Mastering the emotions

[Marblehead]

I like your post but must admit that I am a little more aggressive than that. But whatever works for the individual is good, I suppose.

[Kajenx]

I'd be interested to hear what you mean by "aggressive". I've been hanging out on the dharma overground for the past few months, and I kept asking everyone why they had such an obsession with "anatta". I understood it somewhat, but until now I thought it was just a philosophical construct. I had all these methods and meditations for reaching different states of awareness, and I was convinced there was something I had to do or some mind-state I had to stabilize. But, really, it seems like what I've been chasing after was actually a lot easier than I thought to attain. All I need to do is remove the agent - the "doer" or the control center - and let whatever happens happen. Instant serenity, stillness, peace and contentment. Maybe I'm just surfing on another half realization and it'll become ineffective like all the other methods, but I think the reason the others stopped working is because they didn't strike at the heart of the issue.

 

I'm going to hazard a guess that your agressive methods lead to the same place. Maybe they'll help me out too!

 

Edit: I just realized that this thread is almost identical to one I posted in February, lol... Maybe I'll remember what I learned this time around. XD

Edited June 8, 2014 by Kajenx

[Marblehead]

Edit: I just realized that this thread is almost identical to one I posted in February, lol... Maybe I'll remember what I learned this time around. XD

I did something similar to that yesterday. It would have been a deja vu moment had it not actually been a case of bad memory.

 

I'd be interested to hear what you mean by "aggressive".

Again, I'm not contending with anything you have said. I'm only suggesting that there are times when it would be better if we pushed or pulled or altered conditions in some way so to make the natural flow more natural.

 

What I guess I'm pointing at more than anything else is that there are situations and conditions and people that work at preventing a natural flow so these situations, conditions, and people must be removed in order for the natural flow to resume.

 

Sometimes the natural flow, because of previous causes, isn't in our best interests. A beaver can't use a naturally flowing stream - he has to stop it up so that he has a place to call home.

[GrandmasterP]

The meek shall inherit the earth.

( If that's OK with the bullies).

Sometimes the internal arts don't cut it.

Hence those external forms.

Edited June 8, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[GrandmasterP]

D- Day anniversary last week here in Blighty and over on the beaches of France.

If force were not sometimes both just and defensible then this post would quite likely be written in German.

Edited June 8, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

There was talk about it here too but likely not near as much as over there.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

I am not a computer, not a robot, not an automation.

There is no natural or beneficial reason to limit myself to such designations by eliminating my emotional experience (or any positive experience at all) for.... for what? what is gained by becoming an automated slave?


or


Mastering the emotions: What's in it for me?

Edited June 8, 2014 by Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan

[Kajenx]

Acceptance doesn't preclude practicality or logic. You only need to accept and let go of emotions to find a still mind. A still mind tends to make dealing with conflicts much easier because there is no resistance to any outcome. Say you REALLY don't want to go to work - by accepting that this emotion exists and leting go of trying to make it anything else, the passion within it dissipates and it becomes space or peace or emotionlessness, however you want to put it. It's actionless action, not actionlessness period haha. I think what makes it actionless is because there is nothing DOING the action, it just happens efforlessly because you get out of the way. Think of it like this, you can do anything two ways - either you can set up some subtle or gross mental resistances and feel tension and stress, or you can do the same thing without effort. The actionless part of wu wei is this emotionlessness I'm talking about. It means there is no resistance, you are just accepting what appears in this moment that you can't change. There's no reason you can't react to what hapens, but that reaction doesn't have to be based on emotional resistance. You can live the same life with or without an internal world. Living without it tends to move the mind in a different, more relaxed, direction though. From what I've seen, there is really no excuse not to be completely content at all times without exception. I've proved it's possible to myself too many times to believe the grasping mind any longer.

 

The distinction is important - the action or mental state and the descision process involved in it can happen any way at all, it's only the emotional overlay attached to these things that causes stress. Once this veil is removed, the same things happen, just without resistance. Everything, no matter what it is, is contentment. This mind is free to be practical.

[Kajenx]

@ Vanir: I'm not sure if you're going to find much interest in my response but I'll give it a try. At least try to keep an open mind.

 

A while back I went though an interesting line of self-questioning about the nature of time and reality. Eventualy I concluded that we actually are automated. Consider this - every time you make a decision, you have a reason for choosing what you did. This reason is what caused you to make the decision. This series of causes and effects is influenced by memories, emotions, instict, genetic, etc. Can you point to anything that could be called free will?

 

This flow of cause and effect happens in a perpetual "now" which creates what we see as time. The past and future both exist in our minds as a way to predict events, weight outcomes, and arrive at what we think is the best solution for what is happeneing in this "now". You can observe all this happeneing in your mind fairly easily.

 

A little experiement you can try is to raise you hand in front of you and wave it around a bit. Then ask yourself how you did it, why you did it, and if any free will was involved. What I always come to at the end of this line of self inquery is that the only thing I can point to as "me" is the awareness of what's hapeneing. I don't move my arm, I don't make decisions, and I can't sense time. For "me" it is always now, and I am never doing anything in particular except sensing what is happeneing.

 

As to why emotionlessness is worth it, I can't predict how you would interpret the experience, but subjectively it's completely beyond any emotional experience I've felt. I can understand the sceptical stance, but don't mistake what I'm saying for a neutral emotional tone. I'm talking about complete freedom FROM emotional thinking. It doesn't feel robotic, it feels like freedom. Perhaps this is because emotions are linked to the robotic world of cause and effect, and to be without emotions is to have a truely free will for the first time.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Kajenx

[johndoe2012]

Even neuroscience has proved we don't have any free will as defined by western thought.

 

The problem is people being attached to a sense of self which is just a bunch of thoughts and emotions.

 

So no doer behind the action just doing.

[silent thunder]

Even neuroscience has proved we don't have any free will as defined by western thought.

 

The problem is people being attached to a sense of self which is just a bunch of thoughts and emotions.

 

So no doer behind the action just doing.

a bundle of conditioned responses to most stimuli...

and whenever a situation is presented that is outside our 'normal' parameters, the anxiety over not having a preconditioned way to respond puts many into crisis mode...

[Brian]

Is that why I had dragonwell rather than pu'erh this morning?

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Can you point to anything that could be called free will?

 

 

The ability to make any choice at all.

 

the 5 most valuable principals i can discern in reality are:

 

Truth

Free Will

Mutual Unity

Family

and Self defense/martial arts

 

 

They all build upon and off of each other. there can be no greater virtue than maintaining these 5.

 

this response can be argued to be automated, but there will be no evidence that it is not an act of free will.

 

A lack of proof does not constitute proof of lacking.

[Marblehead]

So we have gone from mastering our emotions to mastering our free will which some claim doesn't exist.

 

Well, just so y'all know, I still have free will.

 

And I still hold to the truth of the Zoroastrian religion (the root religion) that God (I do not hold to this concept) gave us free will and charged us with the responsibility for all our thoughts, words, and deeds.

 

If we didn't have free will there would be no need for religions and governments trying to keep us honest.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Marblehead

[GrandmasterP]

Is that why I had dragonwell rather than pu'erh this morning?

 

Early Grey here instead of Yorkshire.

We do have free will, those who say otherwise have freely decided in favour of their position and that's fine.

The very fact there's a debate between pro and con points towards free will.

 

[GrandmasterP]

We had free will versus no free will on another forum I go on and it ran on for scores of pages.

It's one of those debates akin to nature versus nurture where there can never be a mutually satisfactory conclusion due to their being pretty strong science on both sides.

( I'm a 'nurture' booster BTW).

Edited June 9, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Brian]

We had free will versus no free will on another forum I go on and it ran on for scores of pages.

It's one of those debates akin to nature versus nurture where there can never be a mutually satisfactory conclusion due to their being pretty strong science on both sides.

( I'm a 'nurture' booster BTW).

The answer in both cases, obviously, is "both."

[GrandmasterP]

No it isn't.

As anee fule knoe...

The answer is 42.

 

Edited June 9, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Brian]

Well...

 

That goes without saying.

 

 

 

 

The question is, what's the question?

Edited June 9, 2014 by Brian

[Stosh]

The questions are,

as always ,

"What do I do now".

and

"Who am I ?"

 

This fine thread is moving along nicely without me , but I want to insert this perspective..

 

Free will or not is moot , because you cant prove it to be conclusively existing objectively.

Whether the automaton, is the doer or the perceiver-of-doing,,,, again, is moot

because both exist together embodied in the human condition

Without conclusive provable existance of something besides ourselves ( depicted in the Matrix)

There is nothing that can be done to any purpose but our own , ( though the proof of US is subjectively determined)

There is nothing therefore to "gain" by the mastery of ones emotions or domination by them ,

other than bringing about the ramifications of that pursuit.

 

I dont always drink tea , but when I do, its Yorkshire.

( and all the above applies)

 

Etc

Edited June 9, 2014 by Stosh

[Kajenx]

I never used anything other than simple logic and observation to conclude I had no free will. It's proveable if you enjoy and understand logic. I know a lot of people (well, most people) don't care much for logic or self inquery, though, so feel free to skip this post if you like. It all seems pretty simple to me though. You guys pointed to choices you made as an example of free will, but I think it's more important to examine why you made those choices than the fact that you made a choice. I'm assuming you guys are talking about tea. Why did you pick one tea over the other? It's simple, you picked the one you wanted. You wouldn't pick something you didn't want. This is not a free will, it's cause and effect driven by wanting. If I knew what you wanted, I could pick your tea for you.

 

Now let's say tomorrow you specifically pick a tea you don't want, just to prove me wrong. Doesn't the reason behind that choice show that you're influenced by this discussion? You're still doing what you most want to do, your reasons and motives have just changed to proving me wrong rather than picking a tea to satisfy your tastebuds.

 

Follow this line of reasoning for any action you take. As long as you can point to a reason for a decision, that reason is the cause of your decision. Free will implies that you are an independantly acting agent, so to be truely free, you must make decisions without any influence from past events/action/situations/genetics/etc. If you are making decisions based on reasons, then you aren't really making any descision at all, you're simply following a pattern of cause and effect.

 

I'm a bit suprised how many of you disagreed so quickly, though. Dependant origination is one of the buddha's main teachings, and it's always seemed pretty central to taoism as well in my reading of things. What else is the Tao but the way of nature, cause and effect. Consider actionless action - allowing these things to flow without impediment. I think it's central to most contemplative traditions that we are "out of control" of our lives, and the way to escape stress is to flow with what happens rather than create a conflict against this flow.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Kajenx

[GrandmasterP]

@ Stosh...

But that would be a 'gain' if the opposite was a loss.

For example, true story this from one of our Mindfulness programmes.

Guy with anger management issues and a drink problem who was forever getting into fights in pubs, being arrested and jailed.

He dries out eventually ( with AA) and joins then sticks with a Mindfulness-based anger managent programme.

Result.. Guy no longer gets into fights in pubs and stays out of jail.

The guy himself had to make that decision and until he was at that point where he made the choice to change then no matter what anybody tried to do 'for' him was a waste of time.

Once that 'intrinsic motivation' kicked in though then he was on the up.

Edited June 9, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Stosh]

@ Stosh...

But that would be a 'gain' if the opposite was a loss.

For example, true story this from one of our Mindfulness programmes.

Guy with anger management issues and a drink problem who was forever getting into fights in pubs, being arrested and jailed.

He dries out eventually ( with AA) and joins then sticks with a Mindfulness-based anger managent programme.

Result.. Guy no longer gets into fights in pubs and stays out of jail.

The guy himself had to make that decision and until he was at that point where he made the choice to change then no matter what anybody tried to do 'for' him was a waste of time.

Once that 'intrinsic motivation' kicked in though then he was on the up.

Im not sure what youre indicating , he Did sacrifice . ,the indulging in the fits of pugnacity.

Some folks like to fight , they like the exitement , they like the diversion from other things

The situation society decides to put him in is that he suppress some things , so he doesnt get punished.

Im not saying the tradeoff isnt one that would suit me , all Im saying is that he makes choices -

either as an automaton or out of free will doesn't matter.

In another age he might have been applauded ,

and everyone in the tribe might have paid subservient homage to his greatness.

( heck, in this age there are plenty who find that aggession macho and approve of it

despite being perfectly willing to punish him for it as well)

Hitler had his fans too.

But earlier it was rhetorically put 'why should I suppress myself ' as in 'Whats the gain or unrealized loss'

and my point is that as a logical point , starting from scratch, that he has to decide whats in it for him.

Some have gods , and all of creation exists to serve the god, but then , who's purpose does the god serve?

Its an unending regression , the idea of service or "purpose to a greater thing" ,

and frankly there is no proof that there is any 'greater thing' than the enjoyment of your tea, by you.

[Stosh]

I never used anything other than simple logic and observation to conclude I had no free will. It's proveable if you enjoy and understand logic. I know a lot of people (well, most people) don't care much for logic or self inquery, though, so feel free to skip this post if you like. It all seems pretty simple to me though. You guys pointed to choices you made as an example of free will, but I think it's more important to examine why you made those choices than the fact that you made a choice. I'm assuming you guys are talking about tea. Why did you pick one tea over the other? It's simple, you picked the one you wanted. You wouldn't pick something you didn't want. This is not a free will, it's cause and effect driven by wanting. If I knew what you wanted, I could pick your tea for you.

 

Now let's say tomorrow you specifically pick a tea you don't want, just to prove me wrong. Doesn't the reason behind that choice show that you're influenced by this discussion? You're still doing what you most want to do, your reasons and motives have just changed to proving me wrong rather than picking a tea to satisfy your tastebuds.

 

Follow this line of reasoning for any action you take. As long as you can point to a reason for a decision, that reason is the cause of your decision. Free will implies that you are an independantly acting agent, so to be truely free, you must make decisions without any influence from past events/action/situations/genetics/etc. If you are making decisions based on reasons, then you aren't really making any descision at all, you're simply following a pattern of cause and effect.

 

I'm a bit suprised how many of you disagreed so quickly, though. Dependant origination is one of the buddha's main teachings, and it's always seemed pretty central to taoism as well in my reading of things. What else is the Tao but the way of nature, cause and effect. Consider actionless action - allowing these things to flow without impediment. I think it's central to most contemplative traditions that we are "out of control" of our lives, and the way to escape stress is to flow with what happens rather than create a conflict against this flow.

I prefer the idea that I have free will , If I have free will , then there is something indicating that I exist, I like existing , I like thinking I exist, and so I conclude that free will suits me. Its a self -serving conclusion on my part and I see no reason whatsoever to choose the other option. Thats all there is to it for me. so I like the yorkshire . You dont have to. You can pick the sucky option if you want to.

[GrandmasterP]

Im not sure what youre indicating , he Did sacrifice . ,the indulging in the fits of pugnacity.

Some folks like to fight , they like the exitement , they like the diversion from other things

The situation society decides to put him in is that he suppress some things , so he doesnt get punished.

Im not saying the tradeoff isnt one that would suit me , all Im saying is that he makes choices -

either as an automaton or out of free will doesn't matter.

In another age he might have been applauded ,

and everyone in the tribe might have paid subservient homage to his greatness.

( heck, in this age there are plenty who find that aggession macho and approve of it

despite being perfectly willing to punish him for it as well)

Hitler had his fans too.

But earlier it was rhetorically put 'why should I suppress myself ' as in 'Whats the gain or unrealized loss'

and my point is that as a logical point , starting from scratch, that he has to decide whats in it for him.

Some have gods , and all of creation exists to serve the god, but then , who's purpose does the god serve?

Its an unending regression , the idea of service or "purpose to a greater thing" ,

and frankly there is no proof that there is any 'greater thing' than the enjoyment of your tea, by you.

 

I reckon we are in agreement Stosh.

The guy exercised his free will to change hence free will exists.

The free will to choose which brand of tea to take.

It's free will all the way down.

( and Turtles).