Undisrupted Happiness

    In Line 9 of the chapter "Perfection of Patience" in Way of the Bodhisattva, Santideva remarks, "Even if I fall into extreme adversity, I should not disrupt my happiness. When there is frustration, nothing is agreeable, and virtue is forsaken." (p.62) As I am reading this passage, one question that comes to my mind is, how does a person have undisrupted happiness? Part of the perspective that Santideva shares with us is found in the next line of the text, where he writes, "If there is a remedy, then what is the use of frustration? If there is no remedy, then what is the use of frustration?" (ibid, Line 10).
    Santideva uses a very intriguing logic to point a way toward an undisrupted kind of happiness. He does this by suggesting that regardless of whether there is a cure or no cure, there is simply no point in feeling frustrated at all by any emerging situation. Why is that? As in previous lines of this chapter, Santideva is revealing how the real adversary is not anybody or anything, but the kind of emotional attitudes which habitually arise from likes and dislikes. This is why in the previous sections, Santideva is viewing anger and hatred as 'adversaries' in themselves, rather than looking toward the supposed objects of anger. If I know that the real affliction is emotion itself, then I turn toward the emotion and ask: truly, is this emotion necessary? If not necessary or integral to bettering my situation, why should I even bother to keep that emotion? Using this same logic, Santideva finds a way to let go of frustration in all occasions and reach a state of equilibrium, where it is possible to maintain a state of continuous happiness.
     It interests me that Santideva's logic is quite the opposite to modern psychology in the West. Western psychology of emotions tends to treat emotions as products of events or objects. If I dislike something, it's thought that the object of the dislike triggers me to feel dislike. If only I can just take away that dreaded or detested object, then I will be okay (or so they say). But according to how Santideva writes, it's often the emotion itself (in this case frustration) which becomes the source of attachment. If I am frustrated, I am really responding to the emotion of frustration, rather than a specific object. It stands to reason that if only I wasn't attached to the emotion at all, there would be no problem. But normally, I solidify the emotion into something that is outside me or that belongs to something else. What if instead of doing this, I simply realized that I could question the emotion itself, and go directly to the heart of whether it is working for me or not. Is it worthwhile for me to feel depression? Does frustration really get me anywhere? Besides eliciting the occasional pitying glance, what benefits do 'sad' emotions have? Santideva is immensely practical when addressing these sorts of questions.
      Yet another point Santideva makes is that the emotional states we choose to take on (or discard) have a deep impact on our virtues or moral character. Santideva never stops reminding us that we are moral beings, particularly when he remarks: "When there is frustration, nothing is agreeable, and virtue is forsaken." Again, if virtue is forsaken, the emotion becomes nothing more than a burden which ends up isolating a person. Santideva keeps engaging us to push the question: what true value do emotions have in our lives? If we can maintain this pragmatic attitude, perhaps we can reach a state where we choose to remain joyful and calm in the midst of arising circumstances.

Santideva, The Way of the Bodhisattva (selected chapters only). Translated by V. Wallace and A. Wallace. Snow Lion, 1997.  Other translations by the Padmakara Translation Gorup.