Hatred Vs. Anger

[danieLion]

What's the difference, if any, between dosa/hate and kodhana/anger?
Goodwil
Daniel

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

There are several related terms explained in the Discourse on the Sallekha Sutta.

Ill-will (byāpāda), anger (kodha), malice (upahāna), envy (issā), etc. Its really a difficult task to distinguish these terms and translate them accurately and consistently.

[danieLion]

There are several related terms explained in the Discourse on the Sallekha Sutta.

Ill-will (byāpāda), anger (kodha), malice (upahāna), envy (issā), etc. Its really a difficult task to distinguish these terms and translate them accurately and consistently.

Thanks much, Bhikkhu Pesala. That's extremely helpful. I'm frustrated because I'm looking for behavioral and emotional guidelines. I have a chronic pain condition and I can get very short-tempered because of it. I like to think I'm just being assertive, but then look back and realize I was also being a jerk. Or, even when I catch myself and introspect my intentions and feelings, it's hard to distinguish hate from anger from ill-will etc.... Is there a bottom-line here? I presume if I can identify the mental activity as unskillful/unwholesome, I've a better chance of restraining from bodily and/or verbal misconduct. Yet when you're not sure if your mental activity is unwholesome/unskillful, how can you make such a determination? Does such confusion reveal mental activity, as the Abhidhamma-ists might say, rooted in moha?
Goodwill
Daniel

[nameless]

The Buddha provides some guidelines for determining skilful/unskilful-ness

"Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any bodily action of that sort is fit for you to do.

He goes on to substitute "whenever you want to do" with "while doing" and "having done" the action, as well as include mental and verbal actions, but that's it in a nutshell.

I think it is easy to think that there is 'right' and 'wrong' anger, and perhaps there is, but the reality is that any act of anger harms yourself first, in the sense that it causes immediate discomfort, and perhaps less immediate social and practical consequences. That being said, "anger is bad and I shouldn't be angry" probably isn't a good way to deal with it either. The passage continues

If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future.

Note that it doesn't say that you should blame yourself or feel guilty etc.

[danieLion]

The Buddha provides some guidelines for determining skilful/unskilful-ness

"Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any bodily action of that sort is fit for you to do.

He goes on to substitute "whenever you want to do" with "while doing" and "having done" the action, as well as include mental and verbal actions, but that's it in a nutshell.

I think it is easy to think that there is 'right' and 'wrong' anger, and perhaps there is, but the reality is that any act of anger harms yourself first, in the sense that it causes immediate discomfort, and perhaps less immediate social and practical consequences. That being said, "anger is bad and I shouldn't be angry" probably isn't a good way to deal with it either. The passage continues

If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future.

Note that it doesn't say that you should blame yourself or feel guilty etc.

Thanks, nameless. But how does one confess/reveal if no Teacher or knowledgeable companion in the holy is available and/or readily apparent, even among the hundreds of Buddhists one knows?
Goodwill
Daniel

[nameless]

This is just my opinion, but I suppose as a layperson a trusted friend/elder would suffice? I guess putting it out in the open is more skilful than keeping it to yourself.