IanAnd wrote:Put in the language of Zen, anger presupposes someone to be "angry," at some thing or someone else.
What about disliking? What about choosing? Doesn't it presupposes someone
to "dislike" at some thing
With apologies to the OP of this thread (which has been temporarily hijacked). Hopefully to get back on track soon.
Alex, please pause long enough to put two and two together (for your own benefit, if for no one else). The following seems to have gone over your head: "Dispassion implies allowing things to be
and not minding
that they are (that they exists)." And daverupa's contribution, in reference to the Buddha and how he responded to physical pain (something that we all
have an aversion toward): ". . . but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed
It is not so much that the arising of disliking
can take place (as it most assuredly can, even in an arahant, who is confronted by a conventional situation which may seem to be unjustified, in the mind). It is about not taking it personally (i.e. remaining unperturbed
that it has arisen; in other words, not minding
that it has arisen, thus not
causing one dukkha
!). Through insight into "things as they are" one simply observes the arising of conventional reactions (mental processes) without becoming part of
the reactions. In other words, one observes: "Oh, look! A reaction has arisen! How quaint. In the meantime, I remain unperturbed [by its arising]!" See?
"The gift of truth exceeds all other gifts" — Dhammapada, v. 354 Craving XXIV