Love and Hate at the level of the heart

[Bindi]

Bindi,

 

These words make sense in context. Jesus is not saying that he hates people, he is explaining about how the scribes and Pharisees had misled the masses to gather power for themselves and how it is terribly wrong to mislead others like that. To me, the words in this section are best summed up by Jesus as "cleanse first that which is within".

 

...

 

Regards,

Jeff

 

So it wasn't a hate-filled harangue because in a Christian context it was true and therefore justified? 

[doc benway]

Pure egoless compassion beyond hate would only be possible when consciousness is permanently operating in the higher energy centres, beyond duality - why, how could it be expected before raising consciousness to the highest levels? 

 

Because it is possible, and not terribly unusual, for people to have a taste of that "pure egoless compassion" and the state where it rests without reaching some conceptual state of "highest energy" or "permanently operating in the higher energy centres, beyond duality..."   We can call it what we want but what we call it is not it. It is real and it is beyond conceptualization. This is different than the type of love that is associated with hate. Those are relative emotions based on conditions. While we may use the same symbol, love, for communication purposes, we are pointing to two very different things. When the ego is liberated, hate cannot find any root but that space is imbued with all perfected qualities.

[dwai]

Because it is possible, and not terribly unusual, for people to have a taste of that "pure egoless compassion" and the state where it rests without reaching some conceptual state of "highest energy" or "permanently operating in the higher energy centres, beyond duality..."   We can call it what we want but what we call it is not it. It is real and it is beyond conceptualization. This is different than the type of love that is associated with hate. Those are relative emotions based on conditions. While we may use the same symbol, love, for communication purposes, we are pointing to two very different things. When the ego is liberated, hate cannot find any root but that space is imbued with all perfected qualities.

 

Beautifully articulated Steve!

 

May I add that (and my enthusiasm perhaps a tad more than necessary because of a recent experience) indeed Love and Joy is the essential nature of all existence. The lack of Love or Joy is a conditioning of the mind and nothing else. It is so simple a concept that when I first encountered it (in words), I registered it and discarded it outright as being silly. Then after a few more years of practice, I thought about it again, and it kind of made sense, but I dropped that understanding as "reductionism". And even later, further more years later, it makes sense in a most primal, direct way.

[cheya]

Hey Bindi,

This excerpt from an Adyashanti interview helped me around these issues....

 

"Q: Does being enlightened mean that you never get angry or reactive or 

make big mistakes? 

 

A: Theres no such thing as never getting angry. Enlightenment can and 

does use all the available emotions. Otherwise, we would have to 

discount Jesus for getting pissed off in the temple and kicking over 

the table. The idea that enlightenment means sitting around with a 

beatific smile on our faces is just an illusion. 

 

At a human level, enlightenment means that you are no longer divided 

within yourself, and that you no longer experience a division between 

yourself and others. Without any inner division, you stop 

experiencing most of the usual forms of reactivity. 

 

Q: Could you say a little more what you mean by no "inner division"? 

 

A: Most human beings spend their lives battling with opposing inner 

forces: what they think they should do versus what they are doing; 

how they feel about themselves versus how they are; whether they 

think theyre right and worthy or wrong and unworthy. The separate 

self is just the conglomeration of these opposing forces. When the 

self drops away, inner division drops away with it. 

 

Now, I cant say that I never make a mistake, because in this human 

world being enlightened doesnt mean we become experts at everything. 

What does happen, though, is that personal motivations disappear. 

Only when enlightenment occurs do we realize that virtually 

everything we did, from getting out of bed to going to work to being 

in a relationship to pursuing our pleasures and interests, was 

motivated by personal concern. In the absence of a separate self, 

theres no personal motivation to do anything. Life just moves us. 

 

When personal motivation no longer drives us, then whats left is our 

true nature, which naturally expresses itself on the human dimension 

as love or compassion. Not a compassion that we cultivate or practice 

because were supposed to, but a compassion that arises spontaneously 

from our undivided state. If we undertake being a good, compassionate 

person as a personal identity, it just gets in the way of awakening."

 

http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/1442-adyashanti-interview/

 

 

"Life just moves us." ....  I love that!

[Bindi]

Hey Bindi,

This excerpt from an Adyashanti interview helped me around these issues....

 

"Q: Does being enlightened mean that you never get angry or reactive or 

make big mistakes? 

 

A: Theres no such thing as never getting angry. Enlightenment can and 

does use all the available emotions. Otherwise, we would have to 

discount Jesus for getting pissed off in the temple and kicking over 

the table. The idea that enlightenment means sitting around with a 

beatific smile on our faces is just an illusion. 

 

At a human level, enlightenment means that you are no longer divided 

within yourself, and that you no longer experience a division between 

yourself and others. Without any inner division, you stop 

experiencing most of the usual forms of reactivity. 

 

Q: Could you say a little more what you mean by no "inner division"? 

 

A: Most human beings spend their lives battling with opposing inner 

forces: what they think they should do versus what they are doing; 

how they feel about themselves versus how they are; whether they 

think theyre right and worthy or wrong and unworthy. The separate 

self is just the conglomeration of these opposing forces. When the 

self drops away, inner division drops away with it. 

 

Now, I cant say that I never make a mistake, because in this human 

world being enlightened doesnt mean we become experts at everything. 

What does happen, though, is that personal motivations disappear. 

Only when enlightenment occurs do we realize that virtually 

everything we did, from getting out of bed to going to work to being 

in a relationship to pursuing our pleasures and interests, was 

motivated by personal concern. In the absence of a separate self, 

theres no personal motivation to do anything. Life just moves us. 

 

When personal motivation no longer drives us, then whats left is our 

true nature, which naturally expresses itself on the human dimension 

as love or compassion. Not a compassion that we cultivate or practice 

because were supposed to, but a compassion that arises spontaneously 

from our undivided state. If we undertake being a good, compassionate 

person as a personal identity, it just gets in the way of awakening."

 

http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/1442-adyashanti-interview/

 

 

"Life just moves us." ....  I love that!

 

"Theres no such thing as never getting angry. Enlightenment can and 

does use all the available emotions. Otherwise, we would have to 

discount Jesus for getting pissed off in the temple and kicking over 

the table. The idea that enlightenment means sitting around with a 

beatific smile on our faces is just an illusion."

 

​Yet...

 

"When  [the self drops away and] personal motivation no longer drives us, then whats left is our 

true nature, which naturally expresses itself on the human dimension 

as love or compassion."

 

It is illogical to say enlightenment can and does use all the available emotions (including anger in Adyashanti's Jesus example, and scathing invective in mine) then say that only love and compassion are expressed when enlightened. So I am left with how to account for Jesus's anger at the temple and his scathing attack on the Pharisees.

 

There are 4 possibilities that I can see:

 

1. Ignore it as an inconvenient anomaly 

 

2. Clumsily re-package his anger at the temple and verbal invective towards the pharisees as love and compassion

 

3. Acknowledge that Jesus was motivated personally by his lower self and had not achieved the spiritual level that Adyashanti claims to have achieved

 

​4. Acknowledge that negative emotions still apparently operate in an 'enlightened' state, assuming Jesus was the equivalent of enlightened. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by Bindi

[Gerard]

Working on the assumption that consciousness rises progressively from lower to higher, and from duality to the one, wouldn't working on the heart (still at the level of duality) lead to opening to love and hate?  

 

Pure egoless compassion beyond hate would only be possible when consciousness is permanently operating in the higher energy centres, beyond duality - why, how could it be expected before raising consciousness to the highest levels? 

 

You need to completely overcome lust and anger in order to open the Heart to a level that enables you to reach rebirth in the non-returning level (anagami). Arahantship requires removing all fetters including delusion (attachment to nothing to no reality, form or formlessness of any kind in any possible way, it means returning to the state of complete and maintained ONENESS). This is the hardest level.

 

Egoless compassion does not equate to completely removing lust and anger. Anger to the point that if someone comes with an axe and cuts off all your limbs (please read Buddha's advice on this matter) you feel compassion to your torturer because you know deep down that the harm was caused to you by unresolved past karma.

 

All the very best!

Edited October 13, 2016 by Gerard

[Bindi]

Because it is possible, and not terribly unusual, for people to have a taste of that "pure egoless compassion" and the state where it rests without reaching some conceptual state of "highest energy" or "permanently operating in the higher energy centres, beyond duality..."   We can call it what we want but what we call it is not it. It is real and it is beyond conceptualization. This is different than the type of love that is associated with hate. Those are relative emotions based on conditions. While we may use the same symbol, love, for communication purposes, we are pointing to two very different things. When the ego is liberated, hate cannot find any root but that space is imbued with all perfected qualities.

 

 

In this thread I do refer to the idea of pure egoless compassion as a possible ultimate state, but I also allow that the ultimate state may be closer to a passionate Jesus than to a detached and perfected Buddha, I really don’t know at the moment, and am not prepared to argue for either until I have firsthand knowledge. What I’m actually trying to get at in this thread is the value of exploring the heart in all its guises both good and bad as just one step on the way to ego liberation.  It is a psychologically healthy step, but there seems to be a lot of spiritually conceived resistance to the idea.

[liminal_luke]

 

What I’m actually trying to get at in this thread is the value of exploring the heart in all its guises both good and bad as just one step on the way to ego liberation.  It is a psychologically healthy step, but there seems to be a lot of spiritually conceived resistance to the idea.

 

 

People can really mess themselves up reading spiritual philosophy.  There´s all this stuff out there about love and compassion and all the other groovy mindstates that supposedly come on the way to ultimate enlightenment.  And it might be true, too, but for many people it´s deceptive: they use it as an excuse to avoid all their emotional crap.  Spiritual people are always loving so I will be too.  But then they don´t do the work, and the work is what drives the whole process.  You can´t get to love by pretending you don´t also feel angry.  No, no, no, no, no...you get to love when you stop pretending you´re not angry.

Edited October 13, 2016 by liminal_luke

[Cheshire Cat]

I believe that emotions are the products of internal winds movements.

For example, love is when a certain wind is in the chest ...and anger is when that same wind is in the chest, but the channels in the region are constricted as an effect of mental grasping.

Therefore, it makes sense to me when the Buddha described his feelings of compassion and internal joy as a " siddhi" which he cultivated and kept deliberately.

Also, it makes sense that if we're really looking for something immortal inside us, we should go beyond emotions.
I don't like the duality/non-duality discourse which is plain philosophy without facts : emotions depends on internal winds; internal winds won't last; therefore to cultivate exclusively to have strong positive emotions would be equal to amassing wealth and riches: like it or not, you'll have to let go of them.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Cheshire Cat

[Marblehead]

I have mentioned before in a discussion similar to this that I love my ego and experiencing my emotions.  It allows me to feel alive.

 

Anger and hate are two negative emotions.  I try to avoid hate.  I can't avoid anger because trying to do so would not be honest.

 

And I have mentioned before that I don't talk much about love.  Too many connotations to the word.

 

I will never attain the state that Chuang Tzu attained but I do try.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Marblehead

[Jeff]

So it wasn't a hate-filled harangue because in a Christian context it was true and therefore justified?

 

I think it is important to realize that there are many level at which you can read and perceive the words of Jesus. As an example, with Jesus "getting angry" and overturning the money lenders tables in the temple, at a deeper level it is important to remember that...

 

1 Corinthians 3:16-17

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

 

And the gospel is also about how one must stop worldly things (like being worried about money) to realize God. One must literally shift and anger is a natural emotion as part of that "over turning" process. But, actual anger itself as an emotion is just an automated subconscious response to fears and issues. As issues are dropped, anger itself has no basis and also drops. The Buddha describes it in the Dhammapada here...

 

Let go of anger.

Let go of pride.

When you are bound by nothing

You go beyond sorrow.

Anger is like a chariot careering wildly.

He who curbs his anger is the true charioteer.

Others merely hold the reins.

With gentleness overcome anger.

With generosity overcome meanness.

With truth overcome deceit. Speak the truth.

Give whenever you can,

Never be angry.

These three steps will lead you Into the presence of the gods.

The wise harm no one.

They are masters of their bodies

And they go to the boundless country.

[blue eyed snake]

I think you are probably right, but I do wonder to what extent the process of allowing all emotions and non attachment are simultaneous or consecutive processes, as non attachment may be used to not fully engage with unpleasant feelings. 

 

hm..me thinks there is a difference between disassociate from negative feelings, ( sort of putting them under the rug and denying they are there) and not being attached to these feelings.

 

When you've put the negative under the rug and play the saint, it's just that, playing the saint and not being it.

 

When the process of dissolving negative feeling starts, you'll find that in the place of those feelings a space opens up, to be filled with real positive feelings, with love and kindness etcetera. For me forgiving has played an important role in this process.

 

But deeper down there are always more negative feelings.... so after a while these begin to surface too, it's a sort of continuing process i suppose...

 

and when at first you become slowly aware that the negativity you've harbored for so long a time is made up by yourself...meaning, it's really all of made up of your own mind seeking things it cannot find.

 

then, after a time you can become aware that positive feelings are also just made up...sort of...

 

I suppose that when you can observe not only negative emotions but also positive emotions as a product of mind, at that moment the first seedling of compassion can sprout.

 

imho it's a long and winded process, not linear at all.

 

thereby i suppose that one that is enlightened (whatever that may be..) can show anger, real and frightening anger, as Jesus did in the temple, but at the same time can observe his own anger and see that its a product of mind and mirroring very old things still lingering there.

 

and in the wake of this train of thoughts, I suppose that enlightenment is a process too. That there is a sort of point of no return...but after that point you can grow and grow until the body ceases to support your living here on earth.

 

ever deeper layers,

 

love BES

[blue eyed snake]

There is only love or the absence of it. But even the absence is an illusion...there is only love

 

yes, but one has to go deep ( or high  ) to become aware of that,

 

i'm not there but sometimes i can grasp the inevitable truth of it

[blue eyed snake]

 

There are a lot of possible answers to the issues brought up in your post. But I will try to answer your question 'Are engaged and dis-engaged so different'  from a medical qigong perspective for now.

 

Jerry Alan Johnson writes that "students of Medical Chi Kung also focus on the Middle Dantian in order to train themselves to release their own psycho-emotional patterns." This can only involve engagement with emotions. The greatest gain from this work in his terms may be empathy and intuition (see quote below), which is used to "become aware of the emotional components of the patient's energetic blocks and imbalances." But psycho-emotional work also creates "a line of communication... with [the] higher self" according to him.

 

If I have failed to engage with any of my unpleasant emotions, then I doubt I would be able to empathise when that unpleasant emotion appears in someone else. So the blocks and imbalances in both of us remain hidden, and the particular communication between my MDT and my higher self that is enabled by  emotional engagement cannot develop. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yep, that sums it up nicely!

[Jetsun]

In many paths man is considered a microcosm of the universe, all the forces in the universe play themselves out inside of man, is made in God's image etc. So within man you have the entirety, love, rage, anger, bliss, everything is inside of us. The ego imagines some kind of state of perfection where all the "bad" emotions are overcome and only positive ones remain, but maturity is realising that everything is inside of you including all the negative. By accepting it inside of you you stop rejecting and judging it on the outside, which is the more compassionate place to be and you also stop projecting it all out in the world as a way to avoid seeing it in yourself.

[dwai]

yes, but one has to go deep ( or high ) to become aware of that,

 

i'm not there but sometimes i can grasp the inevitable truth of it

The deeper you go,the "higher" you get. It just doesn't feel high after a while because the "high" becomes the new normal

[dwai]

hm..me thinks there is a difference between disassociate from negative feelings, ( sort of putting them under the rug and denying they are there) and not being attached to these feelings.

 

When you've put the negative under the rug and play the saint, it's just that, playing the saint and not being it.

 

When the process of dissolving negative feeling starts, you'll find that in the place of those feelings a space opens up, to be filled with real positive feelings, with love and kindness etcetera. For me forgiving has played an important role in this process.

 

But deeper down there are always more negative feelings.... so after a while these begin to surface too, it's a sort of continuing process i suppose...

 

and when at first you become slowly aware that the negativity you've harbored for so long a time is made up by yourself...meaning, it's really all of made up of your own mind seeking things it cannot find.

 

then, after a time you can become aware that positive feelings are also just made up...sort of...

 

I suppose that when you can observe not only negative emotions but also positive emotions as a product of mind, at that moment the first seedling of compassion can sprout.

 

imho it's a long and winded process, not linear at all.

 

thereby i suppose that one that is enlightened (whatever that may be..) can show anger, real and frightening anger, as Jesus did in the temple, but at the same time can observe his own anger and see that its a product of mind and mirroring very old things still lingering there.

 

and in the wake of this train of thoughts, I suppose that enlightenment is a process too. That there is a sort of point of no return...but after that point you can grow and grow until the body ceases to support your living here on earth.

 

ever deeper layers,

 

love BES

So funny my teacher told us almost the same thing last night. As we progress in our practice the old tensions and traumas release to reveal even deeper ones. We have to just keep working at it until one day we will realIze that there are no more blocks and traumas.

[Jetsun]

The whole idea of getting higher and higher or progressing up the chakras to eventually lead to enlightenment is not what matches up to my understanding, you can have the energy go up to the higher centres leading to high states and bliss, but there is always a coming down after, what goes up must comes down. States are always temporary and transient and by law are balanced by their opposite, which isn't the peace of recognising what is ever present. Non-duality contains it all, including duality, contains the high and low, and there is no linear progressive attainment of it because it is here right now. But the space of non-duality isn't necessarily empty in the way we regularly understand it, it can exhibit qualities, for example in Hinduism they recognise the different divine qualities of this space including the completely loving embrace of the Divine Mother or Devi, as well as the raw destructive power of Kali and many more. 

[doc benway]

 

In this thread I do refer to the idea of pure egoless compassion as a possible ultimate state, but I also allow that the ultimate state may be closer to a passionate Jesus than to a detached and perfected Buddha, I really don’t know at the moment, and am not prepared to argue for either until I have firsthand knowledge. What I’m actually trying to get at in this thread is the value of exploring the heart in all its guises both good and bad as just one step on the way to ego liberation. It is a psychologically healthy step, but there seems to be a lot of spiritually conceived resistance to the idea.

The state of Buddha is completely connected, It is sometimes a misperception to see it as detached, in the common usage of the word, and I fully understand why it happens. There is a de-attachment if you will but not a disconnection. I think we often see detachment as being disconnected and that can be misleading.

 

I think the objective of this thread as you've just clarified it is essential and foundational. It is integral to the sutric and tantric paths especially, less so on the Dzogchen path which is more a cutting at the root.

[Bindi]

I think it is important to realize that there are many level at which you can read and perceive the words of Jesus. As an example, with Jesus "getting angry" and overturning the money lenders tables in the temple, at a deeper level it is important to remember that...

 

1 Corinthians 3:16-17

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

 

And the gospel is also about how one must stop worldly things (like being worried about money) to realize God. One must literally shift and anger is a natural emotion as part of that "over turning" process. But, actual anger itself as an emotion is just an automated subconscious response to fears and issues. As issues are dropped, anger itself has no basis and also drops. The Buddha describes it in the Dhammapada here...

 

Let go of anger. 

Let go of pride. 

When you are bound by nothing 

You go beyond sorrow. 

Anger is like a chariot careering wildly. 

He who curbs his anger is the true charioteer. 

Others merely hold the reins. 

With gentleness overcome anger. 

With generosity overcome meanness. 

With truth overcome deceit. Speak the truth. 

Give whenever you can, 

Never be angry. 

These three steps will lead you Into the presence of the gods. 

The wise harm no one. 

They are masters of their bodies 

And they go to the boundless country.

 

 

 

It's hard to see how your perspective or the Buddhist perspective on anger can be used to minimise or deny examples of Jesus's anger in the NT,  for another example see Mark 3:4-5 "Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill?" But they kept silent. After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored. 

[Jeff]

It's hard to see how your perspective or the Buddhist perspective on anger can be used to minimise or deny examples of Jesus's anger in the NT,  for another example see Mark 3:4-5 "Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill?" But they kept silent. After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored.

 

I don't see how this quote is about Jesus being angry? It says... After looking around at "them with anger", (he was) grieved at their "hardness of heart" (the "them with anger"). It basically said that he was saddened by seeing the anger and hardness of heart, and then he healed the guy on the sabbath, even though it was wrong to do such things by the law of the Old Testament. This section is more about Jesus saying to do the right and good thing and not get caught up in the old law.

 

The following verse (6) even goes on to say that even seeing Jesus heal the guy, they Pharisees were still angry and unmoved. It states...

 

“And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.”

‭‭Mark‬ ‭3:6‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[Bindi]

The state of Buddha is completely connected, It is sometimes a misperception to see it as detached, in the common usage of the word, and I fully understand why it happens. There is a de-attachment if you will but not a disconnection. I think we often see detachment as being disconnected and that can be misleading.

 

I think the objective of this thread as you've just clarified it is essential and foundational. It is integral to the sutric and tantric paths especially, less so on the Dzogchen path which is more a cutting at the root.

 

I am not clear on the extent to which Buddhists accept emotions and allow themselves to feel emotions nor how they go about de-attaching from them. Do different Buddhists have different perspectives on emotions as you seem to suggest above with the different paths?

[Bindi]

I don't see how this quote is about Jesus being angry? It says... After looking around at "them with anger", (he was) grieved at their "hardness of heart" (the "them with anger"). It basically said that he was saddened by seeing the anger and hardness of heart, and then he healed the guy on the sabbath, even though it was wrong to do such things by the law of the Old Testament. This section is more about Jesus saying to do the right and good thing and not get caught up in the old law.

 

The following verse (6) even goes on to say that even seeing Jesus heal the guy, they Pharisees were still angry and unmoved. It states...

 

“And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.”

‭‭Mark‬ ‭3:6‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

This is a standard commentary on the words in question, where Christian sensibilities come into play in minimising Jesus's anger, but not to the point of saying as you have that it wasn't his anger:

 

He looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts. The sin he had an eye to, was, the hardness of their hearts, their insensibleness of the evidence of his miracles, and their inflexible resolution to persist in unbelief. We hear what is said amiss, and see what is done amiss; but Christ looks at the root of bitterness in the heart, the blindness and hardness of that. Observe, [1.] How he was provoked by the sin; he looked round upon them; for they were so many, and had so placed themselves, that they surrounded him: and he looked with anger; his anger, it is probable, appeared in his countenance; his anger was, like God’s, without the least perturbation to himself, but not without great provocation from us. Note, The sin of sinners is very displeasing to Jesus Christ; and the way to be angry, and not to sin, is it be angry, as Christ was, at nothing but sin. Let hard-hearted sinners tremble to think of the anger with which he will look round upon them shortly, when the great day of his wrath comes.

 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/mark/3.html

[Jetsun]

When it comes to the teachings on anger that is one thing in some Buddhist scriptures I don't agree with, I think modern psychology has a far healthier relationship to it by accepting it's place and function. It is probably a distortion of the teachings or something inserted to disempower people to tell them they should never get angry.

[Jeff]

This is a standard commentary on the words in question, where Christian sensibilities come into play in minimising Jesus's anger, but not to the point of saying as you have that it wasn't his anger:

 

He looked [/size]round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts.[/size] The [/size]sin[/size] he had an eye to, was, the [/size]hardness of their hearts,[/size] their insensibleness of the evidence of his miracles, and their inflexible resolution to persist in unbelief. We hear what is said amiss, and see what is done amiss; but Christ looks at the [/size]root of bitterness[/size] in the heart, the blindness and hardness of [/size]that.[/size] Observe, [1.] How he was [/size]provoked[/size] by the sin; he looked [/size]round upon them;[/size] for they were so many, and had so placed themselves, that they surrounded him: and he looked [/size]with [/size]anger;[/size] his anger, it is probable, appeared in his countenance; his anger was, like God’s, without the least [/size]perturbation[/size] to himself, but not without great [/size]provocation[/size] from us. Note, The sin of sinners is very displeasing to Jesus Christ; and the way to be angry, and not to sin, is it be angry, as Christ was, at nothing but sin. Let hard-hearted sinners tremble to think of the anger with which he will [/size]look round[/size] upon them shortly, when the [/size]great day of his wrath comes.[/size]

 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/mark/3.html

The people giving your bible study are obviously not familiar with things like energy healing. As any healer can tell you, it is not possible to heal someone when in a state of anger (certainly not at the level of rebuilding lost tissue and bone). For such healing, in Christian terms, one must be "one with God" and in that state, the mind is quiet with no individual sense of self to be angry.

 

All healers of any tradition will tell you the same thing. No anger with healing.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Jeff