---
There seems to be a taboo in Western Buddhist circles around anger. Anger tends to be seen as always destructive and unskilful. I’ve even heard members of my own sangha suggest we ought not to get involved with certain grassroots political movements which seem driven by anger – which, to my mind, precludes engagement with most political mass movements. On the other hand, the absence of anger tends to be seen as a virtue, something to aspire to. If your freedom from anger is an enlightened equanimity, fair play. But we must be wary of equanimity’s near-enemy – passive acceptance. It seems to be that all too often, Western Buddhist sanghas, including my own, passively accept the structural violence inflicted by states and corporations under the pretence that it is
unskilful to be angry.
Well, I am angry. I am angry that over a million people were
forced to use food banks in the last year[1]
whilst corporations are allowed to dodge billions in tax[2].
I am angry that the planet is sliding towards a climate catastrophe whilst oil
companies undermine democracy.
I am angry at the violence inflicted on the people of Gaza. And I am angry that
all too often, when I talk about these issues to other Buddhists, it is made
clear that my anger is not welcome. Well, I’d rather have my anger than
acquiesce to the violence of the capitalist system. I’d rather be angry than pretend
that, by keeping silent on the horrors of the world, I somehow keep my hands
clean. It’s hard to see how such passivity can be in accordance with the First
Precept.
 |
| Buddhadasa Bhikkhu |
Western Buddhists seldom talk about structural suffering.
This is unsurprising – our sanghas tend to hold broadly middle class attitudes
which lean heavily on the individual-focused models and ideas of mainstream
psychology[3].
We buy in to a model of the Four Nobel Truths which locates dukkha primarily at
the individual level – I must
practice personal ethics and meditation to eliminate my own suffering. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu argues that this is an
altogether too narrow interpretation of the First Nobel Truth – the Buddha did
not personalise dukkha in this way[4].
To fully practice the dharma, we need to address “social dukkha” – the
suffering caused by economic, political and social structures. Whilst a passive
acceptance of the violence of capitalism does not necessarily contradict our
narrow quest to overcome our personal dukkha, it is obviously unskilful given
this broader interpretation.
Much rhetoric within Western Buddhist circles gives an impression
that the core of our dharma is political, but this too often falls far short.
We are more than happy to talk about the dukkha associated with consumerism – a
suffering that afflicts middle class people with a disposable income – but we
rarely address the poverty, starvation and violence that is built in to the
capitalist system. The Dhammapada says “hunger is the greatest ill”[5].
One million Britons used food banks in the last year. How many talks can you
find online that focus on the dukkha of hunger? Are we really confronting the
causes of suffering in the world?
We should turn towards our anger. We should experience, get
to know it. I’m not saying we should attach to our anger, but with deep rage
comes great energy. We should work to see through the ego-centred and
destructive aspects of our anger, but take the energy it brings and use it to
confront the structural suffering of the world. This is far more skilful than
passively watching the horrors of our age unfold.
[1]
http://www.trusselltrust.org/stats
[2]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-47bn-corporation-tax-lost-through-evasion-and-avoidance-as-royal-mail-is-sold-for-650m-less-than-it-is-worth-8874873.html
[3]
For a discussion of western Buddhists’ attachment to mainstream psychology in
relation to structural violence, read Nathan Thompson’s article ‘Maladjusted
Buddhism’: http://dangerousharvests.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/maladjusted-zen.html
[4]
Buddhadasa’s ideas are explored in
Santikaro Bhikkhu’s ‘The Four Nobel Truths of Dhammic Socialism’ http://www17.ocn.ne.jp/~ogigaya/tsangha/skbdsbook.html
[5]
http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_happy.htm
To repress anger only turns it inward. In common with other 'negative' emotions it can be turned into a creative force.
ReplyDelete