--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Irmeli:I see this to be a dualistic understanding. And it is very typical
> to the eastern traditions. This is also the weak spot of many of
> those traditions. Certain emotions like fear and anger are labelled
> as negative.

Unc:Having gotten to know this gentleman, I can assure you
that this is not the case at all. Fear was "labeled"
as no more inherently "negative" than bliss was "labeled"
"positive." It's not on that level at all, since neither
of these emotions/states of mind really exist.

Irmeli: Ok that is already one important step ahead. I agree fully
with this.

Unc:The judgment is purely about the karmic effect of indulging
in these emotions. Indulging in anger and fear brings the
perceiver down and creates negative karma, that which
lengthens the process of realization. Indulging in compas-
sion and love uplifts, and shortens the process of real-
ization. Purely pragmatic, with no moral judgment involved
at all.

I was not proposing to indulging with those emotions, rather the
opposite, containing, confronting, containing and transforming them
instead of  suppressing them. Suppression is an automatic process
which very easily happens, when you have decided to put your attention
away from those emotions. In that case those emotions don't get
transformed, and in some subtle way somebody else can receive them.
And that creates karma. Indulging in compassion can also lead on a
subtle level to mood making. I appreciate the Tibetans and they have a
great wisdom tradition. But why does that nation live in such a deep
poverty and misery. Isn't there karmic effect working there.

Irmeli:> There are ideals that in an awakened state you don't anymore
> have those emotions.

Unc: Not in this particular tradition. One *continues* to exper-
ience these emotions. One simply has developed the control
not to have to indulge in them.
 
Irmeli: That is very good and in that case the person talks about
precisely the same thing as I am. There is however possibly a problem
embedded in the control of not idulging. The emotions won't
necessarily get really transformed that way.  However it is an
important step to learn to do. When you contain and confront an
emotion, it changes its character rather fast. There is no indulging
present, but no avoidance of it either.

Irmeli:> Ingenious techniques have been developed to
> disconnect oneself from those emotions. Those emotions are thrown
> out of perception somewhere into the collective energy soup for some
> other, maybe somewhat weaker people to carry and handle the best
> they can. And this is called creating peace!!!

Unc: Yours is a perfectly valid POV, but I can assure you that it
is not the POV of the teacher I mention. ALL possible emotions
are present at ALL times; which one or ones you choose to
indulge in is up to you. This tradition would very much
disagree with Maharishi's "unstressing" theory, that when an
emotion becomes predominant, it is a result of something being
worked through or being released, and one has no control over
it; that one is basically a victim to the emotional state until
it passes.

Irmeli: What does POV mean? My dictionary does not know the word.
My way is not to indulge in any emotion. But my approach is closer to
MMY's: I just allow the emotion naturally appear. When it can be
clearly seen, I start to transform it. This is a very important
distinction: We all have many subtle emotional states embedded in
ourselves we are not aware of. The emotional state has to be allowed
to come into awareness in order to be able to transform it. You cannot
work with something you are not aware of. Regrettably I have observed
some subtle level mood making of positive emotions like compassion in
the Tibetan Buddhist I have met.  

Unc:The Tibetan view is very different. There is NO state of
attention that one is "victim" to. One ALWAYS has a choice.
That is what free will is ABOUT. Preferring one state of
attention to another doesn't add to the "collective energy
soup." It can't. All of these emotions are always there at
all times, in infinite amounts. So are all the "positive"
emotions, in equally infinite amounts. All one is doing is
making a choice as to which to focus on and give expression
to and allow to generate karma.

Irmeli: What does "There is NO state of attention that one is "victim"
to" mean.?
 If you feel you are victim of something, you transform that emotion
or energetic structure and the victim hood dissolves.
The collective energy field is a very tricky thing. Different nations
have partly their own collective energy field. I have had all my adult
life a certain kind of understanding of how wars are formed. And I
have not yet seen any need to make changes to it. The theory is this:
A nation is drawn to a war or wars, when in its collective
consciousness there is a lot of suppressed anger and fury and fear.
When people cannot confront and transform these emotions internally,
they start to act them out uncontrollably. On the collective level it
means wars. The only way on the long run to avoid wars is to learn to
contain, face and transform those emotions. 
Tibet is not a good example on this. Somehow the Tibetans managed to
magnetize the Chinese to occupy their country in spite of their long
tradition of powerful internal techniques. There must have been some
energetic imbalance in the collective consciousness of that country.


Irmeli: Fear and anger (fury) are very important emotions for life to
> sustain itself. You cannot live without them, you can only
> disconnect your conscious mind from those emotions and push them
> to your subconsciousness or to the collective consciousness to
> be expressed by others, often not too constructively.

Unc:That is a very Western POV, and possibly valid. I am presenting
a different POV. I'm not trying to sell it, merely to present it.

Irmeli: Fear warns of danger, anger helps us to put legitimate limits, so
 that others cannot use us.

Unc:And both produce karma. The Tibetan view is that we, as perceivers
and actors, are in charge of what karma we wish to produce. We
are not slaves to which emotion is predominant at any given time,
and have a clear choice as to the state of attention we bring to
any situation, and thus a choice as to the karma our thoughts
and actions produce in that situation.

Irmeli: Confronting and transforming an emotion does NOT mean being
hooked to that emotion. It is a total opposite of that state. When you
confront an emotion, it doesn't last, it gets transformed. But if you
identify yourself with a certain emotion, it becomes your state of
mind, and it is very difficult to transform and you become a slave of
that emotion. This very thing people have difficulties with. And
therefore I think they choose to avoid certain emotions. And also we
all are slaves of many emotional states, we are not clearly aware of.

Irmeli:> These are important functions. We must just learn to use them
> constructively.

Unc:That's one way of seeing things. I am merely presenting another.

 





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to