Exploring the Emotion of Anger
“Exploring the Emotion of Anger”
“Expressing Anger Without Judgment”
“The Challenge: Combining Anger and Fun”
Thursday, July 13, 2000
© 2000 (Private/Phone)
Participants: Mary (Michael) and Bobbi (Jale).
Elias arrives at 1:47 PM. (Arrival time is 20 seconds)
ELIAS: Good morning!
BOBBI: Hi, Elias! Good morning to you! (Elias chuckles)
Well, I’ve been having some discussions with different people lately about the emotion of anger, and that’s kind of the direction I’d like to go in this morning. In fact, I’ve written a question here, so if that’s okay, I’ll just read it, and if you would give your comments.
ELIAS: Very well!
BOBBI: Could you discuss the emotion of anger? I have many confusing feelings about anger. Mostly, I don’t like it. (Elias grins) Personally, I am slow to anger, and have to be pretty mad to express it, but when I get there, it’s really big and lasts a long time. I know there are people who enjoy it, but it’s something that I avoid if possible. It seems like a big messy emotion which causes conflict and hurt, in my perception. It also seems like a thickness in energy and situations and movement.
I judge my own expressions of anger — and actually anyone’s expressions of anger — pretty harshly, while at the same time justifying it by either blaming the other person or the situation. When I am angry with another person, and if I am creating ALL of my reality, then aren’t I actually mad at myself?
In that ... well, let me read this. If I’m angry at another person or even a situation, isn’t it my perception of that other person or my creation and perception of the situation that I’m at odds with, and does that make anger an expression of lack of acceptance of self?
If we are all attempting to express from essence and look to self for the source of conflict, would there be expressions of anger in that? It seems like kind of a contradiction. If I were doing those things — expressing from essence and looking to self — I think probably the expression of anger might be different. But usually, anger is just a spontaneous burst of emotion, and the expressions of it are also quite spontaneous and automatic. So, what would be an expression of essence in terms of anger?
I have a couple of other questions here that Ron and Vicki and I came up with, and Mary as well. Shall I go on with those, or pause for a moment?
ELIAS: Let us view the questions that you are already posing, for
you are posing several questions thus far.
As to the emotion of anger and the identification of this particular expression, this is an expression of an emotion. This is an emotion which you have attached very strong beliefs to in association with it, and in the attachment of your beliefs associated with this particular emotion, you also alter the expression of it. Are you following thus far?
ELIAS: In this, anger in itself is merely an expression of a restlessness and an aggressiveness.
Now; neither of these identifications are what you would term to be negative or positive, although both may be viewed in particular situations as negative or positive. Aggression may be viewed in a positive manner, and it also may be viewed in what you term to be a destructive manner, dependent upon your perception of the expression itself, and your perception of the intent of the expression.
Now; you have developed identifications and definitions associated with this particular emotion, for this particular emotion is expressed in an intensity. It also may be created quite spontaneously, and many times is expressed in relation to interaction with outside stimulus. Other emotions that you engage may be created in conjunction with outside elements, but they also many times may be created in association with self singularly, in a manner of speaking. Anger may also be expressed singularly, but for the most part, your expression of it is created in relation to outside influences, so to speak.
In this, in relation to its association with duplicity, you have created very strong identifications and definitions concerning this particular emotion. Few individuals within your physical reality view the emotion of anger as positive. Most individuals view this particular emotion to be detrimental, destructive, negative, hurtful, and quite frankly, bad! (Chuckling)
ELIAS: Now; let me also express to you, as I have expressed in other subject matters, the strength of your judgment of this particular emotion creates a tremendous contribution to its perpetuation.
In this, as you concentrate your energy in the expression of judgment in intensity, that this particular emotion is bad and should be eliminated or reconfigured to such extreme that it is unrecognizable, you continue to perpetuate the actual expression that you view to be bad. I have expressed this many, many times in many situations, that this is in actuality the action that you engage in many subject matters. The very element that you wish not to be perpetuating or that you wish to be altering, you DO perpetuate through your concentration of judgment upon it, and as you allow yourself to be accepting, you also deflate, in a manner of speaking, the power which is held in the perpetuation of that expression.
As to your question of acceptance and your expression in anger in interaction with another individual and is this not in actuality an expression of a lack of acceptance within self, yes, you are correct. You have created an identification of anger as being synonymous with judgment.
BOBBI: Yes. Is it not?
ELIAS: No. It is merely an emotion which is expressed in an intensity in an expression of aggression. You have altered that expression and have reconfigured its expression, and have created another design which you identify as anger. The actual emotion itself is not entirely what you identify in your judgment.
Let me express to you, in conjunction with this shift in consciousness — addressing to another of your inquiries in this subject matter — as you continue to be inserting this shift in consciousness into your objective reality and you move more and more into the expression of acceptance, you are not, as I have stated previously, eliminating the foundational expressions of your reality.
You are not eliminating your beliefs. You are not eliminating your emotions. You are not eliminating thoughts or your expression of sexuality. These are all base elements of the design of this particular physical dimension, which you are continuing to express. You are merely altering the expression of them through the acceptance of self and belief systems, and this does in actuality alter your reality and widen your awareness. In this, you are not eliminating the expressions of any of your emotions.
As this shift is accomplished within each of you, you shall continue to be expressing all of the emotions that you express presently, for this is an aspect of this physical dimension that you have created quite purposefully, to be exploring in physical expression. But as you remove the expression or the aspect of judgment from a particular emotion, its expression may appear in itself quite differently than what you are presently identifying as that emotion.
I have also expressed to you in recent time framework quite frequently, you are engaged in the action of redefining your reality, and in that redefining of your reality, as you allow yourself to identify the definitions that you hold presently in your reality, and recognize the judgments that are associated with these definitions, and allow yourself movement into acceptance, you are altering your reality in that action of redefining.
BOBBI: I guess that’s where my difficulty comes in, in redefining anger. In our discussion last night, we were really hard-pressed to come up with a situation where you could hold the emotion of anger — get angry — without there being a judgment involved to trigger that emotion.
ELIAS: For you are associating this particular emotion, as I have stated, quite synonymously with judgment.
BOBBI: Yes, we are! I cannot think of a situation where you would have the emotion of anger and not have it triggered by some sort of judgment — of yourself, of the situation, of the other person, or of the other person’s expression.
BOBBI: How does that ... I don’t understand how that works.
ELIAS: Let me express to you, Jale ... which may be (chuckling) creating some elements of conflict within some individuals, but we shall proceed regardless. Ha ha ha! Identify to yourself what you define as an emotion of frustration.
ELIAS: Now; in this expression of frustration, may you be expressing frustration without judgment? (Pause)
ELIAS: Correct. Yes, you may be expressing frustration without necessarily creating a judgment associated with that emotion.
Now; I shall rock your boats once again and express to you, you identify within your beliefs a distinction between anger and frustration. You view anger and frustration to be different and separate expressions. I express to you, they are aspects of the same emotion.
BOBBI: Okay, but aspects of the same emotion, but not particularly the same?
ELIAS: They ARE the same emotion. They are aspects of the same emotion, for you have divided the expression.
You have created a division of the expression, and you have created one aspect of the expression to be associated with judgment, and you have incorporated this particular expression of this emotion in association with your lack of acceptance of self.
Now; let me also express to you, quite realistically, in actuality, this is quite beneficial, for it is an objective, outward, obvious expression as an indicator or a focal point, so to speak, of self.
I have expressed to you all many times, there are no aspects of yourself that are hidden. There is no element of yourself which is not available to you objectively. It is merely a question of you allowing yourself to pay attention to self and to become familiar with self and recognize what you are creating within your reality.
As you become familiar with self, you also allow yourself to identify HOW you are defining your expressions, WHAT you are expressing, and WHY you are expressing in the manner that you are choosing.
Anger is in actuality a beneficial and useful emotion in the manner that you have chosen to be expressing it, in association with your beliefs and its coupling with duplicity. For each time you are experiencing your definition of anger, you are allowing yourself to be projecting an obvious, objective expression of your lack of acceptance, which also offers you the opportunity to be identifying and to be altering that expression.
In this, allow yourself objectively the recognition that anger and frustration are the same emotion. Therefore, you may be expressing anger without judgment. It may be expressed as an objective motivational expression, which in actuality is its design.
BOBBI: I understand this part of it, and I can see that. I guess I’m also thinking of specific situations, when you’re in a conflict with another individual ...
ELIAS: Very well.
BOBBI: ... and they are expressing their frustration, their anger, their rage, whatever, at you in quite strong terms.
ELIAS: Very well.
BOBBI: Generally, quite quickly, a reaction will come up within you.
BOBBI: At this point, I really don’t know where to go from there. In a situation like that, I express what comes into my mind — it flies out of my mouth — which I’m quite quickly sorry for normally, or eventually I’m sorry for, or I don’t say anything. And yet, all of those thoughts keep going around and around. In fact, this goes to Mary’s question. She summed it up very nicely. Since none of those things seem to be entirely successful, is there an alternative direction for that type of energy? (Pause)
ELIAS: Let me express to you, as you create your response in immediacy, what do you identify that you are creating? What are you expressing? (Pause)
BOBBI: Well, generally it is a response to the situation of the other person being angry with me and expressing that. So, I would either be defending myself or telling the other person why they are incorrect.
ELIAS: Correct. Now; you view the action of the other individual to be an assault.
ELIAS: And in this, you respond in defense.
ELIAS: Do you view, in actuality, the identification that defense is your immediate, automatic expression of lack of acceptance of self?
BOBBI: Yes, absolutely I do.
ELIAS: Therefore, as you engage an interaction with another individual and you perceive the other individual’s expression to be a type of assault, as you are automatically responding in defense, you are expressing your acknowledgment of your lack of acceptance of self.
Were you to be genuinely expressing the acceptance of self, the other individual may project energy to you, and may intend the energy to be projected AS an assault at times, but it shall not penetrate and become perceived as an assault, for in your acceptance of self, the automatic action that you create instead of defense is the openness of your energy field, which reconfigures the energy that has been projected to you, and you do not receive in the assaulting manner.
In this, we return to the buffer. But beyond the buffer is the expression of acceptance and openness, which automatically creates a reconfiguration of the energy.
Now; I am understanding of your confusion and your conflict in these types of interactions, and I am also understanding of your desire for your quick fix, so to speak, (laughing) to be altering the expression in immediacy.
But there is importance in your understanding objectively of what you are actually creating, and in this, it is quite significant that you allow yourselves to become familiar with yourselves.
There are situations in which you may be the individual expressing the assault and you are the individual that is projecting, not the individual that is initially receiving, and this action also is an expression of a lack of acceptance of self.
For in the projection of the assault, so to speak, which you define as anger, you are attempting to be expressing to another individual in a manner of convincing them of some information concerning you. But you are not familiar with you! And you are not convincing the other individual, for you are expressing your projection TO YOU.
Therefore, your expression of anger — in the definition that YOU hold, in an outward expression of judgmental aggression — is, in a manner of speaking, a type of desperate attempt to be offering yourself information.
BOBBI: About yourself.
ELIAS: Correct. (Pause)
BOBBI: Hmm. (Pause)
ELIAS: Let me express to you, you hold much more difficulty in the recognition that you are not controlling of you, in your beliefs, than you express in the recognition of controlling another individual. You already express to yourselves, quite objectively and in actuality, that you may not be creating another individual’s choices or that you may not be controlling another individual.
You camouflage your actions through your thoughts that [you] are expressing an attempt to be altering the expression of another individual, but in actuality, underlying, you are expressing your recognition that you also are not controlling of you, and this is unsettling, for regardless that you may not be expressing control of another individual, you MUST be expressing control of self. (Pause)
You may identify to yourself a recognition, in interaction with another individual, that you are not in agreement with — or in your terms, preferring or liking of — choices or expressions of behaviors that another individual creates.
You also, in some manner, shall express to yourself the recognition that you may not be altering of that behavior or those choices, [that] they are not your choices or behaviors to be altering, and that it is the choice of the other individual to be continuing or to be altering their behavior as they choose.
And in this, your camouflage — in the actual interaction — is the expression of denying that knowing within yourself, and attempting to be expressing the choices or the directions or the dictates of the choices for the other individual. This is what you may term to be the camouflage. In actuality, the expression is the judgment upon self and the lack of acceptance of self, which is being expressed outwardly and surfacely in the interaction. (Pause)
BOBBI: So, in the case then when ... I guess we only have our own choices and we only deal with our own choices, so the choice would be how we perceive the other person’s interaction and how we receive that energy.
ELIAS: Allowing yourself to be aware. Let us engage in a small example. Shall you find the experience pleasurable that another individual may be dictating to you your thoughts?
ELIAS: Correct. Therefore, if another individual approaches you and expresses to you, “You are thinking this,” or “You are creating this. You are doing this,” your response in the reception of that expression shall be what?
BOBBI: Well, either “No, I’m not,” or “Yes I am, and that’s what I want to do.”
ELIAS: Correct. Now; if your response is “No, I am not,” why is your response “No, I am not”?
BOBBI: I would be disagreeing with their perception of what I was doing, I suppose.
ELIAS: And why shall you disagree with their perception?
BOBBI: (Laughing) Because it doesn’t match mine!
ELIAS: Quite! And what shall you be engaging in this disagreement of the identification of their perception?
BOBBI: I’m sorry; could you say that again?
ELIAS: What shall you be attempting to be doing?
BOBBI: Oh. Well, controlling their thoughts and controlling their perception.
ELIAS: And attempting to convince otherwise.
ELIAS: And attempting to be expressing self, that you may be offering proof to another individual of their incorrectness.
ELIAS: Or that they are wrong, and that you are correct or that you are right.
ELIAS: And what is accomplished in this action?
BOBBI: Well, that’s a good question. Sometimes, nothing. Sometimes it just creates more conflict.
ELIAS: Ah, I shall express to you, there is always an accomplishment in these situations! You may accomplish a validation of self if you view yourself to be successful in altering the perception of the other individual. If you are unsuccessful at altering the perception of the other individual, you accomplish discounting of yourself and reinforcing your view of yourself in duplicity, that you are not quite good enough yet. (Pause)
Now; as to your question concerning your quick fix, so to speak — what shall you engage in the moment of interaction of anger, in the manner that YOU define it — I may express to you, you may allow yourself quite physical actions. Allow yourself a stop-point. Allow yourself an actual physical action of breath, for the physical action of breathing, in the attention of your breathing, creates a lessening of intensity of all of your emotions.
You create more of an intensity of the expressions of your emotions in tension. It is difficult to be creating tension as you allow a physical relaxation of your physical body. It is difficult to create tension in allowing yourself a free flow of breath.
You may, within a single moment, allow yourself a stop-point. Turn your attention to your breath. Turn your attention away from what you perceive to be the other individual, and recognize that your interaction is with self, and in this, the other individual IS YOU. And shall you wish to continue in projecting this type of energy of anger to yourself?
BOBBI: So it’s kind of that old thing of “stop and count to ten,” really. Just stop for a moment, regroup, and think about what’s going on then.
ELIAS: Also allow yourself, within that moment, the recognition that a solution is unnecessary; a resolution, a solution, or a finish line is unnecessary. (Pause) In the moment, allow yourself to be noticing what you are participating within.
As you continue to project your attention and your energy outward, you create — in this action of anger, in your identification of this aspect of it — the judgment of blame, and as you create that action, you perpetuate the situation. What is blame?
BOBBI: Looking outside of yourself for the cause of your conflict.
ELIAS: And the direct, blatant identification of right and wrong.
The identification of projection of blame to another individual is the expression that that individual is wrong in their expression, and this is a direct expression/projection of energy to be discounting of the other individual.
Without the element of duplicity and judgment, it is merely a projection of energy in aggression. Aggression is not bad. It is not negative. It is merely a surge of energy.
With the expression of judgment, you configure that aggression to be an assault to another individual, and you create this action as a direct expression of lack of acceptance of self. (Pause)
BOBBI: So then, post-shift, what we define as anger then — I guess my questions today have been dealing with what we define as anger — that will not exist? If everyone is accepting of themselves, at that point, those types of expressions will not exist?
ELIAS: Not in the manner that you are expressing them presently. This is not to say that you shall not continue in the expression of anger.
BOBBI: It will be a different definition of anger. Is that correct?
ELIAS: It may be expressed more in the likeness of some of your identifications presently of frustration.
BOBBI: So in an intensity of that kind of thing, like rage ... I can’t imagine that existing in a non-judgmental environment.
ELIAS: This may be expressed also, but differently.
For within the acceptance, if you are choosing to be engaging that type of intensity of expression in relation to another individual, you shall both hold the awareness of the intentional creation of that action NOT engaging judgment, in like manner to your ability to be engaging within a game without competition. Therefore, the intensity of the expression may be offered, but there is no engagement of hurtfulness or conflict.
BOBBI: I’m trying to imagine what a scenario like that would be, but at this point, it’s difficult to imagine that.
ELIAS: I am understanding, and this be the reason ... which is expressed in the intensity of your beliefs.
Your beliefs are expressed in extreme intensity, and in this, they are shadowing your perception in a manner that you are not allowing yourselves to perceive in other manners, and this is the point of our interactions and of the offering of information, that you may allow yourselves to be widening your awareness and to be accepting, and therefore also altering your perception.
BOBBI: Yeah, there’s so much more, so many beliefs attached to anger or our ideas of anger. It’s extremely hard to separate them all out.
So to go back to the acceptance thing, if someone is expressing a negative judgment of someone else, like “I think you’re bad and awful for doing that, but I am accepting of myself and I feel good about my expression of saying that because I am accepting of myself,” is that true acceptance of self, to be projecting that judgment of someone?
ELIAS: If you are accepting of self, why shall you be projecting the judgment to another individual that they are bad or awful?
This is their perception. Their perception is influenced by their beliefs. Their perception is reality. Therefore, what they are expressing is the view of you, so to speak, that they have created in their creation of you. How shall this be hurtful or negative within you if you are accepting of you? For if you are accepting of you, it matters not.
Let me express to you in another manner. An individual may express to you that you are a selfish individual. Now; you may be recognizing that their definition of selfish may be expressed in negative terms, in your identification. If you are accepting of self, it matters not that they are perceiving the identification of selfish as negative, for within you, the identification of selfish may be quite accurate, but holds no expression of negative or positive. It merely is. It is merely an identification of a quality or expression of you.
BOBBI: Now, if I’m the person expressing to the other person that they are selfish, that I perceive them to be a selfish individual, and I mean it as a judgment, can I express that, or is expressing that ... gosh, I’m not sure how to express this. I’ve confused myself!
ELIAS: May you express that to another individual, and also be accepting of self.
BOBBI: Yes, that’s what I mean. (Laughing)
BOBBI: Okay, that was my thought on it also.
ELIAS: For this is a projection of a judgment.
BOBBI: Right, and any projection of a judgment is not a true acceptance.
ELIAS: Correct, yes. And each projection of judgment that you offer is and may be directly associated with your own expression of lack of acceptance within self.
BOBBI: Okay, thank you very much. Are there any other thoughts that you have on this that you would like to contribute?
ELIAS: Ha ha! I shall express to you also, allow yourselves to view the intricacies of the judgments that you place upon this particular engagement of anger, for even in the situations that you choose to be addressing to your participation in anger, you place judgments upon the actions that you may choose to be altering your own expressions.
I have expressed previously that you may be engaging conflict, and if you are so choosing, you may remove yourself from the conflict to be creating of your no-conflict scenario, but you place judgments upon that action also. It is not good to be walking away. You must be confronting each situation, and you must be playing out the scenario to the bitter end, and offering yourself an answer or a solution!
For the assessment is that there is some element of the interaction which is malfunctioning or broken, and in that, it needs be altered or adjusted or fixed.
BOBBI: (Laughing) Yeah, we’ve been having a lot of imagery of that lately!
ELIAS: (Chuckling) I express to you, none of these expressions are accepting!
Therefore, as you engage a conflict and you are experiencing the exhibition of anger, recognize that this is not a malfunction or broken either. It needs not be altered. It needs not be fixed. It needs not be adjusted. You merely may recognize the influence of the belief systems that are affecting of your perception, and therefore coloring the hue of your expression.
ELIAS: Acceptance is a wondrous expression! (Chuckling) Ha ha!
BOBBI: I would imagine so! (Laughing)
ELIAS: And all of you are moving into its wondrous embrace! (Chuckling)
BOBBI: Sometimes that is very hard to see! (Laughing)
ELIAS: Ha ha ha! I express to you once again an acknowledgment of the difficulty that many of you are experiencing in your movement in relation to the addressing to duplicity. This creates tremendous challenges, and I am understanding of the conflict and confusion which you are engaging in relation to it. (Chuckling)
BOBBI: It seems to come up in all kinds of forms!
ELIAS: Quite! And how very efficient of all of you to be so very diverse in offering yourselves a variety of expressions to be examining this belief system! Ha ha!
BOBBI: (Laughing) Yes!
ELIAS: Are you not wondrously creative?
BOBBI: (Cracking up) It’s marvelous, I’ll tell ya!
ELIAS: Ha ha ha! I may also offer to you one final comment in relation to this expression of anger. Many, many, many of you move in the expression of seriousness, and especially in the expression of anger, you direct your attention in an intensity of seriousness, and it may be helpful to you objectively to offer yourselves a moment of noticing of your intensity of seriousness.
Allow yourselves to recognize that all of these expressions are merely expressions of exploration, and it is not so very serious!
BOBBI: Looking at it as an exploration has been helpful, when I can remember to do that! (Elias chuckles) But at moments, it is helpful. It diffuses things a bit.
ELIAS: Therefore, if you are viewing not so very seriously, you may also allow yourself less of a thickness and an incorporation of fun!
BOBBI: (Laughing, and Elias chuckles) Well, fun and anger — that would be new!
ELIAS: Ha ha! And you may in actuality — ha ha! — engage this action! Ha ha ha! Ah! There be your challenge!
BOBBI; Yeah! (Laughing)
ELIAS: Explore this action!
BOBBI: Okay — humor and anger!
ELIAS: Ha ha!
BOBBI: Thank you very much for all this. May I ask you just a few quick questions?
ELIAS: You may.
BOBBI: Okay. Is this my Ken’s — my partner — final focus? (Pause)
BOBBI: My daughter Melissa, what is her orientation? (Pause)
ELIAS: Orientation, common.
BOBBI: Okay, and I was also wondering about the orientation of Kristin/Stephonee. (Pause)
ELIAS: First individual, common.
BOBBI: And my sister Nancy, essence name Mae. (Pause)
ELIAS: Orientation, soft.
BOBBI: Well, I got one right out of all those! (Laughing, and Elias chuckles) Is there a relationship between Ken’s mother, Jeanne, and Lawrence/Vicki?
ELIAS: This be a broad question! (Bobbi laughs) Therefore, I shall offer a broad answer: yes! (Chuckling)
BOBBI: What led to the question is, during a ... I don’t know if it was quite a dream state, but I saw their faces interposed over each other. I have not figured out quite what to make of that imagery.
ELIAS: This is imagery in the presentment of a recognition of shared focuses. They are not of the same essence, nor are they fragmented of the same essence. But these essences do participate in shared focuses, and you have offered yourself a type of imagery in relation to an interconnectedness, so to speak, in relationships.
BOBBI: Okay! That answered that! (Elias chuckles)
Oh, one final question, which I sort of hesitate to ask, but I will anyway. Is my Roman focus of Catullus the poet Catullus? (Pause)
ELIAS: No, but is interactive in relationship of what you would identify as close comrade.
BOBBI: Okay. Okay, thank you. That’s everything I have for today.
ELIAS: Very well.
I express to you encouragement in your sojourn of investigation of this particular emotion of anger, (laughing) and your exploration of the many facets and expressions of it that be objectively unknown to you yet! Ha ha ha!
BOBBI: Oh dear!
ELIAS: Ha ha! And as you are widening your view of your horizon before you, I shall be in energy beside you — ha ha! — offering an expression of fun in your moments of anger! (Laughing)
BOBBI: Oh good! (Laughing, and Elias chuckles)
ELIAS: I express to you great affection, and anticipation of our continued interaction. To you this day, au revoir!
BOBBI: Thank you, Elias.
Elias departs at 3:06 PM.
Vic’s note: Elias was doing what I call “conducting himself” in this session. His left hand was constantly moving in sync with his speech patterns, in like manner to how a conductor conducts an orchestra. I’ve only observed this a few other times, and it’s pretty funny!
© 2000 Vicki Pendley/Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved
Copyright 2000 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.