Giving in to anger, one does not practice the Dhamma

Discussion
6

Just a friendly reminder to make sure we don’t get too angry about our anger :joy: and that we deal with it in wholesome ways, not by suppression, denial or being overly idealistic. Anger in one form or another does not disappear completely until very high stages of path realisation have been achieved. So it’s great to have the intention to abandon anger but we are bound to experience anger from time to time…

Practicing the Dhamma is working with our anger. Working with our anger is practicing the Dhamma.

Spiritual Bypassing is a premature transcendence of unwholesome states, like anger, which have been not dealt with fully or authentically by us.

Also, sometimes anger sometimes is a useful emotion that tells us that something is not right, like when someone is physically or sexually, emotionally abusing. It’s also the kind of emotion we experience when there is an injustice like discrimination, genocide or rape.

The simile of the saw relates to verbal abuse and is the ideal, but we should not think that our progress towards an ideal is less important than the ideal itself.

10 Likes
7

I don’t see how anger is useful for the knowing that something is unwholesome or not right?
Anger is in regards unwelcomed unwanted unpleasant feelings, being adverse to pain, and pain is not a sign that something is unwholesome.
But maybe you meant that if there is anger then one can know that something is wrong, and that something is anger, then in that way, anger can indicate that something is wrong because there is anger , which is wrong.

In an extreme unwholesome situation such as rape, there is pain ,and anger is quite normal. However,the practise of Dhamma will uproot the anger,even if such a situation had to occur. It does not justify rape. The rape is still unwholesome.
The person then who has practised in accordance with Dhamma, who is thus free of anger, will still be able to discern the unwholesomeness of rape etc ,it will still be unpleasant, but there will be no dukkha.
Anger is never useful, dukkha is not useful, and being free from it will help one truly deal with whatever horrible situation might arise, and there will not be any lack of discernment or knowing what is right or wrong for one who is free from anger.

Progress to the ideal and arrival at the ideal,are indeed both important,but different experiences.

By ‘working with’ ,I am unsure what you mean?
Do you mean ‘using anger skillfully’, or ’ with anger one practises the Dhamma’?
What are you suggesting that one does with arisen anger, so as to practice the Dhamma or be free from dukkha?

8

Thanks for your questions, @Thaniyo_Bhikkhu. By ‘working with anger’, I mean when we experience it, we don’t try to wish it away, or pretend that it is not happening. We don’t suppress or deny it. We accept that it is there, understand it, see it’s disadvantages and let it go. We don’t pretend that we are spiritually superior – that we have attained an elevated state of non-anger we actually have not yet reached. Nor cultivativate an exaggerated detachment that is excessively neutral, compartmentalising negative emotions so that we think we have dealt with them when we haven’t. We don’t practice emotional numbing, blocking out our thoughts using forceful means or willpower. We don’t fear anger in a phobic way that shuts down legitimate issues where people have hurt, outrage, etc, and we don’t use positivity culture to mask our authentic feelings or deny the negative experiences of others. And, importantly, we don’t espouse an unrealistic ideal that we cannot actually live up to ourselves, or expect others to live up to either.

Hope that clarifies it for you. All the things I suggested avoiding above, I’ve seen people do for years on the spiritual path, or heard them recommend to others. But they still got angry :grinning: because they hadn’t approached their anger with wisdom. This is the difference between the ideal and the progress that leads there; experiencing anger and working with it wisely. Artificially pushing it away, denying, or suppressing anger actually precludes us from understanding it, denying us the opportunity to grow in wisdom so that we can truly let it go.

Edited for typos and clarity.

9 Likes
9

@Akaliko it seems to me that in working with anger, there’s often a lot of deconstruction or untangling of mixed feelings, conditioning, assumptions, and self identification. Would you agree?

There’s thus seems to be a lot of opportunity in anger to make progress on the path, if confronted calmly, patiently, compassionately.

5 Likes
10

Yes! @ERose you are quite right, anger is one of our greatest teachers. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t want to leave school one day though! :joy:

7 Likes
11

I have found working with both has often been the best teacher. Out of every instance of suffering, there is a great opportunity to learn about samsara.

Anger is a very strong emotion. This is a very useful aspect, if one is mindful of the arising and ceasing of emotions. As such, anger can be used to actively practice work on non-self, and on impermanence, and directly feed into the gradual training of the Noble 8-fold path.

4 Likes
12

Yes, leaving that school is a desire which can lead to the ending of desire / craving. And working through its exercises well can mean - only occasional Continuing Education courses from time to time, if I can extend your simile!

Re: “sometimes anger sometimes is a useful emotion that tells us that something is not right, like when someone is physically or sexually, emotionally abusing”.

Yes, I think sometimes anger can be a canary in the coal mine, an indicator that something as yet unrecognized is unhealthy. In this capacity, in my experience the anger feeling dissipates more easily, while pointing to observing things more as they are, and greater understandings.

edited for typos

5 Likes
13

Having killed anger
you sleep in ease.
Having killed anger
you do not grieve.
The noble ones praise
the slaying of anger
— with its honeyed crest
& poison root —
for having killed it
you do not grieve. - SN1.71

6 Likes
14

This, of course was said in response to a very specific question from a deva about killing, hence the strong language in this context. It also mentions the Noble Ones, those who have already attained stream entry and above. Quite refined beings already. :star_struck:

Here is the Deva’s question:

At Savatthi. Standing to one side, that devatā addressed the Blessed One in verse:

“Having slain what does one sleep soundly?
Having slain what does one not sorrow?
What is the one thing, O Gotama,
Whose killing you approve?”
https://suttacentral.net/sn1.71

I’d like to state for record of this thread that I don’t think anger is wholesome etc, but am concerned instead with how people approach it. As a monk, one sees all sorts of approaches to this, and a lot of them fall into the spiritual bypassing category, many of them are unhealthy and some are quite destructive. Hence my friendly advice. :smiling_face: May all beings be free from anger!

PS Bhante Sujato’s translation for the above sutta uses the word ‘incinerated’ instead of slain for ‘chetvā’ usually translated as ‘cut off’, which makes me think that perhaps the original context of the Sutta may have had to do with burnt offerings or sacrifice, of which the Buddha did not approve, hence the Deva’s question… ? But I don’t have time to check right now! :grinning:

When anger’s incinerated you sleep at ease.
When anger’s incinerated there is no sorrow.

Update it’s because of the variant readings in different editions, of jhatva, which means ‘burnt’ and chetvā which means ‘cut off’. Bhikkhu Bodhi says that jhetva is ‘certainly the correct reading’ in his notes to this Sutta, so it seems Bhante Sujato incorporated this reading into the edition he was working from, which otherwise uses chetvā.

Makes quite a difference to the meaning… But dead is dead… I guess. :coffin:

6 Likes
15

Burning is a gradual progression- cutting is sudden - the Buddha often used similes to demonstrate what the practice feels like too apart from the obvious meaning and both were intentional. See Sakka’s chariot simile -

He who checks rising anger as a charioteer checks a rolling chariot, him I call a true charioteer. Others only hold the reins. SuttaCentral

…no-one can challenge a person
who’s strong, guarded by the teaching.
When you get angry at an angry person
you just make things worse for yourself.
When you don’t get angry at an angry person
you win a battle hard to win
When you know that the other is angry,
you act for the good of both
yourself and the other
if you’re mindful and stay calm. SuttaCentral

3 Likes
16

One can also practice the antidote to ill-will, which is metta bhavana.

3 Likes
17

Sure, killing anger is probably more about starving it to death than bludgeoning or curb-stomping it to death.

And what starves the arising of ill will, or, when it has arisen, starves its increase and growth? There is the heart’s release by love. Frequent proper attention to that starves the arising of ill will, or, when it has arisen, starves its increase and growth. - SN46.51

I will say though that the suttas often seem to use less gentle language than the modern western psychology informed dhamma teachings contain. In other words, from a purely textual perspective, in comparison to contemporary teachings. the teachings of the Buddha aren’t always as soft as some of us modern folks might prefer. Whether that’s a problem or not is beyond the scope of this post.

4 Likes
18

I just spent some time reading some suttas that include discussions of how to deal with anger. The main thrust of those teachings is that short of becoming enlightened, even diligent students of Buddhist teachings are going to encounter anger in the course of their lives.

From my perspective, the key words in the subject heading of this topic are “giving in to,” as in “giving in to anger.” In English, “giving in to” could be defined as succumb to, yield to, submit to, or surrender to (I’m relying on my 1962 print version of Roget’s Thesaurus for synonyms for “give in to.”) Assuming for the moment that what is unwholesome about anger is how it is expressed (bringing harm to ourselves and others who become the target of expressions of anger), the question becomes one of cultivating mindfulness when feelings of anger arise so as not to succumb, yield, submit, or surrender to them.

I suppose this is just re-stating the problem, but Buddhist teachings provide guidance for practicing mindfulness in the face of any number of emotions to which succumbing, yielding, submitting, and surrendering bring unwholesome reactions. So I guess the answer is to meet anger the way one would meet any emotion—with the confidence, energy, wisdom, concentration, and mindfulness one would use in meditative and daily practice.

6 Likes
19

I would be interested to hear more about your experiences with spiritual bypassing. I recently discovered this term and appreciate the insight it captures. From my own experience, a vital condition for anger is fear and a vital condition for fear is delight. What is fascinating to me is that the suttas make no mention of this inferred chain of dependencies. Therefore my own experience might be idiosyncratic, hence the question.

2 Likes
20

I also find:
Anxiety leads to anger
Wanting things to be a certain way leads to anger
Attachment leads to anger

Pahana or wipe-out is used which suggests total cessation of anger. Anger is removed totally at the anagamin state.

2 Likes
21

Not to get to far away from EBTs, but I heard on the radio this morning that recent studies show that clinical depression and chronic anxiety can manifest themselves as irritability and anger. Buddhism is not the same as psychotherapy, but I have found in my own practice that the skills I am working on in meditation are very consistent with strategies I discussed with my therapist for dealing with the depression and anxiety following a major life crisis last year. I still experience bouts of irritability and anger, but my approach to them is far more skillful than it was last year at this time.

3 Likes
22

Hi @Polarbear, as Mat wisely said much earlier in this thread:

Sometimes the elegant simplicity of the way things are presented in the suttas lulls us is into thinking that life is not very complicated. You hear an inspirational quote which makes everything sound easy, but then practicing it is more difficult. Spiritual slogans like ‘kill your anger’ are just mere words, they might convince our ears but the mind is more intransigent, and our lives are complex. It’s easy to become discouraged. Or worse, delusion is not far away, either.

Often, this is the difference between reading the texts only, without access to a teacher, and having the texts plus access to good teachers who help you interpret them and practice skillfully. As they say, there is nothing like the zealotry of a new convert, and it’s often people with the least experience of the spiritual path who have the most ideologically extreme views on practice – they just read it in a book! – but experienced teachers are far far more pragmatic, having seen people practicing in many ways over the years. We see glimpses of this type of situation in the suttas, where people have heard a teaching but fundamentally misunderstand it in practice, and then of course there is the infamous incident at Vesāli, where many monks commited suicide after hearing a talk on the loathesomeness of the body…

One way I often think about this kind of issue, when people dogmatically advocate for a purely textual approach, is through the way we use medicine. So, for monks like me, medicines are allowed and in our ordinations we are told to rely on fermented urine as our medicinal support. If we get bitten by a snake, we are told in the Vinaya to drink a mixture of faeces, urine and dirt. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: In the 2500 years since the Buddha, medicine has become somewhat more complex and sophisticated. We recognise that the medicines that we use today are more efficacious and more varied for different uses and people. Similarly, we know that there are more than 31 parts of the body, and that there are more than the 4 great elements.

Should I stick to a strictly textual approach to medicines? No, we have the great standards to guide us. Similarly, when it comes to the mind, should our practice not be informed by developments in psychology over the last 2500 years? If they are line with the Buddha’s teachings, then why not?

@karl_lew some of the above might be of interest to you, I will write a post about spiritual bypassing elsewhere. But for the topic of anger, I’ve seen people suppressing and denying their anger, projecting a contrived facade of cold detached equanimity or hyper positivity; they think that makes them a better Buddhist because Buddhists “don’t have anger”. But eventually the mask has to drop… and they explode in wild temper tantrums, or expletive laden rages, that are quite spectacular! :laughing: One monk I know remarked that people who seem preternaturally calm and controlled are most likely the ones who have anger issues, and it will come out eventually. Something to think about anyway in terms of how we deal with it skillfully.

8 Likes
23

Thank you. :pray:

2 Likes
24

I’m reminded of Ms. Vedehikā, who, according to the Buddha, used to have a reputation of being sweet, even-tempered, and calm…

5 Likes
25

In Dhamma I am no expert. With your kind permission and indulgence, let me write my thoughts more out of personal experience than out of holy writ: Anger is my hinderance. I ameliorate it by reminding myself that anger is a feeling, not me, not mine, not I. When anger arises, I try to remember not to produce unwholesome karma by my actions of mind, speech, and deed in response to it. Having said that, when I am hooked by anger, sending Dhamma flying out the window, eventually, the Dhamma returns, and then I look at it bemused and, as far as possible, with compassion. Cutting myself some Dhamma slack contributes to my ability to cope; to make use of anger to advance. In short, I have hindrances up the wazoo, so I might as well make good use of them. Sorry to ramble.