As I understand it, 'feelings' are inner sensations, 'emotions' are an outer expression of these feelings.
I think that most Buddhist Mahayana and Hinayana texts recommend being continuously aware at all times of one's (inner) feelings, and then to make the (right) effort not to emote (display one's emotions) willy-nilly, which could trigger off unwholesome activity all round. Zen, I think, recommends likewise. Vulcans *appear* to be very Buddhist-like in this regard. However, it may require *no* effort on their part due to a differently-structural neural system. If they do have choice, the motivation underlying their choice would need to be scrutinized. Vajrayana (Tantrayana) may have recommendations different from those in the Mahayana/Hinayana texts. --ED --- In [email protected], "Dave P" <wookielifeday@...> wrote: > > I've never understood the difference. > --- In [email protected], "ED" seacrofter001@ wrote: > > > > Do you draw a distinction between 'feelings' and 'emotions' or not? > > Thanks, ED > > --- In [email protected], "Dave P" <wookielifeday@> wrote: > > > > > > This is another strange question, but I've been watching a lot of > > Star Trek, and there's frequent mentioning of how the Vulcans are not > > actually unemotional, but simply observe their emotions and not let them > > control their actions. Does this sound Zen to anyone here, or am I way > > off?
