Changes

Anger is a violent reaction of the vital to some shock that is unpleasant to it; and when it involves words or thoughts, the mind responds to the influence of the vital and also reacts violently. <ref>http://incarnateword.in/cwm/16/11-may-1966#p4</ref>

The fact that the anger comes with such force is itself enough to show that it is not in you that it is, but that it comes from outside. It is a rush of force from the universal nature that tries to take possession of the individual being and make that being act according to the will of this outside force and not according to the will of the soul within.<refcenter>http://incarnateword.in/cwsa/31/anger-and-violence#p20~</refcenter>

The fact that the anger comes with such force is itself enough to show that it is not in you that it is, but that it comes from outside. It [an outburst is a rush of anger] is really simply force from the recurrence of an old habit universal nature that tries to take possession of the nature. Look at it individual being and see how trifling is the occasion of make that being act according to the rising will of this anger and its outburst—it becomes more and more causeless outside force and not according to the absurdity will of such movements reveals itselfthe soul within. <ref>httpshttp://incarnateword.in/cwsa/31/anger-and-violence#p22,p21,p4p20</ref>

<center>~</center> It [an outburst of anger] is really simply the recurrence of an old habit of the nature. Look at it and see how trifling is the occasion of the rising of this anger and its outburst—it becomes more and more causeless and the absurdity of such movements reveals itself. <ref>https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/31/anger-and-violence#p22,p21,p4</ref> <center>~</center> ...anger, all these movements of violence are necessarily movements of ignorance and limitation, with all the weakness that limitation represents. “[Based on Aphorism<51>-O To hate the sinner is the worst sin, for it is hating God; yet he who commits it glories in his superior virtue.]”<ref>http://incarnateword.in/cwm/10/aphorism-50#p8</ref> <center>~</center>

Man has an extraordinary power of creationA little analysis will make this apparent. He has created a whole set We have in all functionings of godheads in his own imagethe mentality four elements, having the same faults as himselfobject of mental consciousness, doing on a bigger scalethe act of mental consciousness, with greater power whatever he doesthe occasion and the subject. These beings have a relative existenceIn the self-experience of the self-observing inner being, but still it the object is an independent existencealways some state or movement or wave of the conscious being, anger, grief or other emotion, hunger or other vital craving, impulse or inner life reaction or some form of sensation, just like your perception or thoughtactivity. When you have a thought, The act is some kind of mental observation and conceptual valuation of this movement or wave or else a well-made mental formation which goes out sensation of you, it becomes an independent entity in which observation and continues on its way valuation may be involved and it does even lost,—so that for which it was made. It continues to in this act the mental person may either separate the act independently of you. That is why you must be on your guard. If you have made such a formation and it has gone out, it has gone out to do its work; and after the object by a time you find out that it was perhaps not distinguishing perception or confuse them together indistinguishably. He may either simply become a very happy thing to have a thought like thatmovement... of angry consciousness, that this formation was not very beneficial; now at all standing back from that it has gone outactivity, ...or he may observe what he becomes and reflect on it is very difficult for you to get hold of it again. Supposing in a moment of great anger (I do not say that you do so, but still when you were with this seeing or perception in quite a rage against someone, you said: his mind "Ah! couldn't some misfortune befall him?I am angry" Your formation has gone on its way. It has gone out In the former case the subject or mental person, the act of conscious self-experience and you have no longer any control over itthe substantial angry becoming of the mind which is the object of the self-experience, are all rolled up into one wave of conscious-force in movement; and it goes and organises some misfortune or other: it but in the latter there is going to do a certain rapid analysis of its work. And after sometime constituents and the act of self-experience partly detaches itself from the misfortune arrivesobject. Happily, you do Thus by this act of partial detachment we are able not usually have sufficient knowledge only to tell yourself: "Oh! It is I who am responsible"experience ourselves dynamically in the becoming, in the process of movement of conscious-force itself, but that to stand back, perceive and observe ourselves and, if the detachment is the truthsufficient, to control our feeling and action, control to some extent our becoming.<ref>http://incarnateword.in/cwmcwsa/0521/1memory-ego-and-julyself-1953experience#p13p5</ref>

A little analysis will make this apparent. We have in all functionings of the mentality four elements, the object of mental consciousness, the act of mental consciousness, the occasion and the subject. In the self-experience of the self-observing inner being, the object is always some state or movement or wave of the conscious being, anger, grief or other emotion, hunger or other vital craving, impulse or inner life reaction or some form of sensation, perception or thought activity. The act is some kind of mental observation and conceptual valuation of this movement or wave or else a mental sensation of it in which observation and valuation may be involved and even lost,—so that in this act the mental person may either separate the act and the object by a distinguishing perception or confuse them together indistinguishably. He may either simply become a movement... of angry consciousness, not at all standing back from that activity,...or he may observe what he becomes and reflect on it, with this seeing or perception in his mind "I am angry". In the former case the subject or mental person, the act of conscious self-experience and the substantial angry becoming of the mind which is the object of the self-experience, are all rolled up into one wave of conscious-force in movement; but in the latter there is a certain rapid analysis of its constituents and the act of self-experience partly detaches itself from the object. Thus by this act of partial detachment we are able not only to experience ourselves dynamically in the becoming, in the process of movement of conscious-force itself, but to stand back, perceive and observe ourselves and, if the detachment is sufficient, to control our feeling and action, control to some extent our becoming.<refcenter>http://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/memory-ego-and-self-experience#p5~</refcenter>

However, there is usually a defect even in this act of self-observation; for there is indeed a partial detachment of the act from the object, but not of the mental person from the mental act: the mental person and the mental action are involved or rolled up in each other; nor is the mental person sufficiently detached or separated either from the emotional becoming. I am aware of myself in an angry becoming of my conscious stuff of being and in a thought-perception of this becoming: but all thought-perception also is a becoming and not myself, and this I do not yet sufficiently realise; I am identified with my mental activities or involved in them, not free and separate. I do not yet directly become aware of myself apart from my becomings and my perception of them, apart from the forms of active consciousness which I assume in the waves of the sea of conscious force which is the stuff of my mental and life nature. It is when I entirely detach the mental person from his act of self-experience that I become fully aware first, of the sheer ego and, in the end, of the witness self or the thinking mental Person, ...someone who becomes angry and observes it but is not limited or determined in his being by the anger or the perception. He is, on the contrary, a constant factor aware of an unlimited succession of conscious movements and conscious experiences of movements and aware of his own being in that succession; but he can be aware of it also behind that succession, supporting it, containing it, always the same in fact of being and force of being beyond the changing forms or arrangements of his conscious force. He is thus the Self that is immutably and at the same time the Self that becomes eternally in the succession of Time.<ref>http://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/memory-ego-and-self-experience#p6</ref>

<center>~</center> Besides, they are very thirsty or hungry for certain human vital vibrations which for them are a rare dish they love to feed upon; and so their game lies in exciting pernicious movements in man so that man may emanate these forces and they be able to feed on them just as they please. All movements of anger, violence, passion, desire, all these things which make you abruptly throw off certain energies from yourself, project them from yourself, are exactly what these entities of the vital world like best, for, as I said, they enjoy them like a sumptuous dish. Now, their tactics are simple: they send you a little suggestion, a little impulse, a small vibration which enters deep into you and through contagion or sympathy awakens in you the vibration necessary to make you throw off the force they want to absorb.<ref>https://incarnateword.in/cwm/08/12-december-1956#p42</ref> <center>~</center>