Re: When a Zen Priest Looses
Interesting...
I have heard two conflicting perspectives regarding aggression and zen. One is the totally passive non-violent perspective, the other -- as I understand it -- says that such acts are "ok" if they are done with the right intention. The latter seems more inline with writings like the Tao te Ching that emphasize "the right time and place" for various types of actions.
But, then again, I could be totally wrong.
BTW, below is a link to a 30 min. show interviewing the author of the book.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...PgyL2bBQ&hl=en
Re: When a Zen Priest Looses
Anger clouds our judgment, often preventing us from acting in a way is most helpful to all parties involved (hence the precept that . However, there are times when being stern, serious, firm, passionate, or whatever term you might use for actions that would appear on the surface very similar to anger. With my kids, I will often have to be stern when trying to adjust their behavior. They often think I am mad, when actually I'm not angry at all but am trying to give them some idea of the seriousness of the situation. So, maybe it is like that.
Occasionally, however, we raise the voice and assume a stern countenance. In appropriate circumstances, where the practice of others may be enhanced, this is not a violation of the precept. Robert Aitken on the precept regarding anger in Taking the Path of Zen p. 85-86.
Gassho,
Bill
Re: When a Zen Priest Looses
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mushin
Thanks! I really enjoyed the interview. Really, really good book.