Emotions are the path

[neti neti]

10 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

wtf Neti I knew you were inscrutable .... but ....

 

... Thanks ... for being me? 

[neti neti]

9 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I think some people got lost on their way to the Haiku chain.

 

 

 

I think we made rules... to Break 'em! 

[natural]

the more laws created

the more criminals created

Haiku chains

like all others

deserve to be broken

[natural]

Infinity and beyond!

[neti neti]

3 minutes ago, natural said:

Infinity and beyond!

 

 

 

Aah yes... Emotions ARE the path, aren't they?

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by neti neti

[Apech]

@neti neti and @natural

 

take your trolling elsewhere please.

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, silent thunder said:

Word and phrase meaning seems to sift through each awareness in its own manner, and lately it seems so few even care about etymology these days... or know what that is...  and this precludes in depth conversations with broad understanding.

 

i'm tickled to see it addressed at all.  It provides so much context for me to know how folks are using words in conversations... particularly on subjects as subtle and dense as the ones that arise in a setting such as this...

 

one reason I abstain from so many topics (hard to believe I know) is that there is seldom a common or shared set of parameters for what the key and pivotal terms in a conversation mean, which causes me to realize that while we may all be talking together, we'll not be talking about the same things from similar avenues of perception and framing, but from our own reality tunnels...  and I end up recusing myself from participating as understanding is elusive and thus communication is slim even when many words are used.

 

my own process is one of constant and even at time simultaneous expansion/contraction.  (though that is a rare high skill that remains elusive, mostly it's one then the other)

 

expand, emote, explore, encounter...

 

withdraw, contract, analyze, assimilate, synthesize...

 

then expand again...

 

 

I certainly don't seem to be able to choose my emotions, any more than I choose my thoughts...

though lately it seems i garner the potential to influence which one's i feed and bolster to a certain extent...

 

What has the study of insects got to do with it ? 

[neti neti]

4 minutes ago, Apech said:

@neti neti and @natural

 

take your trolling elsewhere please.

 

these are not the trolls you seek,

this is where emotions meet.

 

nonetheless, as you wish. 

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by neti neti

[Taomeow]

27 minutes ago, neti neti said:

 

Tell me about it. And there I was, seduced into yet another extravagant getaway ticket to the greatest story never told... nowhere. What a gyp. 

 

Cut off from source( at the umbilical!), all these radically obnoxious blinding lights, and for the love of all that could still be held sacred, not ONE willing and able nipple in sight!

 

Oh the agony !!! 

 

If ignorance is indeed bliss, guess I'll always just be a sucker for torture. 

 

 

I know exactly what you're talking about.  Spent four years forty years later fixing that, to the extent possible, and it involved reliving every detail (and making up none, incidentally, unlike in all those "rebirthing" etc. scams.)  (Don't ask, that ship has sailed, I'm not advertising that cruise.)  

[Taomeow]

15 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

What has the study of insects got to do with it ? 

 

You are thinking entomology.   ST is talking etymology.  

[natural]

2 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

I know exactly what you're talking about.  Spent four years forty years later fixing that, to the extent possible, and it involved reliving every detail (and making up none, incidentally, unlike in all those "rebirthing" etc. scams.)  (Don't ask, that ship has sailed, I'm not advertising that cruise.)  

Care must be taken not to be accused of feeding a troll!

Any way something is bugging me! 

[neti neti]

1 hour ago, Taomeow said:

 

I know exactly what you're talking about.  Spent four years forty years later fixing that, to the extent possible, and it involved reliving every detail (and making up none, incidentally, unlike in all those "rebirthing" etc. scams.)  (Don't ask, that ship has sailed, I'm not advertising that cruise.)  

 

Interesting! In this reconciling of... paradox, what has been fixed?

 

Have you satisfied the why? Or has reacquainting with the how sufficed?

 

Which emotion is the guiding force?

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by neti neti

[neti neti]

15 minutes ago, natural said:

Care must be taken not to be accused of feeding a troll!

Any way something is bugging me! 

 

Count your blessings, you old scrooge! Can't you see none other knows how to better annoy me, than me!? 

 

You must LOVE getting annoyed. LOL

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by neti neti

[neti neti]

On 9/11/2020 at 6:42 AM, Apech said:

Sometimes emotions are described as 'conflicting' or 'conflicted' which implies a push/pull in the motion.  Motion itself is simply the expression of energy.  So there is energy being discharged within ourselves which leads to separation of one feeling from another, or you could say separation between our sense of ourselves and our moods or actions.  The conflict being that we think of being a certain kind of person and then act differently because of conflicting emotions.  This can cause more problems with identity later when we try to justify to ourselves how we acted and so on.  So you can see a grand mess evolves.

 

When faced with this there are probably three stages of response.  Firstly trying to stop or control the emotion.  Then wanting to transform them into something better.  Then lastly waking up to precisely what is going on and why.  The first two are ok and natural but not really much use.  It's the last one where emotions become the path.

 

This does not mean that your individual feelings are particularly important.  They are just patterns of movement of energy.  So for instance, you might feel particularly angry about something and want to express it.  But that is missing the point.  If you are just indulging in the strength of your feelings you aren't learning anything - even if there might be some temporary feeling of liberation.

 

Perhaps "conflict" is a natural extension of motion, whether push or pull. Perhaps "harmony" isn't as useful to us in comparison short of contrast.

 

Perhaps were it not for the impulse to "just indulge" in the strength of feeling, we'd never even have this guilty pleasure fun show horror to... feel with?

Perhaps there is a time and place for feeling the purity of indulgence, for indulgence's sake.

 

Perhaps, compulsively identifying with the emotion itself, such that one IS Anger/Angry exclusively, is ironically the path most conducive to clear insight into what's truly going on e-motionally, and why. Tracing each down to its logical conclusion and owning them, no matter how unpleasant, thereby reconciling the discharge with its source. At the ends of soul searching, shall we ourselves be found wanting upon scales of our own judgements?

 

Waves crash, ocean unmoved... in unison, motionless motion. Tides push, tides pull, all in pursuit of intrinsic balance.

 

Which emotions consistently present themselves, but remain ignored, deemed insignificant at this very most opportuned singular moment of Now?

And yet perhaps, even in our ignorance we're working out what must, for what lesson could be of more import than realizing one has missed the point entirely?

 

Perhaps we perpetually learn of learning and, feel of feeling. Perhaps this marvelous grand mess of ours is in perfect harmony, just as it is.

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by neti neti

[neti neti]

.

Edited September 14, 2020 by neti neti
majestically bonafide troll mastery

[dwai]

On 9/13/2020 at 8:11 PM, neti neti said:

 

Perhaps "conflict" is a natural extension of motion, whether push or pull. Perhaps "harmony" isn't as useful to us in comparison short of contrast.

 

Perhaps were it not for the impulse to "just indulge" in the strength of feeling, we'd never even have this guilty pleasure fun show horror to... feel with?

Perhaps there is a time and place for feeling the purity of indulgence, for indulgence's sake.

 

Perhaps, compulsively identifying with the emotion itself, such that one IS Anger/Angry exclusively, is ironically the path most conducive to clear insight into what's truly going on e-motionally, and why. Tracing each down to its logical conclusion and owning them, no matter how unpleasant, thereby reconciling the discharge with its source. At the ends of soul searching, shall we ourselves be found wanting upon scales of our own judgements?

 

Waves crash, ocean unmoved... in unison, motionless motion. Tides push, tides pull, all in pursuit of intrinsic balance.

 

Which emotions consistently present themselves, but remain ignored, deemed insignificant at this very most opportuned singular moment of Now?

And yet perhaps, even in our ignorance we're working out what must, for what lesson could be of more import than realizing one has missed the point entirely?

 

Perhaps we perpetually learn of learning and, feel of feeling. Perhaps this marvelous grand mess of ours is in perfect harmony, just as it is.

 

Motion is only possible when two opposing forces act upon each other. Without the “conflict” motion is not possible...is it? 
 

Without the duality of the two polar opposites, no movement can happen. 
 

Emotions are interesting. Is there a difference between thoughts, emotions and feelings? 
 

Are emotions just the effect of thoughts? Like heat and light are effects of a fire? 
 

Is it that a thought sets off a vibration of energy which reverberates through space (Akasha) and the nature of the vibration is what the mind interprets as an emotion? 

[ilumairen]

34 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

Is it that a thought sets off a vibration of energy which reverberates through space (Akasha) and the nature of the vibration is what the mind interprets as an emotion? 

Or do vibrations and reverberations occur, and then thought - to explain, share, reify whatnot?

[dwai]

11 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Or do vibrations and reverberations occur, and then thought - to explain, share, reify whatnot?

Indeed, that is a most pertinent question.  
 

What is vibration in absence of Thought? Can there even be vibration without thought? 
 

If vibration is a phenomenon, ie and object of knowledge, then it cannot exist without a thought  (i.e., can’t be known). 

Edited September 16, 2020 by dwai

[neti neti]

52 minutes ago, dwai said:

Motion is only possible when two opposing forces act upon each other. Without the “conflict” motion is not possible...is it? 
 

Without the duality of the two polar opposites, no movement can happen. 
 

Emotions are interesting. Is there a difference between thoughts, emotions and feelings? 
 

Are emotions just the effect of thoughts? Like heat and light are effects of a fire? 
 

Is it that a thought sets off a vibration of energy which reverberates through space (Akasha) and the nature of the vibration is what the mind interprets as an emotion? 

 

Yes I think so... duality allows for the equal and opposite reaction, the trap-like interplay of attraction & aversion; i.e. desire leads to fear and vice versa. Mindless bliss may be a well-deserved respite from the unending intensity of the mental stream, but not nearly as interesting. Pain is our guilty pleasure. Suffering, a universal antidote for the sickness of inattention. Love for life is natural... being wishes to continue indefinitely.

 

Our true power lies hidden like the pendulum's still center, but not forever. Just beneath the surface abides the subtle rage of perfect peace. War is more readily understood than harmony. Swim with the tide or against it. The moon's reflection only trembles in the wake by virtue of a fixed position. Turbulence urges the seeker to either lovingly dive deep, or engage fearful but adventurous surface waters.

 

But from where do we approach the navigating of soul? From the perspective of love, or of fear?

 

Edited September 16, 2020 by neti neti

[Apech]

38 minutes ago, dwai said:

Motion is only possible when two opposing forces act upon each other. Without the “conflict” motion is not possible...is it? 
 

 

The way I think about this is - for motion you need at minimum one point moving relative to another, so you need two frames of reference.  Some motion is purely translational (continuous in one direction) but nearly all actual motion is rotational, something is moving around or spinning around another 'thing'.  I'm guessing this is 'vritti' like whirlpools in the mind.

 

38 minutes ago, dwai said:

Without the duality of the two polar opposites, no movement can happen. 
 

Emotions are interesting. Is there a difference between thoughts, emotions and feelings? 
 

 

I think emotions (e-motions, energy motions) are their own category, while feelings are sentience itself, an emotion mixes sentience with energy to give a kind of mixing, a kind of inner tension which feelings do not necessarily have.

 

38 minutes ago, dwai said:

Are emotions just the effect of thoughts? Like heat and light are effects of a fire? 
 

 

I think emotions are movements arising from the subject/object division - they carry with them thoughts and they carry energy, I guess heat and light would be a good analogy.

 

38 minutes ago, dwai said:

Is it that a thought sets off a vibration of energy which reverberates through space (Akasha) and the nature of the vibration is what the mind interprets as an emotion? 

 

I see them more as driven by the tension of separation as a seeking of balance gone wrong if you see what I mean.  Obviously a specific thought can trigger emotion if there is a stored potential of energy relating to that form.  Like imaging someone you love or hate - but the cause of the emotional stirring is the energy locked in memory of previous experience of pleasure/pain.

 

?

[skyblue]

From my limited observation, there are vibrations and reverberations in the akasha, owing to several factors. These factors can be genetic, can originate from the prarabdha karma or might come from the collective consciousness. So, in the beginning, the differentiating mind labels the reverberations into the various emotions, while adding a layer of thoughts to them, given the then situation. Then when this has happened enough times, or this happens only occasionally but the vibration carries too much energy, this leads to the false belief in the association of thought with the energy. This slowly changes to the belief that the thought itself is the source of the reverberation, thus resulting in stress, tension, hatred, envy, jealousy, etc.

 

This is an extremely simplified explanation of the working of thought and emotion.

[thelerner]

Often before meditating I have a pre-amble.  I'm not my.. (body, thoughts, past, present, things..), when it comes to emotion what I say is I'm not my emotions, I acknowledge them and let them settle like waves on a pond. 

 

Unlike the other phenomena, I acknowledge emotions and let them settle.  Later outside of meditation I can trace where they come from, their origins before rationalizations (conscious and unconsciously) start building to support them. 

 

I wouldn't want to be without my emotions.  They make me human.  Their 'drama' support my drives and makes life interesting.  I wouldn't want to be controlled by them either.

[doc benway]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

Indeed, that is a most pertinent question.  
 

What is vibration in absence of Thought? Can there even be vibration without thought? 
 

If vibration is a phenomenon, ie and object of knowledge, then it cannot exist without a thought  (i.e., can’t be known). 

 

A few rhetorical questions.

I like questions more than answers lately.

 

Is thought primary or secondary?

Does thought create or comment?

Is there a distinction between knowing and thinking?

 

[Apech]

4 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Is thought primary or secondary?

Does thought create or comment?

Is there a distinction between knowing and thinking?

 

I would say thought is secondary to consciousness - but as I said in another thread it is a mistake to assume that there is only one type of thought.  Some thinking, imaginative, does create while other thoughts are object oriented (and could be said to comment but i think they do a bit more than that).

 

Knowing is more about recognising something.

[dwai]

4 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I would say thought is secondary to consciousness - but as I said in another thread it is a mistake to assume that there is only one type of thought.  Some thinking, imaginative, does create while other thoughts are object oriented (and could be said to comment but i think they do a bit more than that).

I agree with that -- although, thoughts are patterns of consciousness, that appear in consciousness, are illuminated by consciousness, known to consciousness, and dissipate within consciousness. 

4 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Knowing is more about recognising something.

Isn't recognition a thought as well? Can you recognize without a thought? Can you tell me who you are, without thinking?