Thanks Dan, while it's true there are many Buddhists around the world who see the Buddha has perfect, and anything he said or did as skilful means - I'm with you on point three... Sometimes he was angry, like the best of us. To me this is a more hopeful message than the one of perfection - one that allows for both human nature and the possibility of positive change
I’ve noticed that in some Buddhist circles it is typical to talk about enlightenment as a far off (almost) unachievable goal. There’s a nice humility in this but I think it ultimately is a disservice. If enlightenment was understood more as “moments of enlightenment” rather than as a permanent state, then the benefits of practice might become more apparent to practitioners. “My practice has enabled me to experience and live from an enlightened state more frequently” vs. “enlightenment? Me? Not in this lifetime!” —which is what I hear more frequently.
This connects back to how Buddha, and, for example, his apparent anger, is understood. If enlightenment is permanent then we need to jump hoops to explain the apparent anger. If enlightenment is a moment to moment experience, then the anger is a window to the full unadorned reality of being human.
This accounts for so much: “I prefer to apply Buddhism’s teaching of impermanence to enlightenment itself. Enlightenment is a state of being that, like all other states of being, is subject to impermanence.”
I think there is much comfort in your anger series and in this post for imperfect mortals - especially parents.
Parenting is so challenging! Nothing exposes my shortcomings quite like parenting. That’s still the case for me and my very independent children are 32 and 30.
“Consider an adult who tends to the traumas of a child: a scraped knee, spilled milk, a broken toy. As adults, we know that kids have no idea as to what constitutes a genuine problem because inexperience greatly limits their childhood perspective. Children do not yet know that the world does not revolve around them.
As grownups, dare we admit to ourselves that we, too, have a collective immaturity of view? Dare we admit that our thoughts and behaviors spring from a belief that the world revolves around us?
Apparently not! Yet, evidence abounds. Part the curtains of society’s racial, ethnic, religious, national, and cultural conflicts and you will find the human ego turning the knobs and pulling the levers.
Now imagine a world in which everyone, but especially people with power and influence holds an expanded view of our place in the cosmos. With that perspective, our problems would shrink, or never appear at all- and we would celebrate our earthly differences while shunning the behavior of our predecessors who slaughtered one another because of them.” Neil DeGrasse Tyson
I’m always reluctant to say that a story or teaching doesn’t exist in a particular tradition as that would mean I have complete knowledge of all teachings and stories within that tradition. That’s certainly not true for me and Buddhism. That said, I’m unaware of any Buddhist teachings that look favorably on righteous anger. If others read this and have an example to offer, I hope they will.
Dan, thank you for another clear and insightful look at anger, this time from a Buddhist perspective. From a Tantric yoga perspective anger is one of the nine rasas (tastes) of life. It's a given that anger is a part of being human. It's also helpful to consider, as you point to, that even the enlightened ones like the Buddha were also dealing with human emotions.
I plan to write a post on anger in the Mahabharata but it’s some weeks away. For me, working with anger is similar to working with fear—but different from working with joy, love, or wonder. Fear and anger can serve us, but they often best serve us when their lessons are quickly transformed into constructive action and their emotional power (which can often lead to destructive actions) are left behind. I’d be curious to learn whether there are distinctions made in how we should work with these different rasas in Tantric philosophy. Maybe a subject for a future Sage Sanctuary post. 😊❤️
Yes, the energy of the emotions of fear and anger can be helpful when channeled into skillful action. Which historically has been challenging for me. That's one of the ways the practice has helped. I'll look forward to your next edition, Dan. Thanks for the suggestion, that thought has been niggling.
I really enjoyed this discussion, and agree that anger exists within enlightenment; I remember something Alan Watts said once, well I don't remember exactly, but the gist was - when a Zen master gets angry, the whole room shakes! But then it's gone because he's expressed it.
I think the important lesson is in expressing it constructively - scream or punch pillows or play drums - do something to move the physical energy, and realize there is no need to project the anger or blame someone for it. And even if the anger is with a partner or friend - express open heartedly and connect it with love. I'm so angry because I can't stand to see you being so unconscious, because I know you're squashing your potential, because I love you so much... There is a huge different in anger as a stand for love versus anger as a way to deflect personal responsibility
I tend to believe (as humans) it is important to allow ourselves to be angry and even be in touch with righteous anger at times.
Suppressing it tends to bring it back up in other ways. Picturing ourselves as a perfect saint can lead to this pretty easily I think.
Not a Buddhist parable but I envision the passable about “Christ driving the money changers out the temple” as an example of an enlightened being displaying righteous anger.
I’d be curious if there are any similar parables in Buddhism.
OK! you are the guy that thinks the Buddha, if he still existed, would not give a rat's ass about being misquoted. OK i am a Zen Buddhist. For us Buddha was not a God but a man who taught about 40 years after his insights of the Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path. and then he died, but his teachings were profound. There are two major schools of Buddhism. The first Theravada Buddhism believes that the ideal person is one who practices to become an Arhat, someone who practices to attain 'enlightenment' Whereas In Mahayana Buddhism there is no such thing as enlightenment or nirvana. Doesn't exist. Zen falls under the umbrella of Mahayana Buddhism where the ideal person is the bodhisattva, a compassionate person who while walking or practicing the EIGHTFOLD PATH, helps others along the way. we don't believe in enlightenment and that in the eightfold path, the journey itself is the goal. You may of heard 'The Path is the Goal.' Zen Buddhist also believe that it is a hindrance to read Buddhist scriptures and sutras (as Thich Nhat Hanh taught, they are not some exalted words high up in a temple shelf! It's like trying to getting water out of dried-up bones!' Now i am only trying to remember that, and I have a feeling that you're going to look it up to be sure my teacher Nhat Hanh used those exact words. This is so crazy- the gentlemen that you have hooked up with I remember hauling a quote out of my ass to just get the point over that getting angry was not beneficial to anyone. He immediately messaged me that the Buddha didn't say that. I countered with a Monty Python skit were a guy goes into a room that says ARGUMENTS! the man sits down and John Cleese is sitting at a desk and he says 'May I help you?' The man says 'I've come here for an argument"
Cleese says, 'No you never.' Now your friend didn't get the hint apparently -do you? Do you understand the message there? And two months later he is back because he has found someone who spends their time looking for misquotes of the Buddha. it was 2,500 year, to be honest I wasn't there, were you? -Oh, I'd better check that because I got the the timeline wrong . So this guy (rabbi is he?) he is back with you because he can't let go of not being right! And I really don't care. I think I told him, i was probably wrong. and the notion that the Buddha would care shows complete ignorance about what the Buddha taught and - I don't know why I looked up all this shit up to inform you a little, because you won't appreciate it. You'll just say, whatever - I'm a dickhead- but the need to be right about a generic quote. Do you think that the Buddha taught that anger is good for us? No? You are both right! I'm bat-shit crazy, but at least I know it. 'Empty your boat while crossing the river of life, and no one will oppose you, no one will seek to harm you.' Chuang Tzu
The definition of a great teacher is one who points out your hidden faults. Beware of excessively solicitous teachers...sweet words may feel nice in the moment but they're ultimately not particularly beneficial. A truly qualified teacher should help a student to overcome the sickness of egotism. If a real master scolds a student publicly it means you are worth their effort. Will you run? Will you hide? The presumption in the Buddhist tradition is that you haven't accepted a teacher until you've watched them carefully for years. Assuming you've done your due diligence and have accepted them and they've watched and accepted you...any further judgments are suspended forever and always. That's when trust develops and receiving instruction in the context of such a relationship is beyond ordinary assessment. The problem many western students of eastern teachers have is that they did not follow this traditional method and they've mistakenly accepted charlatans or abusers as their teacher. What could be more important than making sure your spiritual guide is worthy of your trust. However, if you've done the work and you know the person from whom you receive teachings is in fact a qualified master...then many unusual skillful means may manifest in the context of such a connection. There are many classic stories of the guru disciple relationship where ordinary phenomena are thoroughly undercut through some outrageous behavior or another. From a random person that's not ok but from your light and guide it is a powerful transformative teaching potentially. The Buddha did not have anger, could not have anger. A Buddha who has anger is not a Buddha. Sentient beings are beings with minds. A Buddha has no mind...no neurotic conceptuality whatsoever. The only experience an enlightened being has is enlightenment. That's why the bodhisattva vow is fulfilled upon attaining enlightenment. You vow to save all sentient beings...but in the enlightened state there are no longer sentient beings to save...only enlightenment exists..an unchanging irreversible state. Activity arises spontaneously according to the aspirations of beings but not from thinking about it. At least this is what the teachings say. I'm just repeating the teachings I've received but I have no experience personally. I did however follow the traditional way and was fortunate to have close relationships with extraordinary beings who accepted me as a student out of their vast compassion. I was never harmed or hurt or abused in more than 30 years of association with such beings. But I also wasn't the recipient of sweet nothings whispered into my ear! Hahaha. Close students of great masters are theoretically capable of receiving teachings for which others aren't yet qualified. But that's a different conversation! 😄
Cheers, Rabbi.
(Why did you come to see the Rebbe? I want to see how he ties his shoes 😉)
This is a brilliant and humane analysis of anger in the Buddha’s teachings. I’d be curious to know if there is any kind of inclusion in the the Pali canon about anger that is “wrathful” or “protective,” when it’s less about the defending one’s ego and more about protecting another. I always heard this wrathful energy to be the kind of feeling a parent might have when their starts child crosses the street without looking, or as my case recently, when a toddler places a small object in her mouth. Sometimes a hard no is called for! Anyway, love how you broke this down. Looking forward to reading more of your work.
‘You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger. Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else. However, you are the one that gets burned. In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for the truth and have begun striving for ourselves.
‘You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger. Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else. However, you are the one that gets burned. In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for the truth and have begun striving for ourselves.’ The Buddha
You know you could very well be right. it’s such a self-evident quote- I have a quote attributed to the Buddha, lao Tzu, Socrates and Eleanor Roosevelt!
But I don’t understand why you would even bring it up. ‘Empty your boat when crossing the river of life.’
🙂 Yes, many quotes get attributed to multiple people. And it's possible they all said it!
When I am chasing these things down, I try to find a place where the original source is cited. Then I try to chase down the original source--or a faithful translation of it.
The value of a quote speaks for itself, regardless of who said it. But because this post was trying to get a sense of the Buddha, rather than those who came after him, I wanted to stick with material that originated with the Buddha.
Well, I have spent some time checking my sources because I am a retired history professor and I do want to have reliable sources. So I finally found the original quote in the Dhammapada.
The funniest Monty Python skit I ever saw was a man in a suit and briefcase walking down a corridor and stopping at a door that says ARGUMENTS. So the gentlemen walks in. John Cleese is sitting behind a desk and the man sits down. Cleese says ‘Yes, may I help you?’ the other man says, “I’ve come here for an argument.’ Cleese says; ‘No you never!’
Thanks Dan, while it's true there are many Buddhists around the world who see the Buddha has perfect, and anything he said or did as skilful means - I'm with you on point three... Sometimes he was angry, like the best of us. To me this is a more hopeful message than the one of perfection - one that allows for both human nature and the possibility of positive change
I’ve noticed that in some Buddhist circles it is typical to talk about enlightenment as a far off (almost) unachievable goal. There’s a nice humility in this but I think it ultimately is a disservice. If enlightenment was understood more as “moments of enlightenment” rather than as a permanent state, then the benefits of practice might become more apparent to practitioners. “My practice has enabled me to experience and live from an enlightened state more frequently” vs. “enlightenment? Me? Not in this lifetime!” —which is what I hear more frequently.
This connects back to how Buddha, and, for example, his apparent anger, is understood. If enlightenment is permanent then we need to jump hoops to explain the apparent anger. If enlightenment is a moment to moment experience, then the anger is a window to the full unadorned reality of being human.
Thanks for your comment!
"As soon as you go away from anything, it's got you." - Ram Dass
This is essential humaning, Dan. Thank you for so succinctly summarizing such profound and important teachings!
Nice quote! A sister quote might be: And as soon as you hold on to anything, it has a hold on you.”
If a man is crossing a river
And an empty boat collides with his own skiff,
Even though he be a bad-tempered man,
He will not be angry.
But, if he sees a man in the boat,
He will shout for him to stay clear.
If the shout is not heard, he will shout again
And yet again, and begin cursing.
And all because there is somebody in the boat.
Yet, if the boat is empty
He would not be shouting and not be angry..
If you can empty your own boat
Crossing the river of the world,
No one will oppose you,
No one will seek to harm you. Chuang Tzu
Thx for the inspiration! If I can achieve one "moment of enlightenment" at a time, then I am on the right path that day.
Missed your posts Dan! :)
This accounts for so much: “I prefer to apply Buddhism’s teaching of impermanence to enlightenment itself. Enlightenment is a state of being that, like all other states of being, is subject to impermanence.”
I think there is much comfort in your anger series and in this post for imperfect mortals - especially parents.
Parenting is so challenging! Nothing exposes my shortcomings quite like parenting. That’s still the case for me and my very independent children are 32 and 30.
“Consider an adult who tends to the traumas of a child: a scraped knee, spilled milk, a broken toy. As adults, we know that kids have no idea as to what constitutes a genuine problem because inexperience greatly limits their childhood perspective. Children do not yet know that the world does not revolve around them.
As grownups, dare we admit to ourselves that we, too, have a collective immaturity of view? Dare we admit that our thoughts and behaviors spring from a belief that the world revolves around us?
Apparently not! Yet, evidence abounds. Part the curtains of society’s racial, ethnic, religious, national, and cultural conflicts and you will find the human ego turning the knobs and pulling the levers.
Now imagine a world in which everyone, but especially people with power and influence holds an expanded view of our place in the cosmos. With that perspective, our problems would shrink, or never appear at all- and we would celebrate our earthly differences while shunning the behavior of our predecessors who slaughtered one another because of them.” Neil DeGrasse Tyson
I’m always reluctant to say that a story or teaching doesn’t exist in a particular tradition as that would mean I have complete knowledge of all teachings and stories within that tradition. That’s certainly not true for me and Buddhism. That said, I’m unaware of any Buddhist teachings that look favorably on righteous anger. If others read this and have an example to offer, I hope they will.
Dan, thank you for another clear and insightful look at anger, this time from a Buddhist perspective. From a Tantric yoga perspective anger is one of the nine rasas (tastes) of life. It's a given that anger is a part of being human. It's also helpful to consider, as you point to, that even the enlightened ones like the Buddha were also dealing with human emotions.
I plan to write a post on anger in the Mahabharata but it’s some weeks away. For me, working with anger is similar to working with fear—but different from working with joy, love, or wonder. Fear and anger can serve us, but they often best serve us when their lessons are quickly transformed into constructive action and their emotional power (which can often lead to destructive actions) are left behind. I’d be curious to learn whether there are distinctions made in how we should work with these different rasas in Tantric philosophy. Maybe a subject for a future Sage Sanctuary post. 😊❤️
Yes, the energy of the emotions of fear and anger can be helpful when channeled into skillful action. Which historically has been challenging for me. That's one of the ways the practice has helped. I'll look forward to your next edition, Dan. Thanks for the suggestion, that thought has been niggling.
I really enjoyed this discussion, and agree that anger exists within enlightenment; I remember something Alan Watts said once, well I don't remember exactly, but the gist was - when a Zen master gets angry, the whole room shakes! But then it's gone because he's expressed it.
I think the important lesson is in expressing it constructively - scream or punch pillows or play drums - do something to move the physical energy, and realize there is no need to project the anger or blame someone for it. And even if the anger is with a partner or friend - express open heartedly and connect it with love. I'm so angry because I can't stand to see you being so unconscious, because I know you're squashing your potential, because I love you so much... There is a huge different in anger as a stand for love versus anger as a way to deflect personal responsibility
Great article!
I tend to believe (as humans) it is important to allow ourselves to be angry and even be in touch with righteous anger at times.
Suppressing it tends to bring it back up in other ways. Picturing ourselves as a perfect saint can lead to this pretty easily I think.
Not a Buddhist parable but I envision the passable about “Christ driving the money changers out the temple” as an example of an enlightened being displaying righteous anger.
I’d be curious if there are any similar parables in Buddhism.
OK! you are the guy that thinks the Buddha, if he still existed, would not give a rat's ass about being misquoted. OK i am a Zen Buddhist. For us Buddha was not a God but a man who taught about 40 years after his insights of the Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path. and then he died, but his teachings were profound. There are two major schools of Buddhism. The first Theravada Buddhism believes that the ideal person is one who practices to become an Arhat, someone who practices to attain 'enlightenment' Whereas In Mahayana Buddhism there is no such thing as enlightenment or nirvana. Doesn't exist. Zen falls under the umbrella of Mahayana Buddhism where the ideal person is the bodhisattva, a compassionate person who while walking or practicing the EIGHTFOLD PATH, helps others along the way. we don't believe in enlightenment and that in the eightfold path, the journey itself is the goal. You may of heard 'The Path is the Goal.' Zen Buddhist also believe that it is a hindrance to read Buddhist scriptures and sutras (as Thich Nhat Hanh taught, they are not some exalted words high up in a temple shelf! It's like trying to getting water out of dried-up bones!' Now i am only trying to remember that, and I have a feeling that you're going to look it up to be sure my teacher Nhat Hanh used those exact words. This is so crazy- the gentlemen that you have hooked up with I remember hauling a quote out of my ass to just get the point over that getting angry was not beneficial to anyone. He immediately messaged me that the Buddha didn't say that. I countered with a Monty Python skit were a guy goes into a room that says ARGUMENTS! the man sits down and John Cleese is sitting at a desk and he says 'May I help you?' The man says 'I've come here for an argument"
Cleese says, 'No you never.' Now your friend didn't get the hint apparently -do you? Do you understand the message there? And two months later he is back because he has found someone who spends their time looking for misquotes of the Buddha. it was 2,500 year, to be honest I wasn't there, were you? -Oh, I'd better check that because I got the the timeline wrong . So this guy (rabbi is he?) he is back with you because he can't let go of not being right! And I really don't care. I think I told him, i was probably wrong. and the notion that the Buddha would care shows complete ignorance about what the Buddha taught and - I don't know why I looked up all this shit up to inform you a little, because you won't appreciate it. You'll just say, whatever - I'm a dickhead- but the need to be right about a generic quote. Do you think that the Buddha taught that anger is good for us? No? You are both right! I'm bat-shit crazy, but at least I know it. 'Empty your boat while crossing the river of life, and no one will oppose you, no one will seek to harm you.' Chuang Tzu
The definition of a great teacher is one who points out your hidden faults. Beware of excessively solicitous teachers...sweet words may feel nice in the moment but they're ultimately not particularly beneficial. A truly qualified teacher should help a student to overcome the sickness of egotism. If a real master scolds a student publicly it means you are worth their effort. Will you run? Will you hide? The presumption in the Buddhist tradition is that you haven't accepted a teacher until you've watched them carefully for years. Assuming you've done your due diligence and have accepted them and they've watched and accepted you...any further judgments are suspended forever and always. That's when trust develops and receiving instruction in the context of such a relationship is beyond ordinary assessment. The problem many western students of eastern teachers have is that they did not follow this traditional method and they've mistakenly accepted charlatans or abusers as their teacher. What could be more important than making sure your spiritual guide is worthy of your trust. However, if you've done the work and you know the person from whom you receive teachings is in fact a qualified master...then many unusual skillful means may manifest in the context of such a connection. There are many classic stories of the guru disciple relationship where ordinary phenomena are thoroughly undercut through some outrageous behavior or another. From a random person that's not ok but from your light and guide it is a powerful transformative teaching potentially. The Buddha did not have anger, could not have anger. A Buddha who has anger is not a Buddha. Sentient beings are beings with minds. A Buddha has no mind...no neurotic conceptuality whatsoever. The only experience an enlightened being has is enlightenment. That's why the bodhisattva vow is fulfilled upon attaining enlightenment. You vow to save all sentient beings...but in the enlightened state there are no longer sentient beings to save...only enlightenment exists..an unchanging irreversible state. Activity arises spontaneously according to the aspirations of beings but not from thinking about it. At least this is what the teachings say. I'm just repeating the teachings I've received but I have no experience personally. I did however follow the traditional way and was fortunate to have close relationships with extraordinary beings who accepted me as a student out of their vast compassion. I was never harmed or hurt or abused in more than 30 years of association with such beings. But I also wasn't the recipient of sweet nothings whispered into my ear! Hahaha. Close students of great masters are theoretically capable of receiving teachings for which others aren't yet qualified. But that's a different conversation! 😄
Cheers, Rabbi.
(Why did you come to see the Rebbe? I want to see how he ties his shoes 😉)
This is a brilliant and humane analysis of anger in the Buddha’s teachings. I’d be curious to know if there is any kind of inclusion in the the Pali canon about anger that is “wrathful” or “protective,” when it’s less about the defending one’s ego and more about protecting another. I always heard this wrathful energy to be the kind of feeling a parent might have when their starts child crosses the street without looking, or as my case recently, when a toddler places a small object in her mouth. Sometimes a hard no is called for! Anyway, love how you broke this down. Looking forward to reading more of your work.
‘You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger. Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else. However, you are the one that gets burned. In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for the truth and have begun striving for ourselves.
‘You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger. Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else. However, you are the one that gets burned. In a controversy, the instant we feel anger, we have already ceased striving for the truth and have begun striving for ourselves.’ The Buddha
That’s a great quote on anger. But I don’t think it was said by the Buddha.
You know you could very well be right. it’s such a self-evident quote- I have a quote attributed to the Buddha, lao Tzu, Socrates and Eleanor Roosevelt!
But I don’t understand why you would even bring it up. ‘Empty your boat when crossing the river of life.’
Chuang Tzu or at least I hope so!
🙂 Yes, many quotes get attributed to multiple people. And it's possible they all said it!
When I am chasing these things down, I try to find a place where the original source is cited. Then I try to chase down the original source--or a faithful translation of it.
The value of a quote speaks for itself, regardless of who said it. But because this post was trying to get a sense of the Buddha, rather than those who came after him, I wanted to stick with material that originated with the Buddha.
Well, I have spent some time checking my sources because I am a retired history professor and I do want to have reliable sources. So I finally found the original quote in the Dhammapada.
The funniest Monty Python skit I ever saw was a man in a suit and briefcase walking down a corridor and stopping at a door that says ARGUMENTS. So the gentlemen walks in. John Cleese is sitting behind a desk and the man sits down. Cleese says ‘Yes, may I help you?’ the other man says, “I’ve come here for an argument.’ Cleese says; ‘No you never!’
I remember that sketch
Did you? did you find it as funny as I did?
I love Cleese and I think that Fawlty Towers is the best comedy ever- and too short!
It was nice meeting you. Kind regards Colin
wondering if you both (Dan and Colin) know about this website, which is a great resource: https://fakebuddhaquotes.com/