Whats the correct perspective on emotions? Where do emotion come from?

[Nungali]

40 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

It depends on the depth of your practice and understanding of reality, my friend. Does this kind of information help those that don't have those things? Of course not.

 

Exactly !  And my original protests here .... on many occasions related to this subject  has been about  this misapplication . 

 

40 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

 

Could it change YOUR experience of the world under more mild conditions? Oh, absolutely. I have many students and have met many students of other teachers from various traditions that have used their practice to transform their lives and the experience of suffering of emotional and physical pain. 

 

Of course, I have done it for myself . 

 

That's the key .... myself .  Regarding other , I have been in more of a practical relief  position . 

 

My main objection is something like  ;  when a person with money sees someone suffering poverty or hunger  and they are told to change their mental attitude to stop suffering .. instead of giving them some money . 

 

Think about that on a broader level other than personally . 

 

Its how our white western privileged society  works .  And people do not like that being pointed out . 

 

40 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

As for extreme examples, you COULD google "monk self-immolation" and see what sort of torture a person with dedicated training can endure. It isn't a pleasant rabbit hole, I wouldn't suggest it.

 

I looked into that as a teenager .... this  'ain't my first barbecue'   ya know . 

 

The key here is 'dedicated training'  .  That type of control is extremely rare  .... you look up 'self immolation gone wrong '  ... where people thought they had control ... until it actually happened . 

 

I won't suggest that either .... unless you want to be haunted by screaming running down the street human fireballs . 

 

 

[Bindi]

4 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

Your examples might feel similar to you - they have nothing to do with what I am talking about.

Do you dismiss Welwood along the same lines? 

On Spiritual Bypassing and Relationship

Article by John Welwood

Spiritual bypassing is a term I coined to describe a process I saw happening in the Buddhist community I was in, and also in myself. Although most of us were sincerely trying to work on ourselves, I noticed a widespread tendency to use spiritual ideas and practices to sidestep or avoid facing unresolved emotional issues, psychological wounds, and unfinished developmental tasks.

When we are spiritually bypassing, we often use the goal of awakening or liberation to rationalize what I call premature transcendence: trying to rise above the raw and messy side of our humanness before we have fully faced and made peace with it. And then we tend to use absolute truth to disparage or dismiss relative human needs, feelings, psychological problems, relational difficulties, and developmental deficits. I see this as an “occupational hazard” of the spiritual path, in that spirituality does involve a vision of going beyond our current karmic situation.

Trying to move beyond our psychological and emotional issues by sidestepping them is dangerous. It sets up a debilitating split between the buddha and the human within us. And it leads to a conceptual, one-sided kind of spirituality where one pole of life is elevated at the expense of its opposite: Absolute truth is favored over relative truth, the impersonal over the personal, emptiness over form, transcendence over embodiment, and detachment over feeling. One might, for example, try to practice nonattachment by dismissing one’s need for love, but this only drives the need underground, so that it often becomes unconsciously acted out in covert and possibly harmful ways instead.

[Nungali]

25 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

Your examples might feel similar to you - they have nothing to do with what I am talking about.

 

 

 

could not I say the same thing 

 

Is my view not about   'a' perspective on emotions   ? 

[BigSkyDiamond]

21 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Do you dismiss Welwood along the same lines? 
On Spiritual Bypassing and Relationship / Article by John Welwood

 

Spiritual bypassing is a term I coined to describe a process I saw happening in the Buddhist community I was in, and also in myself. Although most of us were sincerely trying to work on ourselves, I noticed a widespread tendency to use spiritual ideas and practices to sidestep or avoid facing unresolved emotional issues, psychological wounds, and unfinished developmental tasks.

 

When we are spiritually bypassing, we often use the goal of awakening or liberation to rationalize what I call premature transcendence: trying to rise above the raw and messy side of our humanness before we have fully faced and made peace with it. And then we tend to use absolute truth to disparage or dismiss relative human needs, feelings, psychological problems, relational difficulties, and developmental deficits. I see this as an “occupational hazard” of the spiritual path, in that spirituality does involve a vision of going beyond our current karmic situation.

 

Trying to move beyond our psychological and emotional issues by sidestepping them is dangerous. It sets up a debilitating split between the buddha and the human within us. And it leads to a conceptual, one-sided kind of spirituality where one pole of life is elevated at the expense of its opposite: Absolute truth is favored over relative truth, the impersonal over the personal, emptiness over form, transcendence over embodiment, and detachment over feeling. One might, for example, try to practice nonattachment by dismissing one’s need for love, but this only drives the need underground, so that it often becomes unconsciously acted out in covert and possibly harmful ways instead.

 

 

 

it's not an either-or.  We can work on BOTH at the same time: the relative secular human level (such as secular psychology, therapy, healing practices, recovery, 12-step work, counseling, support groups) and also the absolute the soul level (as a means of understanding and making sense of what is going on, for instance in the context of a path of religion-and-spirituality as defined by the individual).

 

Both are useful for recovering from trauma, abuse, addictions.  And we don't do it alone, we don't do it by ourselves.  But it is up to us as an individual to seek healing, treatment, and put it into practice.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Krenx]

Responsibility also involves facing the emotion. Facing the actual reality of the event. Facing how your sense of "self" response to it. You have to, and you will experience it to the level of your understanding. It is impossible to "think" your way out of it, avoid it, put it aside. It will be right there.

 

It is a very gradual path. I think when Buddhist ideas are mentioned, many adopt that fantasy of it where a person can suddenly awakens to some insight about life under a tree.  That is not how it works. Understanding reality requires the most intimate, honest, and difficult task a human can ever do. Sometimes very painful contemplation for a long time, and painful restraint of unwholesome tendencies that bad events contributed in the past. It takes a long time, many up and down events in life for an individual to make up that puzzle. Not many succeed. Some strive for a lifetime and have results, and many don't. 

 

Extreme traumatic events are often called divine intervention. And it leads to two outcomes. Either the person is suddenly inclined to seek spiritual understanding of the world, because nothing they assumed to know about the world makes sense or is helping them, or they get a mental breakdown and are lost to the mass of suffering unfortunately.  

 

That is the reality, it isn't always pretty. Welcome to the world, samsara.

 

But the real "gradual path", option for improvement and liberation is still available in the world. Most religions share some similar methods of inner development that lead to very beneficial lifestyles and pleasant abiding on earth. 

 

Discerning Context matters alot in the spiritual arts. It has become harmful in many cases and used to "manage" and numb/ avoid/ our experiences, push away responsibility, or even the opposite like taking up burdens that don't belong to you, are not yours. 

 

Refine the Context always 🙏. 

Edited 5 hours ago by Krenx

[stirling]

33 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Do you dismiss Welwood along the same lines?

 

I'm not really acquainted with Mr. Welwood, but based solely on this excerpt I don't find anything to object to. 

 

Bypassing happens when we adopt religious or philosophical ideas as beliefs and act as though our belief in them is understanding. I'm not talking about bypassing or beliefs, I am talking about direct experience and a permanent shift in how things are and appear. 

[stirling]

54 minutes ago, Nungali said:

Exactly !  And my original protests here .... on many occasions related to this subject  has been about  this misapplication .

 

My posts are in the hopes of getting even ONE person to question whether there isn't a different way of being. In terms of practicality, there are techniques to reduce suffering that don't require beliefs or great amounts of practice that I share all of the time. They require genuine interest and some small commitment of dedication. 

 

Quote

Of course, I have done it for myself .

 

Why wouldn't you be sharing that possibility, and how others might do the same thing themselves, then? Or... are you, and I have missed it? I am actually curious about what methodologies you might have, not setting you up for a cutting comment.

[Bindi]

1 hour ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

 

it's not an either-or.  We can work on BOTH at the same time: the relative secular human level (such as secular psychology, therapy, healing practices, recovery, 12-step work, counseling, support groups) and also the absolute the soul level (as a means of understanding and making sense of what is going on, for instance in the context of a path of religion-and-spirituality as defined by the individual).

 

Maybe, though not from my perspective. I take the subtle body level as fundamental, and to me the reality of the subtle body is that there is no interaction between the relative and the absolute levels until the relative is followed and leads to the absolute - in other words consciousness cannot enter the central channel until the side channels are clear and flowing. The side channels are the relative channels, the central is where the absolute can be found. 
 

To me until consciousness is in the central channel all spiritual concepts remain just that, concepts, spiritual notions to practice and believe in but not actually ‘spiritual’ in any sense other than intellectual. 

 

1 hour ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

Both are useful for recovering from trauma, abuse, addictions.  And we don't do it alone, we don't do it by ourselves.  But it is up to us as an individual to seek healing, treatment, and put it into practice.

 

 

[BigSkyDiamond]

duplicate post removed

Edited 3 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

37 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Maybe, though not from my perspective. I take the subtle body level as fundamental, and to me the reality of the subtle body is that there is no interaction between the relative and the absolute levels until the relative is followed and leads to the absolute - in other words consciousness cannot enter the central channel until the side channels are clear and flowing. The side channels are the relative channels, the central is where the absolute can be found. 

 

Thank you Bindi for additional details and description provided from your own frame of reference.  This is helpful in understanding.

 

the absolute for me is the infinite part of me (the Divine in me).  It is always present and always accessible.  There are no preconditions except for me to not turn my back on it or ignore it.  The connection for me is nourished through recognition and interaction and awareness of that part of myself (the ground of my being, the part that is unchanging unformed unborn uncreated no beginning no end no time no form no space always was always will be).    

 

37 minutes ago, Bindi said:

To me until consciousness is in the central channel all spiritual concepts remain just that, concepts, spiritual notions to practice and believe in but not actually ‘spiritual’ in any sense other than intellectual. 

 

Question:  In your view, is intuition  a function of the intellect?

 

Edited 3 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Bindi]

57 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

Thank you Bindi for additional details and description provided from your own frame of reference.  This is helpful in understanding.

 

the absolute for me is the infinite part of me (the Divine in me).  It is always present and always accessible.  There are no preconditions except for me to not turn my back on it or ignore it.  The connection for me is nourished through recognition and interaction and awareness of that part of myself (the ground of my being, the part that is unchanging unformed unborn uncreated no beginning no end no time no form no space always was always will be).    

 

 

Question:  In your view, is intuition  a function of the intellect?

 

I think there might be two levels of intuition, one decidedly based on the intellect, and the other based on a higher knowledge source within. From https://positivepsychology.com/intuition/

 

Processes involved in intuition

Herbert Simon’s research in the 1950s into the concept of bounded rationality guides much of the work on intuition. Simon suggested that people often make decisions – and reduce their cognitive load – based on what is good enough.

Rather than arriving at complete and entirely correct answers, when faced with specific tasks, we often resort to heuristics – or rules of thumb – that help form intuitive judgments (Simon, 1955).

The use of heuristics is considered commonplace and the default approach for making decisions (Epstein, 2010).

The process of recognition – a fundamental evolved function – is also crucial to intuition. It appears separate from other parts of the human memory in the brain, capable of persisting in the most challenging conditions with accuracy sufficient for practical purposes.

Intuition appears to rely on the automation of the decision-making process.

Newly learned tasks often rely on declarative knowledge; we must consciously consider each move or action. As a result of practice and learning, this knowledge becomes automated or procedural. Such tasks are acted out without conscious intervention, saving significant processing power and freeing the mind to focus on more intensive or newly acquired actions.

Forward and backward inferences also play an essential role in intuition (Hogarth, 2010). The knowledge we have acquired through experience helps us predict, intuitively, where the ball will land or why the child tripped and take action.

Indeed, the vast knowledge we build up over time allows real-world predictions, enabling us to act quickly and effectively in situations that most of us have encountered many times before.

Learning and retrieval are also highly relevant to successful intuitive processes.

Having experienced objects and scenes before, we are highly adept at pattern matching to support our ability to decide and act quickly and effectively.

For example, when we walk into a coffee shop, we recognize a cup as something we have seen many times before. We also understand, intuitively, that it is likely to be hot and easily spilled on an uneven surface.

Intuition appears to arise – like an epiphenomenon – out of the interaction of many distinctive cognitive processes, rather than a single one. They combine to deliver a fast and effective response when it is most needed.

                      __________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Ive experienced the other level, where instinct brought me at the right time to the right place or guided me to interact in very specific ways with a few different people. That was inexplicable, but it was in the company of a particular person and it didn’t continue independently. 
 

The first sort of instinct is quick but not necessarily reliable, the second is astounding but unusual without developing a very good communication channel with the higher self. 
 

Neither use of these intuition forms has changed my life in any particular way, intuition is not something I aspire to or have wished to cultivate. Intuition of the second sort may develop as an outcome of consciousness flowing freely in all channels, and that sort of intuition is likely to be reliable, but for the path I’m on it’s not required on the way. 
 

What is your experience with intuition? 
 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Bindi