Trying to understand my shadow, need help

[soaren]

Okay so, from what I can gather at this point in my life, I have the standard conundrum of a male in western society. I am stuck in a hegelian dialectic:

 

To be an emotional man, but to also be a "strong independent" man. To be a monk or to be a soldier; a priest or a general. 

 

To solve this, I would need to first know how one can love when "love" is just scientifically a dopamine rush - an illusion; yet we are told in all spiritual traditions to "love thy neighbor". What is "love" in the Daoist, egoless sense (if "love" is "real" esoterically, it must be beyond biological origins, otherwise it is PURELY an illusion)? All my relationships have been "be the strong independent man" or I will leave you and find someone else... There is always that red pill catch in my (and all my friends) relationships - that kind of feeling men are dispensable cogs, we have no right to feeling... Makes it seem like love is an impossibility - a "phantom" of the chivalric era (thanks Nietchze).

 

If love and emotions ARE an illusion, then naturally, being emotional is a weakness (emotion is an illusion, yet it prescribed for spiritual development...?), and actually being a cold cruel asshole is the LOGICAL path (I'm playing devil's advocate here.

 

And what is an "acceptable emotional man", considering emotions are also an illusion, but yet they are required for "spiritual development? 

 

I think love and emotions are NOT a dead end, I feel like I want to give love freely, but most people in society FORCE me, by their own lack of love into the "me vs them" bubble that makes it all sort of vain... Not sure exactly how to explain it.

 

One thing I am kinda tossing around in my head is that I really want to get F-I-T, in the sense that A) I can be more vulnerable, and feel safe in doing so, but it actually might just be feeding my ego construct and that path forward is essentially a lie, and I need to actually just loosen my ego's grasp... 

 

Ideas?

 

Sorry for long post.

 

Phrased in a psuedocode computer way:

 

Emotional man

if true (emotional cultivation is desirable for enlightenment)

     - Spiritually: What is the purpose of emotion when emotions are to be "outgrown"?

     - Scientifically: Emotions are a lie, a dopamine rush.

          else

          We are all "god" so EMOTIONS ARE VOID. 

 

Love

if true (there is such a thing as "love")

     What is "it"?

          else

          Love is a dopamine rush, love is a lie. IT'S AN EGOTISTICAL LIE!

 

Edited December 28, 2016 by soaren

[RiverSnake]

Society creates all these energetic constructs around "Love, Sex, Relationships....etc". This is because these are phenomenally powerful forces and people and society at large don't know how to handle them in a natural and graceful way. In a rush to create social order the baby is often thrown out with the bath water. 

 

Continue your cultivation practice and opening up blockages surrounding these issues. All of these energetic constructs created by an unconscious and stumbling society become blockages in your energy body that you have to dismantle later on as a practitioner.

 

Otherwise you will continue to cycle through the same psychological and emotional states for your entire life....never seeing beyond the vision of those whom created the constructs in the first place.  Keep working at it.

Edited December 28, 2016 by OldWolf

[soaren]

Society creates all these energetic constructs around "Love, Sex, Relationships....etc". This is because these are phenomenally powerful forces and people and society at large don't know how to handle them in a natural and graceful way. In a rush to create social order the baby is often thrown out with the bath water. 

 

Continue your cultivation practice and opening up blockages surrounding these issues. All of these energetic constructs created by an unconscious and stumbling society become blockages in your energy body that you have to dismantle later on as a practitioner.

 

Otherwise you will continue to cycle through the same psychological and emotional states for your entire life....never seeing beyond the vision of those whom created the constructs in the first place.  Keep working at it.

 

If there is a "natural and graceful way", that means that there is a type of love OUTSIDE of dopamine rushes?

 

But but but I want to dismantle them NOW. (Turns off inner brat).

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Okay so, from what I can gather at this point in my life, I have the standard conundrum of a male in western society. I am stuck in a hegelian dialectic:

First of all, you are not stuck in a "hegelian dailectic", you haven't made made it past "Kant's Antinomies", which frankly arises because like Kant, you never really made it out of the Cartesian mind-body dualism.  If I have time, I will post a second of all, and maybe even a third of all.

 

Don't worry, you are not alone, regrettably there are no support groups, because this condition is pandemic to Western Society, so people don't recognize it as a problem, but like most Westerners you suffer from "Closet Cartesianism", which is the root of a diverse set of symptoms, and while you work your way through it, your inner brat is just going to have to be patient, or maybe you can even talk it into being helpful, kind of like, the adult equivalent of your inner brat taking out the trash.

[SeekerOfHealing]

If you want to understand something - become that.

[soaren]

First of all, you are not stuck in a "hegelian dailectic", you haven't made made it past "Cartesian mind-body dualism.  If I have time, I will post a second of all, and maybe even a third of all.

 

Don't worry, you are not alone, regrettably there are no support groups, because this condition is pandemic to Western Society, so people don't recognize it as a problem, but like most Westerners you suffer from "Closet Cartesianism", which is the root of a diverse set of symptoms, and while you work your way through it, your inner brat is just going to have to be patient, or maybe you can even talk it into being helpful, kind of like, the adult equivalent of your inner brat taking out the trash.

 

Eh, so my issue is that I consider my body and soul separate?

 

...

 

Something up there clicked... I don't know what, I just heard it... But uh... Isn't that true? Aren't they on different planes of existence? I mean technically that would mean they are not separate, but technically they are. Implying otherwise would mean the soul ("energetic vibrations") is dependent on the existence of a living body to survive, which, according to any sensible religion, it is not. Unless you are implying hinduism and daoism are atheistic?

 

Language, oh language, why do you have to fail me NOW??? =\ =\ =\

 

Does that thought somehow infiltrate my ability to be in the moment? Or...?

Edited December 28, 2016 by soaren

[Nungali]

 

Okay so, from what I can gather at this point in my life, I have the standard conundrum of a male in western society. I am stuck in a hegelian dialectic:

 

To be an emotional man, but to also be a "strong independent" man. To be a monk or to be a soldier; a priest or a general. 

 

 

I think the issue is bigger than that. Our whole paradigm has changed re the relationship and 'equality' of the sexes in a relatively short time . The power is moving more towards an equality and some men feel they are loosing power. Also, in the new arrangement, they are unsure of what their new role and how to 'be'  and express themselves in the newly forming  sociosexual dynamic.

 

There was the SNAG movement , but even many men that tried that felt unsatisfied.  So a new identity and expression needs to be found . 

 

 

To solve this, I would need to first know how one can love when "love" is just scientifically a dopamine rush - an illusion; yet we are told in all spiritual traditions to "love thy neighbor". What is "love" in the Daoist, egoless sense (if "love" is "real" esoterically, it must be beyond biological origins, otherwise it is PURELY an illusion)?

 

Consciousness is chemical  < shrug >    doesnt mean it cant be enjoyed, used , learnt from.   'Falling in love' may all come down to a dopamine rush and other inter-reactions , the best way to mess  up that experience is to confuse the experience with the chemical cause ;  to say  "mhe ... its just some reaction, and deby the experience it causes .

 

If you take a trip and experience the beauty and wonder of nature,  the fact that one is tripping doesnt detract from  MANY peoples experience that nature is beautiful or wonderful.

 

All my relationships have been "be the strong independent man" or I will leave you and find someone else... There is always that red pill catch in my (and all my friends) relationships - that kind of feeling men are dispensable cogs, we have no right to feeling... Makes it seem like love is an impossibility - a "phantom" of the chivalric era (thanks Nietchze).

 

'The strong independent man'  ( and woman ) IMO makes the best one to have a relationship with.  IMO some men interact with their partners as if they were (or they wanted them to be )  their Mommy.  I have also heard that a lot from women .... especially single mums ;  "  I got 2 kids already, I dont need a third ! " 

 

Some men even still call washing cleaning and cooking 'women's work' ... its like they never grew up and still need a Mom to help them .  Unless they spent some time in the army or similar ..... first up .... clean your room !  make your bed !         

 

I dont really get the 'dispensable cogs and no right to feeling ' thing  ????   Either some woman had an issue ( they do sometimes    )  or you are feeling emasculated for another reason. 

 

Love can be a  "phantom" of the chivalric era "  if one still has part of  that conditioning .   In modern terms, some think it is weak to be emotional. I would say  is weak to be ruled by emotions, but not necessarily to express them .

 

If love and emotions ARE an illusion, then naturally, being emotional is a weakness (emotion is an illusion, yet it prescribed for spiritual development...?), and actually being a cold cruel asshole is the LOGICAL path (I'm playing devil's advocate here.

 

Yes, and also going from one extreme to the other .  A man has to model himself and for that he needs a relevant map or teaching in line with today's 'paradigm' .   I like this advise ;

 

"  Worship, and neglect not, the physical body which is thy temporary connection with the outer and material world. Therefore let thy mental Equilibrium be above disturbance by material events; strengthen and control the animal passions, discipline the emotions and the reason, nourish the Higher Aspirations."

 

And what is an "acceptable emotional man", considering emotions are also an illusion, but yet they are required for "spiritual development? 

 

One whose emotions were not denied  but expressed, disciplined and controlled.    

 

I think love and emotions are NOT a dead end, I feel like I want to give love freely, but most people in society FORCE me, by their own lack of love into the "me vs them" bubble that makes it all sort of vain... Not sure exactly how to explain it.

 

Yeah, and not sure what this exactly means , but one thing comes to mind; you can have and experience love  with out the need for it to be reciprocated .  So the  " FORCE me, by their own lack of love into the "me vs them" bubble that makes it all sort of vain."  bit  does not gel with me .

 

One thing I am kinda tossing around in my head is that I really want to get F-I-T, in the sense that A) I can be more vulnerable, and feel safe in doing so, but it actually might just be feeding my ego construct and that path forward is essentially a lie, and I need to actually just loosen my ego's grasp... 

 

Ideas?

 

Ummmm .... get off the ego  and construct a path towards expressing your own truth by building on a balanced foundation . 

 

I use the model of the 'Seven Heads of the Beast '     ... yes, the  title and origin may put some off       ( errrmmm , its a rave so I won't put it down here  but .... )   it isnt just a 'whim'  as the same pattern has been enacted in other ways in my life, by 'choice' or by  'chance'  .... it seems a natural proclivity   with me . One example is my martial tradition , the things a man does to express himself  ;   he should be capable with a sword or other weapon, and empty hand , he should have appreciation of art and beauty as well and is encouraged to create and write poetry, with beautiful hand writing (calligraphy) , maybe some nice flower arranging (ikebana)  and be able to do a good tea ceremony, but to  give over to the emotions so as to cause one to act incorrectly is an embarrassment and failure. 

 

 

Sorry for long post.

 

Phrased in a psuedocode computer way:

 

Emotional man

if true (emotional cultivation is desirable for enlightenment)

     - Spiritually: What is the purpose of emotion when emotions are to be "outgrown"?

 

I contend though, they are not to be outgrown, but strengthened  and stabilized and balanced.

 

 

     - Scientifically: Emotions are a lie, a dopamine rush.

 

See above , a chemical origin does not make a lie as consciousness itself is chemically induced . 

          else

          We are all "god" so EMOTIONS ARE VOID. 

 

Of course 'God/s'  have emotions  !        

 

Love

if true (there is such a thing as "love")

     What is "it"?

 

A much misunderstood universal force ; in its essential pure nature it is the thing that 'allows' or 'causes things to 'bond'    ... even   H₂  and  O  . It gets more complex the more we add to it .... especially things like   expectations  and expected reciprocations  !  

 

          else

          Love is a dopamine rush, love is a lie. IT'S AN EGOTISTICAL LIE!

 

 ...... settle down     .    relax  .... enjoy the trip .  

 

Here is a joke from Kitty Flannigan ; 

 

"Yes guys we do want you to be more sensitive and considerate, but, you must remember, if you are in a relationship and you are having an argument and go ' But what about me !  What about my feelings ? I am sensitive too !  "    A woman will, on the outside, nod and agree with you you, but you have to know, that every woman, when she hears that, also hears this little voice in her head at the same time ...

 

< she puts on whining complaining  sarcastic voice >    ' Ohhh   nah nah nah ... whattabout  me ... I got feelings too .... ya big baby !   "  

 

      if you cant laugh at that, ya need to adjust things  ....

 

naughty Kitty ,  though     

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 2016 by Nungali

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Love is associated with biological processes - but so is hate, and indifference, and so on. Whatever a person is feeling has biological correlates, so why only dismiss love as an illusion? If the absence of love and emotions is being a cold cruel asshole - well, the mental states involved in that also have biological correlates! So wouldn't cold-cruel-assholery be illusory too?

 

IMHO trying to figure out the exact nature of the relationship between the mind and body is a minefield and a distraction. Look, let's get back to basics. Just stick to experience - see in an experiential way what is going on, what effect it has, what you can do to get better effects.

 

Here's some snippets of the Kalama Sutta:

 

"...When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them.

 

..."Now, what do you think, Kalamas? When aversion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?"

 

"For harm, lord."

 

..."When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.

 

"When lack of aversion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?"

 

"For welfare, lord."

 

..."Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — thus devoid of greed, devoid of ill will, undeluded, alert, & resolute — keeps pervading the first direction [the east] — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will."

 

I think you're making things a lot more intellectual than they need to be. 

 

If you feel goodwill, it's better for you and the people you interact with. Simple. Maybe try some metta practice: http://www.wildmind.org/metta/introduction.

 

 

I feel like I want to give love freely, but most people in society FORCE me, by their own lack of love into the "me vs them" bubble that makes it all sort of vain

 

What do you mean? Do you expect 'giving love freely' to happen in some certain way, have a certain result for you? What is this "me vs them" bubble? In what way do others force you to do anything? Go on...

 

I really want to ... be more vulnerable, and feel safe in doing so, but it actually might just be feeding my ego construct

 

Who has more of an ego - the person who has a lot of goodwill, or the person who is closed off? I suppose there's the risk that someone might be kind but conceited about their kindness, but this is not a reason to be less kind, eh?

 

It sounds to me like part of you wants to be more in touch with your emotions, and another part is looking for reasons to close itself off from emotions. 

[roger]

IMHO trying to figure out the exact nature of the relationship between the mind and body is a minefield and a distraction.

 

I think you're making things a lot more intellectual than they need to be. 

 

This is what I was thinking as I was reading the OP.

 

Soaren,

 

You said you want to understand your shadow, and making things complicated and difficult is actually exactly what your shadow might attempt to do.

 

The shadow self wants to AVOID truth, love, and peace. It wants to keep them "at bay," keep them at a safe distance.

 

It seeks distraction and entertainment (I'm not implying that entertainment is always bad).

 

One of the great teachings of Taoism is the emphasis on simplicity.

 

Find simple answers to complex questions- that's a Taoist approach to problem solving.

[Teddy]

You say that love is a dopamine rush, then you say it is an illusion. If it's a dopamine rush, then it's not any more illusory than anything else, as dopamine rushes are just as real as anything else.

 

So, you ask what is love in an egoless sense; Well, according to your definition of love, it would be having a dopamine rush and not being too attached to it.

 

You go on to say all emotions are illusory. Why do you say that? You haven't really explaned why you think they are illusions.

 

Also, no one can force you not to love. Loving is something that you do. Not them.

[sagebrush]

well in simplistic terms from my perspective on the help with the shadow thing is to bear in mind that in order to have shadow in the first place it means the sun is present.

 

most people associate sun with good attributes.

[liminal_luke]

Whew...I`ll help if I can.  Rarely can this kind of thing be "figured out."  There`s nothing wrong with analyzing spiritual literature, neuroscience, or the way our culture shapes gender roles.  All of those areas of inquiry are fascinating on an intellectual level.

 

That said, you can go around and around trying to figure out how all that bears on how you want to be as a man in the world and not get very far.  You`re an intelligent guy, Soaren, and if this problem could be solved with intellect, you`d of solved it by now.

 

I`d like to suggest something simple and difficult: be yourself.  Cultivation helps greatly with this.  If you have a feeling -- love, for example -- feel it.  No need to worry about whether it`s a "dopamine rush" or whatever.  No need to worry if the people in your life want you to have it or to express it or whatever.  Just let it be.  Whatever feelings you have are yours.  You get to have them.  If you don`t have a feeling, well, that`s OK too.  Just be.  

 

There`s a power in this.  You might find it`s attractive to people, perhaps especially to a woman you`ll want to be close to.  To my way of thinking, it`s a very masculine kind of power.

[thelerner]

 

Okay so, from what I can gather at this point in my life, I have the standard conundrum of a male in western society. I am stuck in a hegelian dialectic:

 

To be an emotional man, but to also be a "strong independent" man. To be a monk or to be a soldier; a priest or a general. 

 

Very black and white thinking, imo.  Should I be extreme- a soldier, or extreme a monk?  Be yourself.  The happiest people don't buy into cultural stereotypes, they are Themselves. 

 

Similarly I don't think we need to intellectualize love.  Be open, be natural and when you love something, you love it, treasure it.  Go with it.  Love is precious, the person with the most love, tends to win in this game of life. 

 

In the West we need to get out of heads more.  If you have a track record of wisdom, making wise choices then believe in yourself, Be Yourself.  On the other hand if it seems like life has been one bad decision after another, then maybe take a little more time and weigh decisions. 

 

I kinda like this video.  Good stuff on life's inner rules

[rex]

Don't know if this'll be any use Soaren but I stumbled on this which ticks all the keyword boxes from your post:

https://www.amazon.com/Be-Man-Guide-Masculine-Power/dp/1622032292/

 

This too: http://robertmasters.com/book/knowing-your-shadow/

Edited December 30, 2016 by rex