Feelings and Emotions

[scotslad]

The same?

Different?

Opposite?

Often confused & yet distinct...

...or simply interwoven?

For me, "emotions" occur at the end of the creation process and....

"Feelings" at the start.

For, feelings create circumstances and circumstances create emotions.

And you?

Whats your thoughts on these two very important reality altering concepts?

[5th]

Technically speaking 'feelings' should be reserved for bodily sensations - 'I feel hot' for example. Emotions are not necessarily connected with 'the creation process'.

Emotions are emotions regardless of whether at the start or the end! I speak as one who was a psychoanalyst specialising in hypnosis for several years.

The problem is that we only have vague descriptions of physical and psychological functions so unless you are a psychologist, your terms are probably different from another person's. If we want to understand our psyche, we need to establish precise definitions!

One important factor is that thoughts are much slower and easier to control than emotions. It's easy to think of a banana but almost impossible to 'feel' sadness on request. It's a common delusion that thoughts create feelings and while this may sometimes be true, it is more likely to be the other way around. We are often not even aware of where our emotions have come from...

[scotslad]

For me, I think circumstances create emotions not feelings.

But feelings do create circumstances.

Emotions are accessed at the end of the creation cycle, after the period of creation (which is created with feelings). Our emotions are our reactions to our external environment (people, situations and events) and circumstances we have created, but instead of recognising this and breaking the mould, we perpetuate our circumstances with our negative emotions reinforcing and perpetuating our negative beliefs to create our negative reality and environment.

We therefore react to our "negative" environment, experience "negative" emotions, negatively verbalise these "negative" experiences, and thus condition ourselves to behave in a negative fashion.

However, if we could take time out to realise we are perpetuating and creating the environment we are experiencing, we can instantly change our focus to creating the positive experience we want.

NLP coaches will tell us to change our thinking.

But there is a step before that -

Change your feelings.

Feelings > Thoughts > Words > Action.

By focusing on our emotions we are preventing protons and electrons from fusing, we are preventing quantums of light from being created. Our intention is not focused, and our attention is directed at the temporary cause of un-ease/disruption we are temporarily experiencing in realtime. (and continue to replay over and over in our heads combined with regrets of the past and worries of the future instead of creating what we do want - now.)

We need to change our focus to our feelings, and focusing on the positive experiences we want to experience, then the cycle of creation and realisation can really begin in earnest. In other words, instead of lowering our frequency and vibration to a more dense state and keeping protons and electrons apart, we should focus on what we do want and the more intense we are with our desire, the quicker we can fuse electrons & protons together to create the space/time events we want.

In my book emotions are not the same as feelings.

Emotions tend to be energy in motion, our reaction to the stimuli and environment around us. It is external "things" that stir our emotions. Emotions tend to be easy to describe, occur frequently, and we can often pinpoint accurately the cause or trigger of that emotion.

Feelings are created from that internal "still space".

A feeling (in my book) is that indescribable sensation of creativity that comes in an instant from the void, from where we rid ourselves of the external "noise" and distractions, and simply allow the protons and electrons to fuse, to create a quantum of light within us, which we then interpret that fusion with our thoughts, and articulate those thoughts with words to manifest and create a space/time event in our reality.

For me, feelings occur proactively and allow us to create with what we know, and emotions are what we do with what we know albeit somewhat reactionary.

For me, feelings are a cause, and emotions are an effect. Feelings boost your personal power and emotions drain it.

Then again, we all perceive, experience and interpret differently in this co-operative universe that we are all (un)knowingly creating together including this post/thread/community

[what is a name?]

I would say that emotions and feelings are generated from the body, not the mind - and as 5th above says our thoughts are a much slower process.

Generally people think that the mind is 'operations control' for our whole being, but if emotions/feelings dictate to the mind, then it would be logical to say that when the body is balanced then the mind must follow and be balanced too.

Then you would ask 'how do you balance the body?' And paradoxically the answer is to 'use the mind!'

The symbiotic relationship between the body and mind is not something to under estimate and when balance between the two begins, our 'internal pilot light' in the body begins to get a fuel source from the mind. Then you get Fire

That's my 'feeling' on the subject!

[scotslad]

I agree with 5th in that feelings precede thought for many people cant or are unable to meditate for their mind is too busy filtering all kinds of thoughts.

Some believe that we are a human enduring/enjoying a spiritual experience and others a spiritual being enjoying/enduring a human experience in this skin suit.

Some believe that memories are not stored internally but downloaded like a modem from the internet (akashic records).

Some think that the brain is the cpu crunching the data that it "receives" inside the head from an external "universal" source, and that the mind is outside of the body, for like the soul or spirit it is non physical.

We are led to believe that non physical can alter and effect reality, and that the act/intention of the observer can change the outcome. For me, if our attention is too busy on getting distracted by external stimuli and reminding us of what we dont want, like or desire in our busy and hectic lifestyles (especially from the many distractions created by those in power to distract us and keep us dumbed down).

In constantly being distracted by our emotions purposely stirred from external sources to keep us resonating at and with more dense frequencies. What if we need to go "in" not for to discover a biological source, but an infinite awareness of source that frees us of the confinements of our physicality of what we have been conditioned to believe with our small finite 5 sense limited self instead of the powerful, multi dimensional being that can create reality (space/time events) instantly with what we choose to focus on instead of being distracted by what we fear (or winds us up). Think of the power of that.

Do I really care (or want to watch, read or listen to) what the BBC is going to say to the masses just to lower their vibration and so they can react emotionally and "accordingly" or....

...do I want to focus my attention and intention to choose to contribute and create the reality and experiences I want with feeling?

Everyone is all too stressed, reacting instead of responding to "stuff" in life and keeping themselves trapped at a lower frequency instead of taking time out to appreciate their own wonder and focusing on what they do want and raising their vibration with feelings to create what they do want this time around

[5th]

Wow scotslad - talk about confused! Maybe by 'feelings; you mean intuition?

The smallest amount of self observation will show you that we have no control over our emotions - only control over expressing /suppressing them.

Everybody creates their own reality and this reality depends entirely on our belief system which is certainly connected to our emotions. It has nothing to do with connecting protons and electrons because everything already exists and our 'creation of reality' is simply moving to a place where that reality ALREADY exists. But what you call 'negative emotions' are not created by circumstances at all. Circumstances will trigger negative emotions but they come from our repressed traumas (almost always from childhood).

You can have two people experiencing the same objective reality and one thinks it's very nice and the other thinks it's horrible. No need to 'connect protons and electrons' to actually change anything.

You really need to define your terms because they have different meanings for different people and you can't call one type of emotion a 'feeling' and another type an emotion. As 'what is a name pointed out', 'feeling' is a vague term that has no precise meaning at all and you can't just decide to give it one! The precise use of a commonly understood language is vital...

[Ratszinger]

Posted by scotslad (here)
The same?

Different?

Opposite?

Often confused & yet distinct...

...or simply interwoven?

For me, "emotions" occur at the end of the creation process and....

"Feelings" at the start.

For, feelings create circumstances and circumstances create emotions.

And you?

Whats your thoughts on these two very important reality altering concepts?

To me we are like fingers reaching out. The manipulative fingers of the waking consciousness that is the one and we each have these 'feelers' and we stretch them out and we feel with our eyes, our fingers, our toes, and so on and each response and how we deal with what we feel and/or see and who deals with it is the POV (Point Of View) experiencer having emotions. We each reach differently to what we feel even as we feel the same things we don't react the same so the emotion does not always equate to the feeling in any type of consistency across the mass conscious of all the experiencers. Two feelers can feel foam rubber and one may immediately repel a yuk fashion while the other grasps it more rather enjoying the experience as a example.

Reaching out is how we feel, and reaction/response to the experience is how we emote. To me anyway.

[Dagmar]

? "I have given you examples of six different inner states. Three of them relate to the moving center and three to the emotional center. In ordinary language all six are called feelings. Yet in right classification those whose nature is connected with the moving center should be called sensations, and those whose nature is connected with emotional center, feelings. There are thousands of different sensations which are usually called feelings. They are all different, their material is different, their effects different and their causes different.
In examining them more closely we can establish their nature and give them corresponding names. They are often so
different in their nature that they have nothing whatever in common. Some originate in one place, others in another place. In some people one place of origin (of a given kind of sensations) is absent, in others another place of origin may be lacking. In yet other people, all may be present.
The time will come when we shall endeavor to shut off artificially one, or two, or several together, to learn their real nature.

At present we must have an idea of two different experiences, one of which we shall agree to call "feeling" and the other "sensation." We shall call "feeling" the one whose place of origin is what we call the emotional center; while "sensations" are those so-called feelings whose place of origin is in what we call the moving center. Now, of course, each one must understand and examine his sensations and feelings and learn approximately the difference between them...."
excerpts from Views From the Real World - Early Talks of Gurdjieff page 173-4/207

[Ernie Nemeth]

Phychoanalytics has done nothing for the mentally ill except pigeon-hole their illness and multiply the labels for diagnostic purposes.

From an early age I was made aware of the importance of a feeling oriented lifestyle. Emotions are mental constructs defining the interpretation of raw feelings.

As such, emotions are very much like phychoanalytical pigeon-holing in that emotions are labels of a frozen state instead of recognizing and acknowledging the dynamic process feelings truly are.

[shaberon]

I agree there is a difference, and we have poor words to describe it, but in standard usage I also use "emotion" to mean a response to an external stimulus, but a feeling is generated internally on one's own.

The main issue is whether you are lead and controlled by them like a dog, or, if it is only some added detail to enrich an experience. There is no intention to stop sentient feeling, itself, but there is one to clean it of instincts and unstable, disturbing moments.

However, there can be further issues with methods to break their control.

The main example is celibacy. If one takes the vow without being ready, it might take a year or ten, but it will build up waves of horrible backlash that may release themselves sexually, violently, psychotically, or otherwise. So although celibacy probably is a less emotional, more disciplined and energetic state of being, premature attempts to force it can be disastrous. I think people understand about bottled and repressed emotions that can become bombs.

On the other hand, if one has truly renounced, then the vow is just window dressing.

The feeling-oriented lifestyle is very Western, we expect someone to care what we have to say and help process anything we do. More typically in the East, no one is ever going to think about how you felt...you do something and move on to the next thing without ever getting wrapped up in it. That's daily life. At the same time, we would say spiritual practice is made out of unpleasant emotions. We try to eat all those shadows until no trace is left, not even subconsciously is there a glimmer of selfishness or violence. So if my main example is Akshobya, which means "unshake-able", Akshobya is never shaken by anger even if you defecate on a shrine or go through a maternity ward with a flame thrower. Although I have some success with either eliminating angry emotions, or at least not lashing out due to them, I'm still very weak and small--although maybe a bit more placid than many people, I can still be "shaken". So I cannot merge with this deity.

A person can call me names and punch me in the nose, and it may not even get my attention. However, my inner thought-based feelings about "the system" do in fact produce an unreasonable amount of anger. That means I have to suffer whatever it takes until I quit doing it. If we say that Akshobya is an inherent self-arisen aspect of reality, the wisdom of peace that has never fluttered for an instant, then what I am doing is mostly running as hard as I can away from that into disaster, every chance I get. Why would you do that?? Mankind has cooked up the same stew of evil whether I get mad about it or not, right?

So primarily what we are doing with deities is absorbing every dark emotion and feeling and burning it all until no Attraction or Repulsion is present to the mind. This is why, in ordinary terms, I think everything about feelings and emotions and mental processes is important. Not really the medical definitions, but personal experience.

[petra]

Hungry is a feeling, but it is not an emotion.
If Hungry goes on long enough, we might get Hangry
Angry is definitely an emotion, and one of the most powerful at that. I've actually seen red on occasion (that's not just a metaphor, I literally saw red). Anger in my experience is always an effect of a feeling, so that fits.
When you're hungry, it's really hard to feel much else - other than hunger. It's just over powering.
There's no other way to describe anger though, other than "I feel angry" - so now it's a feeling too.

This reminds me of the tree falling in the woods thing again, because I'm going in circles.

Does the tree make a sound when it falls, if no one is there to hear it? Yes, or no - depending on how you define sound.
If sound is "something you hear", then no it didn't make a sound.
If sound is "a vibration", then of course it makes a sound.

When the definition of a word is the same thing that causes it, things tend to get kind of snakey - and this is part of why English gets on my nerves

[Hervé]

Posted by 5th (here)
Technically speaking 'feelings' should be reserved for bodily sensations - 'I feel hot' for example.

[...]

That's where the language switcheroo occurs: substituting "feeling" for "sensation" to compensate for poor vocabulary... and/or the misuse of a thesaurus.

"Feeling hot" is a sensation... a feeling of gloom is neither a sensation nor an emotion... it's an "idea" which can then affect one's emotions and/or body sensations via something called "psychosomatics."

[Ernie Nemeth]

There are other planes of reality that are just as valid as the one we collectively believe we share that we call the 3D world - the world of modern humans, the scientific world of deterministic materialism.

One such is the pure energy level of reality, where energy is continually being exchanged between energy sinks - at this level these sinks are far too large to be defined (matter). At a more subtle level of this realm is what Eckhart Tolle calls the pain body. This is a reservoir of sorts that serves as a dump for unwanted or unresolved or unsavory 'feelings'. These energies collect and sometimes interfere with the normal function and flow of energies in the body.

Our realities are disproportionately weighted towards materiality by senses that interpret energy in terms of matter, which is what we naturally believe our bodies to be. Yet we do have other senses that tell another story. It is only that these other senses sense a portion of reality alien to our five predominant senses. These senses report of a world far smoother, finer, and that often conflicts with the grosser world of the body.

As an example here is a link to the disproportionate preponderance of sense receptors in the human body. Scroll down a bit to see a picture of a human represented according to the number of sensory input regions on different parts of the body.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_homunculus

If there was such a diagram according to the sense of internal feelings there would be no recognizable features at all, as the landscape of the internal has no distinct and acceptable universal representation. Yet the senses exist because we 'feel'.

Since we have no consensus on the internal reality of life we must each learn to cope with that world on our own. Since the function of the brain is primarily to navigate the grosser world of the five main senses there is little resources left over for internal work unless consciously set aside by the individual. Since we are left on our own and find ourselves with limited resources to deal with the problem we learn to catagorize feelings into distinct groupings based mostly on the basis of the pleasure principle - does this make me feel better or worse?

This method of judgement works well in the accepted 'real' world where there is the direct threat of danger, injury and death but has no true applicability at the finer level of feelings. However, since we are predominately focussed on the outside world our internal world, if left to subconscious and unconscious processing, uses the same criteria as we automatically use in the five sense dominated world of regular life.

These groupings of feelings with no true definition become emotions. I 'feel' angry. I 'feel' hungry, I 'feel' jealous, become I am angry, I am hungry, I am jealous. The feeling becomes the state. Or, the dynamic becomes the static.

Feelings come and go. They are fleeting. Emotions linger. Emotions perpetuate.

Feelings develop, crescendo, and wane. Feelings wash over, then recede. Emotions precipitate states of being that we then are.

[scotslad]

Interesting points being made above. For me, they are separate and distinct. I also think that vocabulary and use of language in different cultures often get lost in translation which can results in dumbing us down over the ages and can often confuse or hide the real meaning of different things and their true purpose in so many different areas of our planet, lives and culture(s).

A person can call me names and punch me in the nose, and it may not even get my attention. However, my inner thought-based feelings about "the system" do in fact produce an unreasonable amount of anger. That means I have to suffer whatever it takes until I quit doing it. If we say that Akshobya is an inherent self-arisen aspect of reality, the wisdom of peace that has never fluttered for an instant, then what I am doing is mostly running as hard as I can away from that into disaster, every chance I get. Why would you do that?? Mankind has cooked up the same stew of evil whether I get mad about it or not, right?

Interesting, I interpret that as -

1. External Stimuli > punches your nose > You react & show emotions - Anger
2. You experience "stuff" all the time, but how you choose to "respond" can determine what you create next. (E+R=O experience + response = outcome)
3. Many people react (negatively) without thinking and often perpetuate negative situations with their negative emotions instead of choosing different thoughts and actions to create a new circumstance.

We can moan about the glass being half empty after someone drank our juice or we can simply choose to get a bigger glass and pour ourselves a new juice

Any other thoughts on the difference between feelings and emotions (or whether they are the same?)