On Anger
Posted: September 27, 2009 | Author: Doug | Filed under: Buddhism, Hosso | 7 Comments »This recent comic from Sinfest says it all:
Anger is considered one of the Three Poisons in Buddhism, along with Greed and Delusion that are at the root of the mind. Anger arises from the ego and its expectations. When our expectations do not accord with reality we get frustrated and angry. When others do not things the way want them to do it, we get irritated with them.
Long story short, anger is rooted in nothing more than one’s ego. In terms of Yogacara/Hossō Buddhist thought, we can say this is the manas at work. The Manas is that subconscious part of the mind that takes the vast number of experiences collected in the store-consciousness and reifies them into a sense of self. In the book Living Yogacara, Rev. Tagawa quotes from a 13th century Hossō named Ryōhen (1194 – 1252) and his famous Two-Volume Hossō Extracts:
Always functioning to pollute in the bottom of the minds of ordinary people, even when the prior six minds are pure, I never fail to attach to the distinction between my self and things. The depths of the mind are always being defiled; they come to this state dependent on the manas. (pg 63)
So any anger, even if we believe it justified, is still based on a self-centered view. The ego or the manas is at work, distorting our view of the world into a self-centered one. Rev. Tagawa then describes the three features of the manas:
- It is latent and cannot be accessed by conscious thought.
- It is always active, and uninterrupted.
- It places “I” as the center of everything.
So, when getting angry about something, it helps to consider the function of manas in one’s mind and consider why one is really angry, aside from the logical argument. For example, I got annoyed a few days ago while at a big home/garden store when I saw one of those “garden Buddhas”, since someone was using a selling a statue of the Buddha as cheap lawn decor. Then I thought about how my view of how things should be was based on a self-centered view of mind, and that the divergence was what annoyed me. Then I forgot all about why I was mad.
As an enlightened being has let go of their self-centered view of things, it only stands to reason why they do not get angry. 
Hello, this blog is about my life as a father, Buddhist and Japanophile. Any useful information I can pass along will hopefully make the 
Good post.
Your post reminds me of a TED.com video about Dr. Taylor’s experience and insight of her stroke.
I’m new to your site and am enjoying your entries. Anger arises in such a simple manner and would be so easy to recognize if only I could remember the process. My anger-mode seems to have a built in blocker to rational thought.
I think your reaction to the garden Buddha is common, I’ve had it myself, yet the photo on the left of your blog of the sitting Buddha at Sensoji Temple begs for perspective. How is the little garden Buddha in the store any different from an expensive bronze Buddha that happens to be located in a temple garden? Further, since all objects reflect to some incomplete degree the original thing they signify, where do you draw the line at “this is worthy and this is artificial”.
I suspect that a person’s ego is involved in drawing the line.
Morris: yeah I did see that video. Kind of freaked me out as I read about her experience with a stroke.
Sbtokyo hello and welcome to the JLR. Regarding the Buddha statue issue, the photo in question was not in a garden but one of a few outdoor shrines outside the main temple building. It is not clear from the pictue though. In any case, I agree that there is nothing wrong inherently with this statue or that. Merely how it is used. I gather from others I have met that they justend up as decoration without further thought. That is my pint of frustration I guess. Butlike you said, I think ego my own ego is at play.:-/
Doug,
Not to be argumentative or belabor the point—I just think it’s an interesting topic—but is there a wrong way to use a Buddha (or any iconic) statue or symbol? On the one hand, it’s just an object; on the other hand, because it’s an image of the Buddha, couldn’t it be considered just as potentially potent as any other Buddhist image?
I probably wouldn’t put one in my garden, but whenever I see one, no matter what the form, it serves as a nice reminder.
Hi Sbtokyo,
I’ve seen and heard of some rather crass usages Buddha statues. I heard of one used in an adult picture, for example, though thankfully I’ve never seen it. There are definitely ways to abuse it. But there’s a lot of gray area in between. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
By my desk, I have a little green daruma with one eye and a lot of dust on it. It’s kinda cute. It’s not as inspiring as I thought it would be, hence the single eye. Maybe a pirate-like eyepatch would make him more compelling.
Har-har! Tis’ a good idea, matey.