-dosa complex, are grouped separately. What surprised me was that envy and stinginess are under the anger heading, rather than the greed heading. That said, your reasoning still works.
First, we need to understand the words as the Buddha and early Buddhists used them. There are three groups of defiled, afflictive, or unwholesome volitional states -- the greedy, attachment or attraction states; the angry or aversive states; and the ignorant or stupid states.
Anger or aversion refers to feeling repulsed or hostile; a dislike for something. The root of the anger states is given variously as dosa {hatred, annoyance, unhappy}, patigha {anger, as in striking out against}, arati {aversion}, vyapada {enmity}, kupito {offended, provoked, irked}, and khoda {rage, fury, wrath}. There are other nuances of hated and anger; I listed some of those. These can be treated as synonyms in general use, but each has its own shade of meaning.
If I did not read the Theravadin Abidhamma, I would instinctively group envy {issa / irsya} and stinginess {macchariya / matsarya} with the greedy states. Now why are they are considered angry states? Envy is wanting what others have; stinginess is declining to share what one possesses. Furthermore, envy tells us we can only get it by taking it away from the other person. Stinginess tells us if we share it, we will lose it and they will keep it. I guess I see the anger element there?
Anyway, the greedy states are the opposites of the angry aversive states; they refer to feelings or emotions of attraction and attachment. The root is given as lobha {avarice, cupidity}, kama {lust, sensual desires}, or raga {passionate attachment, ardent affection, possessiveness, selfish interest}. Mana-mada {pride, arrogance, vanity} and dhitthi {opinionated views} are also listed under the greed heading.
Kukkucca, meaning worry and anxiety, is grouped with the angry states. I would intuitively place it under the third heading; given as nescience {avijja / avidya}, ignorance {annana / ajnana}, or confusion {moha}. I would also tend to put dhitthi; which is listed as a greedy state, under the ignorance heading.
By the way, the abhidhamma list of ignorance / stupidity group includes:
Moha: Confusion, delusion, foolishness. Also given as avidya or ajnana.
Ahrika: Heartlessness, lack of moral conscience; lack of empathy for others.
Anottappa / anotrapya: Unscrupulousness; lack of moral concern for consequences.
This is all rather advanced theory, but it is useful to contemplate. I do not have it sorted out yet. I should probably talk about the practical ways of dealing with anger. Like the first entry:
Most people, when they think of anger and violence, have been trained to think and to say that we must deal with anger in one of two main ways, either fight or flight. Perhaps in speaking about reflex, this is quite true. But we can train ourselves to interfere with or to travel beyond reflex, thereby entering into a skill or skills for living well. In this way, we can add much to this original equation, and come out (hopefully) with a far better outcome.
I believe that the Buddha would tell us that living well or in a wise manner isn’t something that just happens without any forethought or help from us, but rather that living well and even with wisdom is in fact a skill that must be learned AND developed.
There are many different ways to protect yourself and thereby protect others from you.
Q: “In protecting our selves, we protect others.”
One example might be:
If you study your self very carefully and in depth, you will come to know your own vulnerabilities to anger, at which time you can find ways to put a protective cover over that RED button (aka trigger) and disallows someone else from pushing it way too easily.
Another opportunity to protect your self might come through building personal strength of one kind or another (good character, marshal arts, and an arsenal of wise advise and practice to abort falling into the negative emotions, and/or a calm center to fall back on having built it up in meditation, etc. None of these things, of course, just happen over night.) In other words, there are many ways to add to your own self-confidence and clarity that could somehow ameliorate your present weakness and make you less afraid of being harmed. (We all seem to have weakness of one kind or another).
Another strength is compassion. But how are you going to build such ‘an attitude of compassion’ at a time when someone is already in your face, and emotions are high? Obviously we must build such strengths previous to the need for them and have them accompany us into each and every situation fully grown.
If we have ever been angry, (and who hasn’t ?) you cannot really claim that getting angry again is a surprise…now can you. What we need than is a little foresight during our quiet moments in order to prepare and be ready.
Opinions are a problem if we attach to them and make a sense of self out of them.
Yes. The word dhitthi {sanskrit dristi} comes from a word that means viewpoint or perspective. This can refer to a literal line of vision. For example, the perspective from a hill top is different from that of a valley. The perspective from inside a well is difference from that of a viewer looking into a well. It is also used figuratively to mean a mental point of view; like an an opinion or ideology. That is how it used here.
In this context it is listed as an affliction under the greed / attachment heading. So the implication is a strong attachment {raga} to our own, self centered perspectives, opinions, or ideologies. Buddhism also talks about samma ditthi, or the correct perspective. So, not all opinions are unwholesome; just self centered or opinionated opinions.
There are actually two correct perspectives. There is the worldly perspective; which relates to karma, to volitional moral causality, we reap what we sow. We should avoid acting out on anger because of the moral or karmic consequences for ourselves.
There is also the sublime perspective. Raga {attachment} is closely tied with dosa {dislike}; in that we tend to view things in terms of what we like and dislike. The former arouses raga; the latter arouses dosa.
It’s a restless hungry feeling
That don’t mean no one no good
When ev’rything I’m a-sayin’
You can say it just as good. You’re right from your side
I’m right from mine
We’re both just one too many mornings
An’ a thousand miles behind
~~ Dylan
Raga {or lobha, kama, rati} and Dosa {or patigha, arati}; attraction-attachment and aversion-anger, also lead to moha {confusion / delusion}. Because we tend to see things in terms of what we like and dislike, we can not see things as they are. This creates 4 distortions:
Distortion of forms. Seeing beauty in that which is spiritually impure; attraction to spiritually harmful things.
Distortion of feelings {vedana}. Seeking bliss in unsatisfying pursuits that lead to pain and suffering.
Distortions of mental perceptions. Seeking security and constancy in things that are inconstant.
Distortions of mental phenomena. Identifying a perpetual self where none exists.
I don’t see anything wrong with opinions. In fact, I see them as being a necessary finite tool (aka dream tool) within this finite Universe (aka dream universe).
But I 3rd the motion put forth by Guy, and 2nded by Robby, that we should not identify with our opinions by seeing them as either our self or our self-definition.
All opinions are not created equal. By this I mean that most opinions can become more sophisticated when they are educated. I think we all start out in the beginning with opinions that are basically a mixture of instinct and emotion, and only slightly percolated in a tiny smidgen of intellect (often very tiny). Grin!
Education doesn’t mean however that we must swallow ideas presented to us by either educators or even sages whole and without question. Rather they give us a good chance to see how others have handled these very same questions, before us, often dedicating their whole lives to the truth found within these very opinions. In this way, we can stand on these persons shoulders and fly higher than we ever might have if we were forced to reinvent the wheel. But we must add ourselves into this mix, if we are actually ever going to fly free of just words.
I think too that we must consider wisdom, right about now.
Is wisdom just one more opinion or some form of opinion or is it something way more?
I personally believe that wisdom is a gestalt of opinions. (Gestalt meaning more than the sum of its parts…so that wisdom is not simply a unity or like a jigsaw puzzle that includes all opinions.)
Wisdom comes about when we take our opinions out on the road, (aka apply them to life and vigorous internal investigation), in order to see if they are workable and truly satisfying at a deeper level than merely surviving.
Wisdom is more like clarity of vision, than it is an accumulation of facts. For this reason, true wisdom has a vastness that is not easily captured in words. It is more intimate and subjectively personal than knowledge.
Opinions can be about judgement. And you should not judge until you have walked in the 'victim' of your judgment's shoes So yes, an educated opinion is worthy of more respect, but it doesn't make it any more true...
Anger is nothing more than one's own projected needs of grasping - a desire for having everything their own way.
Deal with the issue - grasping to satisfy the ego.
Realize anger is the ego's attempt to rearrange the world to suit itself.
Anger therefore originates nowhere else other than from oneself.
We should thank those who 'make' us angry. They are revealing to us our own obscurations. We should thank them for being our kindest teacher in giving us a change to practice the path.
I think too that we must consider wisdom, right about now.
Is wisdom just one more opinion or some form of opinion or is it something way more?
I personally believe that wisdom is a gestalt of opinions. (Gestalt meaning more than the sum of its parts…so that wisdom is not simply a unity or like a jigsaw puzzle that includes all opinions.)
Wisdom comes about when we take our opinions out on the road, (aka apply them to life and vigorous internal investigation), in order to see if they are workable and truly satisfying at a deeper level than merely surviving.
Wisdom is more like clarity of vision, than it is an accumulation of facts. For this reason, true wisdom has a vastness that is not easily captured in words. It is more intimate and subjectively personal than knowledge.
Peace and love,
My young friend,
S9/Leslie
You are touching on one of many problems of translation; the semantic value of words, cognates, idiom, and nuance. In Sanskrit, the nuance is reversed of wisdom {vidya} and knowledge {jnana}. Wisdom {Vidya} is objective fact, knowledge {jnana} is the subjective knowing.
The Sanskrit cognate of wisdom is vidya, vijja in Pali. The verbal root vid comes from the same root as view and video. It is also a cognate of wit, wizard, witch, and wicca, That shows the way words from the same root can acquire different nuances in different cultures over time. The suffix -ya in vidya is a possible cognate of -ion, -ia, -y, and -ity. I have seen vidya translated as both wisdom or knowledge; though wisdom is the cognate. The sense is Merraim-Webster's wisdom 1. a:accumulated philosophic or scientific learning. The best direct translation of vidya might be objective wisdom or science. At present, wisdom or knowledge are used as interchangeably as translations. It is taken to mean a hard or objective fact, not as subjective. The Chinese word for vidya 明 means light, bright, or wise
Another word that translated as wisdom or knowledge is jnana; which is nnana is Pali. The root jna, means to know. Jna a cognate of know, as well as the gno is gnosis, the gni in cognition, and the gna in cognate. The -na suiffix is a cognate of -ing, so it literally means 'knowing' in the sense of the noun usage. The sense is subjective knowledge. I take it mean to know for ourselves. The Chinese is 智.
There is also vijnana. The prefix vi- is a cognate of dis-. The basic meaning is 'apart.' It can mean divided, a reversal, or extreme. Here, it is understood to mean divided; so it is 'divided knowing;' and translated as [general] consciousness or discrimination. The Chinese translation 識 can mean discrimination or recognition.
Yet another word translated as wisdom or knowledge is prajna; panna is Pali. There is that same 'jna." the prefix pra- is a cognate of for, pre-, pro- {in the sense of antecedent}, and per-. The sense of pra- here is likely for as in the usage or purpose. Literally, 'for to know.' The Chinese word for this is 慧and means intelligent, smart, or wise. The most common translation of prajna these days is discernment; or wisdom in the sense of being discerning. It is a near synonym of passana or vipassana {insight}
A related word is samjna 想. The prefix sam is a cognate of same, sim-, syn-. or com- [in the sense of with, together, or together with]. Cognize is literal, conception is close, but is is usually translated as perception.
If you took a young child and locked him in a room with all or most of the dictionaries ever written, and he also studied them constantly (having nothing much else to do), I daresay that if you then released him onto the streets of New York City, with all of his accumulate wisdom (?), my guess is that he wouldn’t be able to function very well.
Perhaps this is very simply because, knowledge in order to become wisdom must be lived.
I have often thought of the old tale about the Tower of Babel, where they were trying to reach heaven and failing badly because words alone won’t get you there.
I don’t believe you can divide wisdom and knowledge by saying one is subjective and one objective, otherwise you would need to have (invent?) another word to mean the gestalt of these two. The idea of something of more vast transcending accumulation, obviously outruns the words and their usage throughout the ages.
At an earlier age, I used to think I would come across a sentence one fine day that would finally enlighten me...I was very mind bound.
But then too, language is a growing thing, living and changing as need dictates. So we cannot restrict ourselves to what some scholars might have said a word meant a long time ago, although we shouldn’t ignore their fine efforts in this area either, by any means.
Let me just throw out one more thought before I wonder off into my day of necessary minutia.
I believe that our emotional states like fear, anger, and greed, not to mention envy, Da/Da/ Da/Da, are not actually separate. Separating these words and conceptual structures are only a convenience for studying them carefully, so that we will not be overwhelmed and left floundering in vast, complex, and intertwining details.
Emotions actually bleed into each other, much like taste and smell do.
In studying why the elderly had lost their taste for food and ate often poorly in consequence, they found out that smell was the actual problem in most cases.
A cat also won’t even eat his food in good amounts, if at all, when his nose is stuffed up.
Now we could find a multitude of good reasons for this reaction, one being the poor detection of food spoilage and consequent treat to survival through an error. But the fact remains they bleed into each other, taste and smell, back and forth. Even though they have separate names and seem to take place in separate body parts, their function is not actually separate. See my point here?
By the way, I am enjoying your input in this area of word translation. I am just too much of a philosopher not to question everything, even my own attempts. Smile!
But like they say, “Two heads are better than one,” even if they are banging them into each other in search for clarity. Grin!
If you took a young child and locked him in a room with all or most of the dictionaries ever written, and he also studied them constantly (having nothing much else to do), I daresay that if you then released him onto the streets of New York City, with all of his accumulate wisdom (?), my guess is that he wouldn’t be able to function very well.
Perhaps this is very simply because, knowledge in order to become wisdom must be lived.
I have often thought of the old tale about the Tower of Babel, where they were trying to reach heaven and failing badly because words alone won’t get you there.
I don’t believe you can divide wisdom and knowledge by saying one is subjective and one objective, otherwise you would need to have (invent?) another word to mean the gestalt of these two.
Peace and love,
S9/Leslie
I get your point. and agree. I am just trying to sort out the way the Buddha sorted these things out. Sometimes; vidya {wisdom} and jnana {knowing} are used as synonyms; and sometimes they have distinct nuances. Explaining the nuances to ourselves; which I think is what the drives the philosopher and writer, can get very sticky.
In modern English, wisdom {vidya} and knowledge {jnana} are also treated both as synonyms and as words with distinct meanings. Also, the distinct meanings vary. If you have a moment, look at:
1 a. accumulated philosophic or scientific learning
3: the teachings of the ancient wise men
Those are the primary senses of the sanskrit vidya, pali vijja. The verbal root is vid; which can mean to know or to see. It is a cognate of video, vista, view, wizard and wisdom. The suffix -ya makes it a noun, and can do roughly the same same as the noun suffix -ia, sense 3, 'the area, field, or realm of.' Or several of the variations of the suffix -y, especially 'characterized by' or 'instance of.' {the sanskrit -ya or -aya is a cognate of -y and -ia}.
The Chinese for vidya is 明 {ming} -- meaning light, in contrast with darkness. So it is information that figuratively casts light on a subject. The sense is objective truth or fact, the stuff we try to get from books. Translators use either wisdom, as in senses 1 & 3, or knowledge as in:
4. a: the sum of what is known : the body of truth, information, and principles acquired by humankind
Wisdom is preferred by some, as a translation of vidya, because it is a cognate; ii comes from the same ancient root word as vidya. Note that vidya can also be esoteric arcane lore, such as wicca; which is yet another cognate. The opposite of vidya, avidya, is sometimes loosely translated as ignorance, but the more current preference might be nescience, since science has the same nuance as vidya.
Now, jnana. The pali word in nnana. The Chinese 智 {zhi} does not help clarify it much. As i talked about before, the direct translation of jnana is knowing as a noun; jna = to know' -na - ing. It is a fairly close cognate of gnosis. Translators usually render is as knowledge, with the sense of:the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association. The opposite is ajnana; literally the state of ignoring, ignorance, not knowing.
So far, we have vidya, the objective wisdom or knowledge that we want to know. Then there is the subjective process of knowing it; which is jnana. We still need a tool to know. This is prajna, Pali: panna, Chinese: 慧 {hui}. Prajna is pra = for + jna = to know. It is knowing how to know. The traditional translation is wisdom; sense 1 b:. ability to discern inner qualities and relationships. Currently, discernment is the preferred translation. One other thing, the Bodhisattva of Prajna, Manjushri, is depicted as youth of 18 years. So prajna is not something gained through age and experience. The symbol of prajna is a double edged sword. That means it can be used to glean both conventional and ultimate wisdom / knowledge.
I also mentioned sanna / samjna 想 {xiang}. This is the name of the third of the 5 aggregates of clinging {khanda, skandha}. Samjna is sam = with + jna = to know. This is taken to mean abstract ideas, our mental conceptions.
There are a few more related words:
Passana / pashana 觀 {guan}: This from another verbal root, pash; which also means 'to see'. Pash = see + ya = the field, + na = ing. Pash can be the same as 'lok;' to literally look at. I get the impression it might mean to see the big picture, 'the forest.' The Buddha used passana figuratively, like seeing in the sense of 'getting it" -- a moment of insight. The Buddha also said ehipassiko; "come and see for yourself."
There is also vipassana or vipashyana 観心. The prefix vi-, in this case, is considered an intensifier, 'apart' in the sense out of the ordinary; vipassana is a process of spiritual introspection.
Sati / smrti 念 {nian}: This is presently translated as mindfulness and is related to the practice of vipassana. Depending on context, it is sometimes translated as recollection, sometimes as alertness, or observance. The Chinese word means remembrance, study closely, pay attention. [念 can also meaning a single thought-moment; sanskrit: kshana]. I associate mindfulness with khanika samadhi; a moment-to-moment concentration that moves fluidly from object to object, without fixing or attaching on any object; in contrast with appana samadhi, an absorption or fixed concentration on one object.
There is also the concept of practical street wisdom or skill 聰; which can either be unwholesome, as in cunning or slyness 邪聰;
or wholesome, as in know-how or savvy. The latter, wholesome practical skill, is covered under the category of merits, blessings, advantages, or benefits {punya} and aims {artha}.
Normal reaction is to reflect. Shields up and prepare for battle.
Or absorb and become a verbal punching bag.
All ego nonsense.
Keep in mind that all beings are like you. We all want the same things -
Less suffering and more happiness.
Just have confused and foolish ways to go about it.
Wisdom as a two edged sword is interesting in that it cuts two ways (subjective and objective?) and yet at the same time a sword it obviously more than these two edges, is able to hold and wield these two edges (both subjective and objective knowledge). So the sword is a metaphor (don’t you think?) that speaks of a gestalt (wisdom) as being more than the sum of its parts.
I will answer your post after some thought on these fine issues.
Anger is nothing more than one's own projected needs of grasping - a desire for having everything their own way.
Deal with the issue - grasping to satisfy the ego.
Realize anger is the ego's attempt to rearrange the world to suit itself.
Anger therefore originates nowhere else other than from oneself.
We should thank those who 'make' us angry. They are revealing to us our own obscurations. We should thank them for being our kindest teacher in giving us a change to practice the path.
Comments
I don't know.
G: Now its days later and I have been suffering from the shame…
S9: One of the newer findings in psychology is that our emotional mind is actually separate from our intellectual mind, literally, and even has its own memory.
I read somewhere that often the intellectual mind may not remember in any detail an emotional event, or even have any memory of the event at all. Yet, strangely enough, when they were somehow induced into being very emotional again, similar to when the event took place, that the memory came back to them ever so clearly.
This puts a whole n’other wrinkle on “being of two minds.”
Because of this split, we are more like a group of minds or a committee (who knows how many minds actually reside within us). In which case perhaps, it is better to wait and not make a hasty decision emotionally, or intellectually, but let our multiple minds have time to voice their side of any issue. In this way we may please all sides of our self, or harmonize more of all of our wishes for particular outcomes. This being a kind of coming together, (with our selves), or a healing of purpose, in order to make us once again whole. Smile!
Peace and love,
S9/Leslie
I do think much of the higher Catholic world is a conspiracy, but not all of it...
Well, actually, anger and greed, though related as part of the raga-dosa complex, are grouped separately. What surprised me was that envy and stinginess are under the anger heading, rather than the greed heading. That said, your reasoning still works.
First, we need to understand the words as the Buddha and early Buddhists used them. There are three groups of defiled, afflictive, or unwholesome volitional states -- the greedy, attachment or attraction states; the angry or aversive states; and the ignorant or stupid states.
Anger or aversion refers to feeling repulsed or hostile; a dislike for something. The root of the anger states is given variously as dosa {hatred, annoyance, unhappy}, patigha {anger, as in striking out against}, arati {aversion}, vyapada {enmity}, kupito {offended, provoked, irked}, and khoda {rage, fury, wrath}. There are other nuances of hated and anger; I listed some of those. These can be treated as synonyms in general use, but each has its own shade of meaning.
If I did not read the Theravadin Abidhamma, I would instinctively group envy {issa / irsya} and stinginess {macchariya / matsarya} with the greedy states. Now why are they are considered angry states? Envy is wanting what others have; stinginess is declining to share what one possesses. Furthermore, envy tells us we can only get it by taking it away from the other person. Stinginess tells us if we share it, we will lose it and they will keep it. I guess I see the anger element there?
Anyway, the greedy states are the opposites of the angry aversive states; they refer to feelings or emotions of attraction and attachment. The root is given as lobha {avarice, cupidity}, kama {lust, sensual desires}, or raga {passionate attachment, ardent affection, possessiveness, selfish interest}. Mana-mada {pride, arrogance, vanity} and dhitthi {opinionated views} are also listed under the greed heading.
Kukkucca, meaning worry and anxiety, is grouped with the angry states. I would intuitively place it under the third heading; given as nescience {avijja / avidya}, ignorance {annana / ajnana}, or confusion {moha}. I would also tend to put dhitthi; which is listed as a greedy state, under the ignorance heading.
By the way, the abhidhamma list of ignorance / stupidity group includes:
This is all rather advanced theory, but it is useful to contemplate. I do not have it sorted out yet. I should probably talk about the practical ways of dealing with anger.
The first thing to do, is try to avoid being provoked? Beyond that, it really depends on a lot of specifics. Who is doing that, where, and why? Do we attract that carp? Did we provoke the hostile person? Does the hostile person have some serious mental health issues? Is the hostile person a genuine threat to life, limb, or property? Can we calm them down? Can we walk away? Do we need to defend ourself or summon professional help? Do we need to help get them in a treatment program?
Will we have to deal with the person regularly? The practice called 'metta bhavana' can be very powerful in resolving conflicts. There is a four-fold endeavor meditation: Blocking and abandoning the unwholesome anger state; while cultivating and maintaining 'metta.' Also, chanting the Metta Sutta, the Chant of Metta, or the compassion mantras related to Avalokiteshvara and Green Tara
The other thing is to work on being very calm and objective in sizing up the situation. Chanting Nichiren school Daimoku, the Manjushri Mantra, or the Heart Sutra can clear the mind. Also, sitting concentration meditation to clam down, and 4-fold mindfulness meditation to become more discerning.
There are many useful Buddhist practices we can try out and see what works for us.
Well said
Regarding anger, I think that as well as whatever practice we're doing, its good to just relax a little - and not take everything too seriously !
.
I believe that the Buddha would tell us that living well or in a wise manner isn’t something that just happens without any forethought or help from us, but rather that living well and even with wisdom is in fact a skill that must be learned AND developed.
There are many different ways to protect yourself and thereby protect others from you.
Q: “In protecting our selves, we protect others.”
One example might be:
If you study your self very carefully and in depth, you will come to know your own vulnerabilities to anger, at which time you can find ways to put a protective cover over that RED button (aka trigger) and disallows someone else from pushing it way too easily.
Another opportunity to protect your self might come through building personal strength of one kind or another (good character, marshal arts, and an arsenal of wise advise and practice to abort falling into the negative emotions, and/or a calm center to fall back on having built it up in meditation, etc. None of these things, of course, just happen over night.) In other words, there are many ways to add to your own self-confidence and clarity that could somehow ameliorate your present weakness and make you less afraid of being harmed. (We all seem to have weakness of one kind or another).
Another strength is compassion. But how are you going to build such ‘an attitude of compassion’ at a time when someone is already in your face, and emotions are high? Obviously we must build such strengths previous to the need for them and have them accompany us into each and every situation fully grown.
If we have ever been angry, (and who hasn’t ?) you cannot really claim that getting angry again is a surprise…now can you. What we need than is a little foresight during our quiet moments in order to prepare and be ready.
Peace and love,
S9
Yes. The word dhitthi {sanskrit dristi} comes from a word that means viewpoint or perspective. This can refer to a literal line of vision. For example, the perspective from a hill top is different from that of a valley. The perspective from inside a well is difference from that of a viewer looking into a well. It is also used figuratively to mean a mental point of view; like an an opinion or ideology. That is how it used here.
In this context it is listed as an affliction under the greed / attachment heading. So the implication is a strong attachment {raga} to our own, self centered perspectives, opinions, or ideologies. Buddhism also talks about samma ditthi, or the correct perspective. So, not all opinions are unwholesome; just self centered or opinionated opinions.
There are actually two correct perspectives. There is the worldly perspective; which relates to karma, to volitional moral causality, we reap what we sow. We should avoid acting out on anger because of the moral or karmic consequences for ourselves.
There is also the sublime perspective. Raga {attachment} is closely tied with dosa {dislike}; in that we tend to view things in terms of what we like and dislike. The former arouses raga; the latter arouses dosa.
It’s a restless hungry feeling
That don’t mean no one no good
When ev’rything I’m a-sayin’
You can say it just as good.
You’re right from your side
I’m right from mine
We’re both just one too many mornings
An’ a thousand miles behind
~~ Dylan
Raga {or lobha, kama, rati} and Dosa {or patigha, arati}; attraction-attachment and aversion-anger, also lead to moha {confusion / delusion}. Because we tend to see things in terms of what we like and dislike, we can not see things as they are. This creates 4 distortions:
I don’t see anything wrong with opinions. In fact, I see them as being a necessary finite tool (aka dream tool) within this finite Universe (aka dream universe).
But I 3rd the motion put forth by Guy, and 2nded by Robby, that we should not identify with our opinions by seeing them as either our self or our self-definition.
All opinions are not created equal. By this I mean that most opinions can become more sophisticated when they are educated. I think we all start out in the beginning with opinions that are basically a mixture of instinct and emotion, and only slightly percolated in a tiny smidgen of intellect (often very tiny). Grin!
Education doesn’t mean however that we must swallow ideas presented to us by either educators or even sages whole and without question. Rather they give us a good chance to see how others have handled these very same questions, before us, often dedicating their whole lives to the truth found within these very opinions. In this way, we can stand on these persons shoulders and fly higher than we ever might have if we were forced to reinvent the wheel. But we must add ourselves into this mix, if we are actually ever going to fly free of just words.
I think too that we must consider wisdom, right about now.
Is wisdom just one more opinion or some form of opinion or is it something way more?
I personally believe that wisdom is a gestalt of opinions. (Gestalt meaning more than the sum of its parts…so that wisdom is not simply a unity or like a jigsaw puzzle that includes all opinions.)
Wisdom comes about when we take our opinions out on the road, (aka apply them to life and vigorous internal investigation), in order to see if they are workable and truly satisfying at a deeper level than merely surviving.
Wisdom is more like clarity of vision, than it is an accumulation of facts. For this reason, true wisdom has a vastness that is not easily captured in words. It is more intimate and subjectively personal than knowledge.
Peace and love,
My young friend,
S9/Leslie
Deal with the issue - grasping to satisfy the ego.
Realize anger is the ego's attempt to rearrange the world to suit itself.
Anger therefore originates nowhere else other than from oneself.
We should thank those who 'make' us angry. They are revealing to us our own obscurations. We should thank them for being our kindest teacher in giving us a change to practice the path.
You are touching on one of many problems of translation; the semantic value of words, cognates, idiom, and nuance. In Sanskrit, the nuance is reversed of wisdom {vidya} and knowledge {jnana}. Wisdom {Vidya} is objective fact, knowledge {jnana} is the subjective knowing.
The Sanskrit cognate of wisdom is vidya, vijja in Pali. The verbal root vid comes from the same root as view and video. It is also a cognate of wit, wizard, witch, and wicca, That shows the way words from the same root can acquire different nuances in different cultures over time. The suffix -ya in vidya is a possible cognate of -ion, -ia, -y, and -ity. I have seen vidya translated as both wisdom or knowledge; though wisdom is the cognate. The sense is Merraim-Webster's wisdom 1. a : accumulated philosophic or scientific learning. The best direct translation of vidya might be objective wisdom or science. At present, wisdom or knowledge are used as interchangeably as translations. It is taken to mean a hard or objective fact, not as subjective. The Chinese word for vidya 明 means light, bright, or wise
Another word that translated as wisdom or knowledge is jnana; which is nnana is Pali. The root jna, means to know. Jna a cognate of know, as well as the gno is gnosis, the gni in cognition, and the gna in cognate. The -na suiffix is a cognate of -ing, so it literally means 'knowing' in the sense of the noun usage. The sense is subjective knowledge. I take it mean to know for ourselves. The Chinese is 智.
There is also vijnana. The prefix vi- is a cognate of dis-. The basic meaning is 'apart.' It can mean divided, a reversal, or extreme. Here, it is understood to mean divided; so it is 'divided knowing;' and translated as [general] consciousness or discrimination. The Chinese translation 識 can mean discrimination or recognition.
Yet another word translated as wisdom or knowledge is prajna; panna is Pali. There is that same 'jna." the prefix pra- is a cognate of for, pre-, pro- {in the sense of antecedent}, and per-. The sense of pra- here is likely for as in the usage or purpose. Literally, 'for to know.' The Chinese word for this is 慧and means intelligent, smart, or wise. The most common translation of prajna these days is discernment; or wisdom in the sense of being discerning. It is a near synonym of passana or vipassana {insight}
A related word is samjna 想. The prefix sam is a cognate of same, sim-, syn-. or com- [in the sense of with, together, or together with]. Cognize is literal, conception is close, but is is usually translated as perception.
If you took a young child and locked him in a room with all or most of the dictionaries ever written, and he also studied them constantly (having nothing much else to do), I daresay that if you then released him onto the streets of New York City, with all of his accumulate wisdom (?), my guess is that he wouldn’t be able to function very well.
Perhaps this is very simply because, knowledge in order to become wisdom must be lived.
I have often thought of the old tale about the Tower of Babel, where they were trying to reach heaven and failing badly because words alone won’t get you there.
I don’t believe you can divide wisdom and knowledge by saying one is subjective and one objective, otherwise you would need to have (invent?) another word to mean the gestalt of these two. The idea of something of more vast transcending accumulation, obviously outruns the words and their usage throughout the ages.
At an earlier age, I used to think I would come across a sentence one fine day that would finally enlighten me...I was very mind bound.
But then too, language is a growing thing, living and changing as need dictates. So we cannot restrict ourselves to what some scholars might have said a word meant a long time ago, although we shouldn’t ignore their fine efforts in this area either, by any means.
Let me just throw out one more thought before I wonder off into my day of necessary minutia.
I believe that our emotional states like fear, anger, and greed, not to mention envy, Da/Da/ Da/Da, are not actually separate. Separating these words and conceptual structures are only a convenience for studying them carefully, so that we will not be overwhelmed and left floundering in vast, complex, and intertwining details.
Emotions actually bleed into each other, much like taste and smell do.
In studying why the elderly had lost their taste for food and ate often poorly in consequence, they found out that smell was the actual problem in most cases.
A cat also won’t even eat his food in good amounts, if at all, when his nose is stuffed up.
Now we could find a multitude of good reasons for this reaction, one being the poor detection of food spoilage and consequent treat to survival through an error. But the fact remains they bleed into each other, taste and smell, back and forth. Even though they have separate names and seem to take place in separate body parts, their function is not actually separate. See my point here?
By the way, I am enjoying your input in this area of word translation. I am just too much of a philosopher not to question everything, even my own attempts. Smile!
But like they say, “Two heads are better than one,” even if they are banging them into each other in search for clarity. Grin!
Peace and love,
S9/Leslie
I get your point. and agree. I am just trying to sort out the way the Buddha sorted these things out. Sometimes; vidya {wisdom} and jnana {knowing} are used as synonyms; and sometimes they have distinct nuances. Explaining the nuances to ourselves; which I think is what the drives the philosopher and writer, can get very sticky.
In modern English, wisdom {vidya} and knowledge {jnana} are also treated both as synonyms and as words with distinct meanings. Also, the distinct meanings vary. If you have a moment, look at:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wisdom
1 a. accumulated philosophic or scientific learning
3: the teachings of the ancient wise men
Those are the primary senses of the sanskrit vidya, pali vijja. The verbal root is vid; which can mean to know or to see. It is a cognate of video, vista, view, wizard and wisdom. The suffix -ya makes it a noun, and can do roughly the same same as the noun suffix -ia, sense 3, 'the area, field, or realm of.' Or several of the variations of the suffix -y, especially 'characterized by' or 'instance of.' {the sanskrit -ya or -aya is a cognate of -y and -ia}.
The Chinese for vidya is 明 {ming} -- meaning light, in contrast with darkness. So it is information that figuratively casts light on a subject. The sense is objective truth or fact, the stuff we try to get from books. Translators use either wisdom, as in senses 1 & 3, or knowledge as in:
4. a : the sum of what is known : the body of truth, information, and principles acquired by humankind
Knowledge: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/knowledge?show=0&t=1286375982
Wisdom is preferred by some, as a translation of vidya, because it is a cognate; ii comes from the same ancient root word as vidya. Note that vidya can also be esoteric arcane lore, such as wicca; which is yet another cognate. The opposite of vidya, avidya, is sometimes loosely translated as ignorance, but the more current preference might be nescience, since science has the same nuance as vidya.
Now, jnana. The pali word in nnana. The Chinese 智 {zhi} does not help clarify it much. As i talked about before, the direct translation of jnana is knowing as a noun; jna = to know' -na - ing. It is a fairly close cognate of gnosis. Translators usually render is as knowledge, with the sense of: the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association. The opposite is ajnana; literally the state of ignoring, ignorance, not knowing.
So far, we have vidya, the objective wisdom or knowledge that we want to know. Then there is the subjective process of knowing it; which is jnana. We still need a tool to know. This is prajna, Pali: panna, Chinese: 慧 {hui}. Prajna is pra = for + jna = to know. It is knowing how to know. The traditional translation is wisdom; sense 1 b :. ability to discern inner qualities and relationships. Currently, discernment is the preferred translation. One other thing, the Bodhisattva of Prajna, Manjushri, is depicted as youth of 18 years. So prajna is not something gained through age and experience. The symbol of prajna is a double edged sword. That means it can be used to glean both conventional and ultimate wisdom / knowledge.
Manjusri Mantra; Visualizing Bodhisattva Manjusri
Discernment Cultivation; Heart Sutra / Manjushri Mantra
I also mentioned sanna / samjna 想 {xiang}. This is the name of the third of the 5 aggregates of clinging {khanda, skandha}. Samjna is sam = with + jna = to know. This is taken to mean abstract ideas, our mental conceptions.
There are a few more related words:
Passana / pashana 觀 {guan}: This from another verbal root, pash; which also means 'to see'. Pash = see + ya = the field, + na = ing. Pash can be the same as 'lok;' to literally look at. I get the impression it might mean to see the big picture, 'the forest.' The Buddha used passana figuratively, like seeing in the sense of 'getting it" -- a moment of insight. The Buddha also said ehipassiko; "come and see for yourself."
There is also vipassana or vipashyana 観心. The prefix vi-, in this case, is considered an intensifier, 'apart' in the sense out of the ordinary; vipassana is a process of spiritual introspection.
Sati / smrti 念 {nian}: This is presently translated as mindfulness and is related to the practice of vipassana. Depending on context, it is sometimes translated as recollection, sometimes as alertness, or observance. The Chinese word means remembrance, study closely, pay attention. [念 can also meaning a single thought-moment; sanskrit: kshana]. I associate mindfulness with khanika samadhi; a moment-to-moment concentration that moves fluidly from object to object, without fixing or attaching on any object; in contrast with appana samadhi, an absorption or fixed concentration on one object.
There is also the concept of practical street wisdom or skill 聰; which can either be unwholesome, as in cunning or slyness 邪聰;
or wholesome, as in know-how or savvy. The latter, wholesome practical skill, is covered under the category of merits, blessings, advantages, or benefits {punya} and aims {artha}.
If directed at the previous post, I have a lot of time on my hands. :cool:
Or absorb and become a verbal punching bag.
All ego nonsense.
Keep in mind that all beings are like you. We all want the same things -
Less suffering and more happiness.
Just have confused and foolish ways to go about it.
Compassion is the heart of the dharma.
Just a thought:
Wisdom as a two edged sword is interesting in that it cuts two ways (subjective and objective?) and yet at the same time a sword it obviously more than these two edges, is able to hold and wield these two edges (both subjective and objective knowledge). So the sword is a metaphor (don’t you think?) that speaks of a gestalt (wisdom) as being more than the sum of its parts.
I will answer your post after some thought on these fine issues.
Peace and love,
S9/Leslie
I can tell :rolleyes: