Righteous Anger is Still Anger

Recently I was involved in an email exchange regarding forgiveness, and the scope of the topic expanded into a debate of whether hating evil = loving good (God). Upon recently seeing the movie Django (SPOILER ALERT) in which a freed slave pursues bounties of white criminals, I have developed an even stronger opinion on this subject. Hating evil is NOT the same as loving good. Hating evil is just legitimizing hate and nothing more. It transcends nothing and simply perpetuates a very basic and mundane human impulse, that of pride, egoism, and of course aggression. In the yoga sutras put forth by Patanjali, the 4 attitudes for the yogi to cultivate are as follows:

1.33 In relationships, the mind becomes purified by cultivating feelings of friendliness towards those who are happy, compassion for those who are suffering, goodwill towards those who are virtuous, and indifference or neutrality towards those we perceive as wicked or evil. (emphasis added)

from: http://swamij.com/yoga-sutras-13339.htm#1.33

Swamij’s explanation of the rationale behind this last attitude is as follows:

Swamij attitudes

I agree with what he says, yet I would go much further. Swami Vivekananda says that responding to anger with anger and hatred with “validated” hatred is at best a drain on energy and at worst perpetuates a cycle of hatred. Our goal as yogis is to rise above, transcend these petty attitudes and rest in the infinite. In that state, all actions, regardless of intent, are seen as a drama in a play, it is literally impossible to identify with the motivations behind them simply because one’s awareness and personal identification is completely removed from any external stimuli. External stimuli are arbitrary and novel to the true yogi.

To get back to the practical problems of countering hate with hate, anger with anger, etc., we see in the movie Django (SPOILERS) that in killing vicious slavers, Django only incites them to take more revenge and become more angry towards their slave populations. Fast forward to current times, people watching this movie are now reminded of an obsolete past and emotions that are at best uncomfortable and at worst resentful and angry. These feelings are based on history that in actuality is as far removed from our current experience as any fiction. To identify with these archaic and obsoleted paradigms, we unnecessarily engender antiquated and problematic emotions into our culture. This is the same exact concept with regards to movies about killing Nazis, as in Tarantino’s other flick, “Inglorious Bastards.”

Ultimately, Rastus says it best. In order to move forward we need to FORGET. In order to evolve as people we must truly BECOME people – fulfill our spiritual potential. A human being’s true state is unbound, unconditioned, and free. The yogi works towards this with wisdom and discipline, but the average individual has not the critical thinking capacity to discriminate useful lessons regarding racial differences with arbitrary and manipulative attitudes promoted by the PC media or angry resentful racial factions (ie, black panthers, white nationalists).

As a mulatto, white/black mix, I am sensitive to these issues in a way many are not. As an intelligent individual I can see perspectives others cannot. As a yogi I have the insight to realize this world is a reality molded by subconscious mind.

To conclude, Rastus had an anecdote about a demon who became enlightened because he spent so much time dwelling on Krishna, and hating him. His mind was so occupied by Krisha, that despite the resentment and hate of this preoccupation, he took on the nature of Krishna and gained liberation and bliss. Likewise, a good man can corrupt himself if he dwells on evil. He will continue to manifest evil and frustrating situations, which he alone feels he can resolve through his righteous anger. He will perpetuate and become that which he focuses on, regardless of the attitude the ego uses to validate this attitude. When I was being trained in a defensive driving course for van certification at camp, the teacher had countless stories of accidents, near accidents, and dangerous road predicaments he was in. He was involved in an exceptional amount of these circumstances. Despite his promotion of good driving habits and his passion to create safe drivers, on a metaphysical level, all he was truly creating by focusing on dangerous scenarios was more accidents. With respect to the audience that reads this blog, I feel I do not have to beat a dead horse regarding metaphysical laws and their influences on your waking reality. Let us truly be yogis. Let us meditate and transcend petty tit-for-tat and energy draining attitudes in our waking state. Peace

PS – To preempt a potential rebuttal about Arjuna’s righteous war against his house; he was doing this out of duty, not egoic or righteous passion. This idea of duty and aloofness from the fruits of action is the fundamental lesson of the Gita (fruits in this sense would be those of ego gratification for doing a “righteous act”).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Righteous Anger is Still Anger

  1. janoklark says:

    temporarily hate has become a politicised word and it’s come to mean talking against the government, misandrists and the like. first of all, hate does not mean anger. the two words are not the same. in chemistry, water hates oil. so hate can also mean to strongly avoid. also i notice that when i criticise people on youtube they say that i hate them. so many people are calling criticism hate.

    anyone with a normal moral sense and conscience hates evil. it is an option to openly criticise evil and evil people.

    the option is there because some people respond to criticism well and others don’t. also some people respond to shock tactics, while others are offended. so if i’m talking to someone on a personal level, i judge this. if i’m talking to a general group, i chose to openly criticise. the reason for this is because i’m naturally a critical type and this is what my talent is. if i tried to stop i’d just be supressing my own positive nature and talents.

    i think many gurus and popular speakers want to have a war on hate and criticism, but i think this is silly. we need criticism and hate just as much as we need love. and emotions cannot be the target of some new war. for example, is your article a hate article against haters and hatred? it’s like the US bombing countries so they become democracies, i.e., hating governments they accuse of hatred/oppression/violence/authoritarianism. this is a major contradiction in liberal thought in general, that they say they hate haters.

    hatred and criticism are just options. sometimes silence works better. sometimes you can ignore evil. i just don’t think it’s wise to have a war on a kind of feeling or on criticism in general, regardless of what it is directed at or if it could possibly successful. compassion is overplayed in western countries, and what is generally needed more in the balance of tactics is passionate, righteous self-expression against things that are very wrong.

    for example, in the circumcision debate there are very few people willing to passionate express what they really feel against it. in many circumstances this kind of passion is exactly what would express to mothers in an effective way that mutilating men is pissing them off and it is really dangerous to commit that sin. for me personally this passion, hatred and criticism is just a tool in the toolbox, but if i were in america, i’d encourage more of it, because there are so many pussies in america who won’t stand up for themselves and their God-given rights, that they are all being mowed over. you can only ignore and be nice in some circumstances, and compassion only effects people who have a conscience to begin with.

    i think if you lived in africa, india or china you’d begin to see where i’m coming from. you’re typing from a society in which law is basically established and you think that certain useful tactics can be completely abandoned, but most of us don’t live in a world like that, and even in such a world, there is still a lot there that would be justly reacted to with hate. depending on the circumstance, hate might be the best response possible.

  2. janoklark says:

    as for the US, it seems like you’re just adding more passivity to an already very passive situation.

  3. fundator says:

    I did not know I was obligated to define hate for this essay. Hate generally understood as a highly engaging EMOTION. It lies at the opposite pole of the emotive spectrum as love, which is also a highly engaging emotion. If we are to take away the emotive quality of this term, then of course the whole essay breaks down because as I stated in the PS of this post, the whole goal of yoga is to move beyond attachment to the fruits of action. If one has TRANSCENDED emotion, there is no egoic investment into the result of these actions, whether or not they are viewed as good or bad by the general public.

    From your response, I would say you are equating hate to “being assertive” or “standing one’s ground” or “taking forceful action against injustice.” All of those terms are not word play. They are neutral ways of talking about actions that address negative situations without an emotive quality.

    I am not against people fighting against circumcision or fighting for their own homelands (white nationalism) or fighting for their right to healthcare, etc. Even the word FIGHTING is more neutral than hate. The difference between FIGHTING and HATING is just that. One can fight as Arjuna did out of DUTY, but one can only HATE out of emotion. And just as love will consume someone with thoughts of their lover, so too will hate consume someone with thoughts of revenge, frustration, and yes, anger.

    To sum up, stand up for yourself, kill for your rights as a human if you have to. I agree that the US is way too passive. I am not promoting more of that at all. However, I am saying, that if one cannot dis-identify from one’s actions against a negative force, if he finds it hard to sleep at night due to mental burden, if he is only able to find faults, unable to take positive, creative action to address a situation, then he is engendering negative emotive qualities in himself and is better off dropping these causes, temporarily or permanently, and working towards his internal equanimity.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s