Irritations

[Songtsan]

We all get irritated, just about every day, until we learn not to be. I've been irritated at pretty much every damn one of you here, and I know you have me! Now, is irritation the response of an enlightened being? Did the Buddha ever get irritated after he had fully 'enlightened,' or do enlightening beings become irritated from time to time no matter what? DB has claimed to have surpassed the Buddha, it seems, and I am sure others have, yet it seems that she still gets irritated. Many of the other great teachers seemed to have expressed irritation, yet were they irritated on the inside, or was it just a play? Jesus freaked out in the marketplace. Is irritation part and parcel of an enilghtening beings toolset? Or can/does one reach a place of never being irritated again? Can Nirvana include irritation? Or is it always Samsara? Wrathful deities....are they in love with righteous indignation, or do they transcend internal angst, and only outwardly express the appearance of angst, while inwardly dwelling in deep bliss?

Edited May 20, 2015 by Songtsan

[soaring crane]

Buddhists ...

[Songtsan]

What about Taoists?

[johndoe2012]

I heard irritation being called the spiritual impulse to do something. This is something I get sometimes and it is a nudge from the divine 'do something about this issue NOW'

 

Even enlightened people get angry and it is the natural bodily expression to look irritated / angry when that particular vibration gets expressed.

[Songtsan]

Buddhists ...

 

Can you elaborate? I hate to jump to conclusions....

 

...let me add that I have read about 50x as much Buddhist materials as Taoist...perhaps it is clear from my posting. I have left Buddhism for a long while, although my heart is in Tibetan Buddhism, probably in descending order from Vajrayana, Mahayana, and mixed Theraveda/Hinayana (not sure how to classify everything exactly). I have seen many instances of righteous indignation taking place from high level Zen patriarchs and other various teachers...I see the use of it as a teaching tool. I'd love to hear the Taoist perspectives on it....would striking out in fury be the masculine taking form? Keep to the feminine, but bust out into masculine war dance when necessary? Remember that I am primarily learning Taoism from you guys here, and reading very little source materials....

Edited May 20, 2015 by Songtsan

[Stosh]

  I get irritated, therefore I am not enlightened. 

[idiot_stimpy]

Can the body hold someone that is completely and perfectly enlightened? 

 

As far as I can tell, we are completely limited by this body.

[Jeff]

From the Dhammapada on anger (and irritation)...

 

17. Anger

 

Let go of anger.

Let go of pride.

When you are bound by nothing

You go beyond sorrow.

Anger is like a chariot careering wildly.

He who curbs his anger is the true charioteer.

Others merely hold the reins.

With gentleness overcome anger.

With generosity overcome meanness.

With truth overcome deceit.

Speak the truth.

Give whenever you can,

Never be angry.

These three steps will lead you Into the presence of the gods.

The wise harm no one.

They are masters of their bodies

And they go to the boundless country.

They go beyond sorrow.

Those who seek perfection

Keep watch day and night

Till all desires vanish.

...

 

Anger and irritation drops. All irritation is an automated subconscious ego response. It is simply a reaction to a past memory or projection of the past into the future. There is no anger or irritation while focused in the present moment.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Jeff

[Songtsan]

These are good points all, and thanks. So, while the body may be having an emotional/physiological reaction to an event, the mind feels the result, the spirit does not have to acquiesce to knee-jerk reactions. Forsooth! However, do true Buddhas pick and choose then, when to let the dogs out? Whoof! Whoof!

[Songtsan]

So if the wise harm no one, if you saw a man physically beating a woman to death on a high escarpment, unreachable by you, yet you have a sniper rifle sitting next to you, just by random chance, would you say, 'Nay, tis wise not to harm,' and keep your gun in check?' What would Buddha do? What would Lao Tzu do?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Songtsan

[soaring crane]

Can you elaborate? I hate to jump to conclusions....

 

Well, I only meant that your OP seems stereotypical of what I see in the forums (not only here) from people who read a lot of Buddhist books. Something like, feeling insecure about feeling insecure, questioning the natural state of things and wondering if that's a natural thing to do. And then hoping to find the answers by analysing the personalities of beings who have transcended personality.

 

Chillax, it's all good. Tao :-)

[Seeker of Wisdom]

...feeling insecure about feeling insecure, questioning the natural state of things and wondering if that's a natural thing to do. And then hoping to find the answer by analysing the personalities of beings who have transcended personality...

As a dedicated practitioner of it, I think Buddhism has been damaged by an excess of ideals of perfect saintliness. The texts imply a rigid correlation between levels of awakening and incredibly saintly shifts in behaviour and emotion which, judging by people who actually do vipashyana and get the results (cough, Ingram, cough) doesn't apply.

 

Some of what the texts say on this (e.g. arhats will die in a few days unless they ordain) is clearly nonsense, but how much of it is naive, how much is superstitious, and how much actually happens... I think we'll only really know from achieving these things ourselves. Unfortunately most people think you have to be a really saintly person to achieve even stream-entry, that this doesn't really happen anymore, and if you want jhanas say hello to fifty years on retreat.

 

Virtue is one axis of development, samadhi is another, and the insight into the fundamental nature of experience which results in awakening is another. These axes are related, to a certain extent they support each other and rely on each other. This is part of the reason virtue is one of the three trainings. But it's naive to say an arhat will never ever be upset, or that they will die if they don't ordain very soon. As for Buddhas, *shrug*.

 

Kenneth Folk makes good points on this here.

[Bearded Dragon]

When my housemate was not even 3 years old there was a time when she was crying. I asked her why she was crying and she said she didn't know. It's kind of that age where you start feeling more emotions and are just able to talk about things, yet she had no idea and it didn't seem to bother her at a deeper level. I'm sure she was just overtired and everything was fine not that long after.

 

My point is that you can shit your pants without sticking your face in it.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Bearded Dragon

[Stosh]

Lessee,, , hmmmm,,,,,,, I'm irritated , ,, umm ,  I haven't mastered my emotions, I am not living in the present moment, I haven't experienced a transcending revelation which changed my attitudes... , I still have the illusions of egoic expectations..  No mark has been left upon my transient soul which indicates I am enlightened. 

[maldor]

You cannot get irritated in that place. This usually irritates others and they actively try to irritate you and bring you back into their collective view of the "real world".

 

When I was in that place I found that I managed to retain it for so long because I didn't really tell anyone anything. I understood that I could not tell them about it only that I could ask them questions about things that interested them. My ego was gone, I just wanted to listen because everyone and everything "spoke".

 

Maybe it is not enlightenment I am talking about? I guess that depends on what you think it is and what it is meant to mean in the first place ?

[wilfred]

the way i see it, the conscious mind can still become tired and tired of things, it's a natural energetic response if we think of it at a mechanical level. the behavioral manifestation of that might seem on the surface like the person is frustrated or annoyed, context depending. where it would differ for arahants/liberated ones etc would be what's going on beneath the surface. their reactions would never be particularly strong because there is no aversion being registered on a subconscious level. likewise no attachment to those feelings, so everything is pretty much in and out. reactions in the present create no ripples, they are just that.

Edited May 21, 2015 by wilfred

[maldor]

Next time you are irritated think of it as misused excitement ... it works

[johndoe2012]

So if the wise harm no one, if you saw a man physically beating a woman to death on a high escarpment, unreachable by you, yet you have a sniper rifle sitting next to you, just by random chance, would you say, 'Nay, tis wise not to harm,' and keep your gun in check?' What would Buddha do? What would Lao Tzu do?

In no-thinking there's just spontaneous action.

[maldor]

Lao Tzu wasn't likely a single person.

[soaring crane]

Driving home from my place of business earlier today, a dumb fucker was tailgating me all along the twisty road through the woods, then, at the first possible chance, blasted past me and almost caused a head-on collision with another car.

[Songtsan]

I have always been instinctively more attracted to Taoism, than any other religion. In 6th grade, when reading about religions of the world, in reaching the Taoism section, I had a huge draw to it vs. All the others....the only reason I ended up studying more Vedanta and Buddhism is that they are marketed more. Taoism is always more in the background, just being, whereas all the others are out there left and right, at least in my country....I never like to assume too much about my 'self,' just let myself naturally be, but I keep saying that I am mostly Taoist, if I say I am anything....its the most free way to be...with the least amount of cognitive dissonance... There are gems in every religion, of course, but I can't help feeling manipulated by the rest. Only Taoism leaves me feeling fresh and un-owned...

[Songtsan]

In psychology, there is what's called frustration aggression hypothesis, simply stated: we become frustrated/irritated when things don't go our way. It seems that 99% of irritation is attachment based. Is righteous indignation ever Holy, that is, not based on personal attachment? Or is holy even a real thing? Like if one person in the world wanted one thing, and everyone else wanted the exact opposite, would their desires be equally as valid, even if it went against the grain?

[C T]

people say telling lies is not virtuous

someone runs into an apartment in trying to escape from a knife-carrying gangster 

The killer barges in and demands to know if the person he is chasing is hiding in the house

even if a buddha were to be there, i very much doubt the hiding person will be exposed 

 

if telling the truth leads to a negative outcome, then its time to temporarily let go of conventional support and do the right thing

 

as for irritations, why not? its good to be irritated at ignorance, harmful potential, and negative afflictions

 

main factor for consideration is to keep checking one's motivation

 

basically, a good meditator (ideally) will know the arising and ceasing of emotional triggers and not get caught in the quagmire of dualistic clinging

[Stosh]

people say telling lies is not virtuous

someone runs into an apartment in trying to escape from a knife-carrying gangster 

The killer barges in and demands to know if the person he is chasing is hiding in the house

even if a buddha were to be there, i very much doubt the hiding person will be exposed 

 

if telling the truth leads to a negative outcome, then its time to temporarily let go of conventional support and do the right thing

 

as for irritations, why not? its good to be irritated at ignorance, harmful potential, and negative afflictions

 

main factor for consideration is to keep checking one's motivation

 

basically, a good meditator (ideally) will know the arising and ceasing of emotional triggers and not get caught in the quagmire of dualistic clinging

Id like to change your mind about the stuff in this post.  

[Songtsan]

I think that having hard and fast rules about anything is inflexibility. I have posted on this before. Would you kill someone 'wicked' to save the life of someone 'innocent' if that was the only choice? There is always redemption. Where do you guys think Hitler ended up? Its all real confusing. I always wonder too, why if Lao Tzu knew so much, he was willing to just walk away from it all, only turning back as an afterthought when that guard asked him too. Me personally, if I find great wisdom through toil and struggle, I'm not just going to walk off into the mountains and go find peace...I'd want to leave a hell of a lot more trail markers than he did....I like what the Buddha did, and I like what Lao Tzu did in parts....I think I'd like to combine them....each to their own nature be true though, and judge not...I speak for myself mainly...I would be a cross between Hazrat Inayat Khan, Lao Tzu, Buddha, Atish, Babaji, and a few others....I think that's what I might do at some point, is to list my 'spiritual heroes' and the facets of each that I like, and seek to create a Hodge podge self based on that, constantly tweaking and updating...