carrying meditation throughout the day and removing emotion

[eva hermit]

Greetings to all here, I have joined the forum recently and this is my first post.

I'm curious as to the experience of others with carrying meditation throughout the day, and removing emotion. I'm able most of the time to drop the emotion right when it arises inside, but it's interesting that there are some emotions and intentions that are so much easier to remove than others.

For example, if something like anger, irritation or jealousy arises I will not keep it more than one second or less, I drop it right away. But others such as sadness, anxiety or doubt are trickier: when these arise it's much harder to cut them off in the moment and I often have to go and meditate for 5-15 minutes until I am light again.

So what is it that makes some emotions so much harder to catch compared to others? Why is the mind so sticky to some and not to others? Does anyone else have similar experience?

[Goofaholix]

Why do you want to remove emotion?

This practice is to be aware of emotion, this creates a level of objectivity that prevents you from being caught up in emotion, this works to level out the extremes of emotion.

Emotion is a part of the human experience, it's not something to be removed.

[stillpointdancer]

It's an interesting idea. Many Buddhists assume that we are moving to a state of equanimity, which in English means calmness and composure, especially in a difficult situation. In Buddhism it's a bit trickier to define because it has been translated in many different ways. For me the problem lies in how we interact with the world with equanimity. Are we indifferent to what is going on or engaged in a mindful way? Do we let our emotions decide how to behave or create a gap between the arising of the emotion and the decision what to do about it, and then take action? The more I delve into this one the more complex it becomes.

[eva hermit]

Why do I want to remove emotion?
 One point is that if I am caught up in emotion, I cannot see clearly or take wise decisions. If my mother is sick and dying, and I'm caught in emotion, full of my own sadness and grief, how can I think of how best to help her, how to lift her spirits and make her comfortable?
Can a person who is sad, anxious, or angry make a choice based on wisdom?

I see in myself that anytime there is an emotion arising from something I hear, touch, see, or feel, it means I have made a Self, an ego with something, it means I'm attached to something. Who gets angry? Who gets hurt? Why am I sad? Any emotion, particularly negative emotion, arising from a contact through one of the sense doors, means attachment to something, no? If I want to practice detachment, I should not accept the emotions born from it.
 
My understanding of equanimity is that it means that you are not a yoyo, getting delighted and excited with one word, depressed and unhappy with another. "You're beautiful" => happiness, "you're ugly" => insecurity/irritation. You don't depend on anything outside to bring you joy and happiness, you create it from inside when you meditate and depend on yourself.
I don't understand it to mean indifference, in the sense of not caring and therefore not wanting to help anyone who is suffering. It's selfishness that doesn't care about the suffering of others and doesn't want to help, while perfect equanimity is possible only for someone who is selfless. This equanimity can help to the maximum of his capacity, but doesn't get emotionally involved.
We have an image of a kind of psychopath that can murder someone without feeling a hint of guilt or emotion in relation to that, and so we're scared of turning into robots with no emotion, but the psychopath acts with indifference, not equanimity. He's selfish, so if he has something he wants removed from him, he'll get pissed off. The Buddha is the most compassionate and lovely person in the history of humanity, but you never hear of him getting emotional.  If you're so full of compassion and generosity towards the whole world, if you're totally selfless, then you will be just content in yourself, you don't need some pleasant event from outside to bring you into pleasant emotion, and you don't fall into negative emotion with one word, look, or rainy day. This is the meaning of equanimity as I understand it.

 One of my favourite teachings of the Buddha is when he tells "Even if someone is cutting you into pieces with a two-handled saw, if you have one thought of anger, you are not my student." He doesn't say that one should be aware of the anger, or that the anger is part of the human experience, he says that even in this most extreme situation, anger is not acceptable.

From my own experience, I can say that learning this practice of dropping the emotion in the present moment as I see it being born has helped me A LOT to be a better person. Let's say I have some problem that normally would cause me great anxiety and stress. Instead of carrying around anxiety, insecurity or stress all day long and constantly having to fight with it, I just drop it right away; then I'm light, and I can look at the problem and see if there is anything I can do about it - if not, I just continue and live with it; and if there is something I can do, I calculate what is the best solution, and do it.

I also never realised how much energy emotions demand; and when you are removing them, you have so much more energy. But as I said I'm far from being able to do it perfectly and all the time, this is the work of my life!  I thought that this was what meditation was for, actually; at least this was the meditation I learned. Do no others do this?

[Goofaholix]

Not getting caught up in emotion is a very different from the idea of removing emotion.

A person who is sad, anxious, or angry can make a choice based on wisdom if he/she is fully aware of what is going on in the body and mind that is influencing that choice, emotion included.  Believing that emotion has been removed may create a numbness to experience, which is not wisdom.

Emotion is generally made up of a combination of physical sensation and the story that the mind tells you that justifies the emotion.  Seeing these clearly results in not getting caught up, it moderates what is an important part of being human rather than removes it altogether.

[dharma bum]

This is something I don't understand very well either. Isn't it true that in the state of enlightenment, or even close to it, there is no emotion?

I try to understand it this way - not sure if it is correct - the goal of meditation is wisdom. Wisdom makes you understand the true nature of emotion, which is transient, like waves on a lake. When you are at an advanced state of wisdom, the mind is like a tranquil lake, deep and calm. So the absence of emotion is a byproduct of wisdom. One should not strive for an absence of emotion because it doesn't even work.

[Middleway]

Why do I want to remove emotion?
 One point is that if I am caught up in emotion, I cannot see clearly or take wise decisions. If my mother is sick and dying, and I'm caught in emotion, full of my own sadness and grief, how can I think of how best to help her, how to lift her spirits and make her comfortable?
Can a person who is sad, anxious, or angry make a choice based on wisdom?

Agreed. A person who is sad, anxious, or angry cannot act in accordance with the Dhamma.

I see in myself that anytime there is an emotion arising from something I hear, touch, see, or feel, it means I have made a Self, an ego with something, it means I'm attached to something. Who gets angry? Who gets hurt? Why am I sad? Any emotion, particularly negative emotion, arising from a contact through one of the sense doors, means attachment to something, no? If I want to practice detachment, I should not accept the emotions born from it.

Who should not accept the emotions? who are you referring to? your ego-self? Remember, the emotions arise dependently based on ego-self. How can ego-self reject emotions when ego-self and emotions are two sides of the same coin?

My understanding of equanimity is that it means that you are not a yoyo, getting delighted and excited with one word, depressed and unhappy with another. "You're beautiful" => happiness, "you're ugly" => insecurity/irritation. You don't depend on anything outside to bring you joy and happiness, you create it from inside when you meditate and depend on yourself.
I don't understand it to mean indifference, in the sense of not caring and therefore not wanting to help anyone who is suffering. It's selfishness that doesn't care about the suffering of others and doesn't want to help, while perfect equanimity is possible only for someone who is selfless. This equanimity can help to the maximum of his capacity, but doesn't get emotionally involved.

You got it. Equanimity arises when there is no self.

We have an image of a kind of psychopath that can murder someone without feeling a hint of guilt or emotion in relation to that, and so we're scared of turning into robots with no emotion, but the psychopath acts with indifference, not equanimity. He's selfish, so if he has something he wants removed from him, he'll get pissed off. The Buddha is the most compassionate and lovely person in the history of humanity, but you never hear of him getting emotional.  If you're so full of compassion and generosity towards the whole world, if you're totally selfless, then you will be just content in yourself, you don't need some pleasant event from outside to bring you into pleasant emotion, and you don't fall into negative emotion with one word, look, or rainy day. This is the meaning of equanimity as I understand it.

Yes, selflessness gives rise to equanimity.

One of my favourite teachings of the Buddha is when he tells "Even if someone is cutting you into pieces with a two-handled saw, if you have one thought of anger, you are not my student." He doesn't say that one should be aware of the anger, or that the anger is part of the human experience, he says that even in this most extreme situation, anger is not acceptable.

Buddha would not have said that. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Fire needs to be put out to get rid of the smoke. Buddha would have advised to douse the fire (self) instead of trying to reject the smoke (emotion or anger).

From my own experience, I can say that learning this practice of dropping the emotion in the present moment as I see it being born has helped me A LOT to be a better person. Let's say I have some problem that normally would cause me great anxiety and stress. Instead of carrying around anxiety, insecurity or stress all day long and constantly having to fight with it, I just drop it right away; then I'm light, and I can look at the problem and see if there is anything I can do about it - if not, I just continue and live with it; and if there is something I can do, I calculate what is the best solution, and do it.

When ego-self drops the emotions, they go into the basement only to arise at another time. Work on the ego-self not the emotions.

I also never realised how much energy emotions demand; and when you are removing them, you have so much more energy. But as I said I'm far from being able to do it perfectly and all the time, this is the work of my life!  I thought that this was what meditation was for, actually; at least this was the meditation I learned. Do no others do this?

We are all on the same path.

[stillpointdancer]

This is something I don't understand very well either. Isn't it true that in the state of enlightenment, or even close to it, there is no emotion?

I try to understand it this way - not sure if it is correct - the goal of meditation is wisdom. Wisdom makes you understand the true nature of emotion, which is transient, like waves on a lake. When you are at an advanced state of wisdom, the mind is like a tranquil lake, deep and calm. So the absence of emotion is a byproduct of wisdom. One should not strive for an absence of emotion because it doesn't even work.

States of enlightenment are timeless instances of enlightenment, or at least that's how they feel. All conscious thought stops in that instance, which is over as soon as thought returns. In that sense there can be no emotion during the experience. The immediate aftermath, when thought returns, however, hits you like a ton of bricks with emotion overload. When this settles down somewhat, you can never see things in the same way as before and so your emotional responses can never be the same as before. It's up to you what you do with your new understanding, but if you are a Buddhist then you tend to reassess everything along Buddhist lines, including your emotional responses to what happens within and what happens around you.

[Middleway]

This is something I don't understand very well either. Isn't it true that in the state of enlightenment, or even close to it, there is no emotion?

I try to understand it this way - not sure if it is correct - the goal of meditation is wisdom. Wisdom makes you understand the true nature of emotion, which is transient, like waves on a lake. When you are at an advanced state of wisdom, the mind is like a tranquil lake, deep and calm. So the absence of emotion is a byproduct of wisdom. One should not strive for an absence of emotion because it doesn't even work.

You are onto something beautiful here....

The Heart Sutra
Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Compassion, meditating deeply on Perfection of Wisdom, saw clearly that the five aspects of human existence are empty*, and so released himself from suffering.  Answering the monk Sariputra, he said this:

Body is nothing more than emptiness,
emptiness is nothing more than body.
The body is exactly empty,
and emptiness is exactly body.
The other four aspects of human existence --
feeling, thought, will, and consciousness --
are likewise nothing more than emptiness,
and emptiness nothing more than they.

All things are empty:
Nothing is born, nothing dies,
nothing is pure, nothing is stained,
nothing increases and nothing decreases.

So, in emptiness, there is no body,
no feeling, no thought,
no will, no consciousness.
There are no eyes, no ears,
no nose, no tongue,
no body, no mind.
There is no seeing, no hearing,
no smelling, no tasting,
no touching, no imagining.
There is nothing seen, nor heard,
nor smelled, nor tasted,
nor touched, nor imagined.

There is no ignorance,
and no end to ignorance.
There is no old age and death,
and no end to old age and death.
There is no suffering, no cause of suffering,
no end to suffering, no path to follow.
There is no attainment of wisdom,
and no wisdom to attain.

The Bodhisattvas rely on the Perfection of Wisdom,
and so with no delusions,
they feel no fear,
and have Nirvana here and now.

All the Buddhas,
past, present, and future,
rely on the Perfection of Wisdom,
and live in full enlightenment.

The Perfection of Wisdom is the greatest mantra.
It is the clearest mantra,
the highest mantra,
the mantra that removes all suffering.

This is truth that cannot be doubted.
Say it so:

Gaté,
gaté,
paragaté,
parasamgaté.
Bodhi!
Svaha!
Which means...
Gone,
gone,
gone over,
gone fully over.
Awakened!
So be it!

Contemplate on this, every chance you get.

[dharma bum]

Thanks spd and Middleway.

[Laurent]

Why do I want to remove emotion?
 One point is that if I am caught up in emotion, I cannot see clearly or take wise decisions. If my mother is sick and dying, and I'm caught in emotion, full of my own sadness and grief, how can I think of how best to help her, how to lift her spirits and make her comfortable?
Can a person who is sad, anxious, or angry make a choice based on wisdom?

I see in myself that anytime there is an emotion arising from something I hear, touch, see, or feel, it means I have made a Self, an ego with something, it means I'm attached to something. Who gets angry? Who gets hurt? Why am I sad? Any emotion, particularly negative emotion, arising from a contact through one of the sense doors, means attachment to something, no? If I want to practice detachment, I should not accept the emotions born from it.
 
My understanding of equanimity is that it means that you are not a yoyo, getting delighted and excited with one word, depressed and unhappy with another. "You're beautiful" => happiness, "you're ugly" => insecurity/irritation. You don't depend on anything outside to bring you joy and happiness, you create it from inside when you meditate and depend on yourself.
I don't understand it to mean indifference, in the sense of not caring and therefore not wanting to help anyone who is suffering. It's selfishness that doesn't care about the suffering of others and doesn't want to help, while perfect equanimity is possible only for someone who is selfless. This equanimity can help to the maximum of his capacity, but doesn't get emotionally involved.
We have an image of a kind of psychopath that can murder someone without feeling a hint of guilt or emotion in relation to that, and so we're scared of turning into robots with no emotion, but the psychopath acts with indifference, not equanimity. He's selfish, so if he has something he wants removed from him, he'll get pissed off. The Buddha is the most compassionate and lovely person in the history of humanity, but you never hear of him getting emotional.  If you're so full of compassion and generosity towards the whole world, if you're totally selfless, then you will be just content in yourself, you don't need some pleasant event from outside to bring you into pleasant emotion, and you don't fall into negative emotion with one word, look, or rainy day. This is the meaning of equanimity as I understand it.

 One of my favourite teachings of the Buddha is when he tells "Even if someone is cutting you into pieces with a two-handled saw, if you have one thought of anger, you are not my student." He doesn't say that one should be aware of the anger, or that the anger is part of the human experience, he says that even in this most extreme situation, anger is not acceptable.

From my own experience, I can say that learning this practice of dropping the emotion in the present moment as I see it being born has helped me A LOT to be a better person. Let's say I have some problem that normally would cause me great anxiety and stress. Instead of carrying around anxiety, insecurity or stress all day long and constantly having to fight with it, I just drop it right away; then I'm light, and I can look at the problem and see if there is anything I can do about it - if not, I just continue and live with it; and if there is something I can do, I calculate what is the best solution, and do it.

I also never realised how much energy emotions demand; and when you are removing them, you have so much more energy. But as I said I'm far from being able to do it perfectly and all the time, this is the work of my life!  I thought that this was what meditation was for, actually; at least this was the meditation I learned. Do no others do this?

A psychopath is not a person without any emotions. It's their emotions that make them to act. This may be anger or craving for example.
Otherwise, i agree with you and i think wanting to remove negative emotions is legitimate.
The problem is that they appear, even if we don't want it. Being able to drop them is a good thing. The question is, why are you able to drop some and not to drop some else?
What happens when you feel anger and what happens when you feel anxiety ? You feel anger, and then you say "huh, that's it again" and you drop it very easily because it seems useless and counterproductive. But what about anxiety or doubt for example. Are they really counterproductive in your mind? When you see them, don't you give them a certain legitimity.
I guess some emotions are more linked to survival instinct, to death of oneself or someone we love (or something). It is probably more difficult to drop this type of emotions because it means to accept death, loss, which is not beautiful in the world. It is more easy to drop anger which is not beautiful too.
So, as we don't give any importance to those emotions, they continue to arise because at a subconscious level we give them a great importance and we react to them.
The only solution is to consciously accept and let those emotions arise and develop inside, while it is very unpleasant. It is the only way to drop them because your subconscious level doesn't accept them. It is necessary and overall unavoidable to go through unpleasant emotions without giving them energy with which they will last longer and come back later. To avoid giving them energy, OBSERVE it with a complete acceptation of it. You have to enter inside cold water and stay here seeing finally it is only a sensation, it is not so dangerous. You don't give it energy, it will pass and probably come back later in a weaker version.

[eva hermit]

I agree that a psychopath is not someone without emotions. I have the impression that some people are afraid of the idea of not having negative emotions, perhaps partly because they think that removing emotion means you end up cold and feeling no sympathy; that was why I used the example. It is true that the psychopath is far from being without emotion - he might be able to kill somebody without feeling sympathy or remorse, but in all his life he's driven by emotion like everyone else. Thank you for emphasising that point.

One point I probably should clarify is that dropping emotions has nothing to do with "controlling them". As you say, observation is the key - and thank you also for bringing this point! - the magic is that when you correctly observe the emotion inside, it drops by itself and is really gone - not the same as suppressing an emotion that you don't want but keeping it there under the surface. I wrote an article about this difference on a blog I write for, if anyone is interested in reading more on this topic: https://believeinwhatyousee.com/2019/08/17/the-difference-between-control-and-observation/

It's an interesting point you bring regarding some emotions seeming more "legitimate" than others in the moment. I had come to something like this conclusion too; that the wisdom and faith are not developed enough in order to practice perfect equanimity. I am very clear in my mind that, for example, something like jealousy is useless, unacceptable and immoral, so if ever there is a tiny touch of this I will not keep it as long as even one second; but in the case of things like sadness or anxiety, I'm still trusting the mind when it is saying "There is good reason to feel x, y and z." It means I have not understood deeply enough that all anxiety and sadness are babies of attachment and selfishness and that they are therefore just as useless and unacceptable as jealousy.

Another reason is that jealousy is not a deep-rooted habit of my mind, it is not something that is strong in my character; and therefore not something I would have reason to consider as "that's the way I am" - in other words, I have not made a Self, or an ego with it. But anxiety, yes, insecurity; this was always "me, myself, that's the way I am." It's therefore harder to let go of because it's as if you have to let go of a part of yourself, to kill a part of yourself; however unwanted and ugly it is.

Thank you everyone for your comments! It's very interesting to listen to different perspectives about the practice and what different ways work differently for different people.

[Middleway]

I agree that a psychopath is not someone without emotions. I have the impression that some people are afraid of the idea of not having negative emotions, perhaps partly because they think that removing emotion means you end up cold and feeling no sympathy; that was why I used the example. It is true that the psychopath is far from being without emotion - he might be able to kill somebody without feeling sympathy or remorse, but in all his life he's driven by emotion like everyone else. Thank you for emphasising that point.

One point I probably should clarify is that dropping emotions has nothing to do with "controlling them". As you say, observation is the key - and thank you also for bringing this point! - the magic is that when you correctly observe the emotion inside, it drops by itself and is really gone - not the same as suppressing an emotion that you don't want but keeping it there under the surface. I wrote an article about this difference on a blog I write for, if anyone is interested in reading more on this topic: https://believeinwhatyousee.com/2019/08/17/the-difference-between-control-and-observation/

It's an interesting point you bring regarding some emotions seeming more "legitimate" than others in the moment. I had come to something like this conclusion too; that the wisdom and faith are not developed enough in order to practice perfect equanimity. I am very clear in my mind that, for example, something like jealousy is useless, unacceptable and immoral, so if ever there is a tiny touch of this I will not keep it as long as even one second; but in the case of things like sadness or anxiety, I'm still trusting the mind when it is saying "There is good reason to feel x, y and z." It means I have not understood deeply enough that all anxiety and sadness are babies of attachment and selfishness and that they are therefore just as useless and unacceptable as jealousy.

Another reason is that jealousy is not a deep-rooted habit of my mind, it is not something that is strong in my character; and therefore not something I would have reason to consider as "that's the way I am" - in other words, I have not made a Self, or an ego with it. But anxiety, yes, insecurity; this was always "me, myself, that's the way I am." It's therefore harder to let go of because it's as if you have to let go of a part of yourself, to kill a part of yourself; however unwanted and ugly it is.

Thank you everyone for your comments! It's very interesting to listen to different perspectives about the practice and what different ways work differently for different people.

I sincerely suggest you take a break from writing blogs and asking others to read your blogs. It will not help you. Rather, it traps you in thinking and traps you in words. Use the freed time sitting more on the cushion. All you have to do is keep your mind unoccupied. Try it and see how fast the insights will rush in.

[eva hermit]

Middleway Thank you. I ask pardon to all on the forum if this was an inappropriate thing to say or suggest; I am new to the forum and though I read the rules carefully, perhaps there was something I missed or misunderstood. The aim in sharing it was to share a more in depth discussion of a topic I find both interesting and useful, which I thought might be the same for others. Honestly, from the heart (and I don't lie, I am very strict in practicing five precepts!)-  I do not care about having more readers for the blog; which is not "my" blog, it is the teachings of a monk which I put in writing at his request. If it is not useful, please DO NOT READ!
I appreciate your advice. I will follow it as far as spending more time meditating goes, and I will not mention again what I write on this page if that is inappropriate and unwelcome. I cannot completely stop writing, on the other hand, as it is sort of my job; and I am happy to do it. It has been useful for me in developing my understanding and I have not found personally that it is a hindrance, at least not at the point I am at in the practice, which is not very advanced; as you can see I lack a lot of wisdom!  I agree absolutely though that although right understanding is important, one should not get trapped in thinking and words. Reality has no name.

[stillpointdancer]

Middleway Thank you. I ask pardon to all on the forum if this was an inappropriate thing to say or suggest; I am new to the forum and though I read the rules carefully, perhaps there was something I missed or misunderstood. The aim in sharing it was to share a more in depth discussion of a topic I find both interesting and useful, which I thought might be the same for others. Honestly, from the heart (and I don't lie, I am very strict in practicing five precepts!)-  I do not care about having more readers for the blog; which is not "my" blog, it is the teachings of a monk which I put in writing at his request. If it is not useful, please DO NOT READ!
I appreciate your advice. I will follow it as far as spending more time meditating goes, and I will not mention again what I write on this page if that is inappropriate and unwelcome. I cannot completely stop writing, on the other hand, as it is sort of my job; and I am happy to do it. It has been useful for me in developing my understanding and I have not found personally that it is a hindrance, at least not at the point I am at in the practice, which is not very advanced; as you can see I lack a lot of wisdom!  I agree absolutely though that although right understanding is important, one should not get trapped in thinking and words. Reality has no name.

I think balance is the key. Balancing your own practice, sat with your own mind month after month and year after year, and continually checking with others, who maybe lived many years ago in another place and culture, understanding your own experiences in the light of those others. Of course you couldn't possibly do that if they, or someone close to them, had not written about them. Personally I am all for sharing experiences and understandings.

[Middleway]

Middleway Thank you. I ask pardon to all on the forum if this was an inappropriate thing to say or suggest; I am new to the forum and though I read the rules carefully, perhaps there was something I missed or misunderstood. The aim in sharing it was to share a more in depth discussion of a topic I find both interesting and useful, which I thought might be the same for others. Honestly, from the heart (and I don't lie, I am very strict in practicing five precepts!)-  I do not care about having more readers for the blog; which is not "my" blog, it is the teachings of a monk which I put in writing at his request. If it is not useful, please DO NOT READ!
I appreciate your advice. I will follow it as far as spending more time meditating goes, and I will not mention again what I write on this page if that is inappropriate and unwelcome. I cannot completely stop writing, on the other hand, as it is sort of my job; and I am happy to do it. It has been useful for me in developing my understanding and I have not found personally that it is a hindrance, at least not at the point I am at in the practice, which is not very advanced; as you can see I lack a lot of wisdom!  I agree absolutely though that although right understanding is important, one should not get trapped in thinking and words. Reality has no name.

No worries. Here is that clause from the agreement.

13) You agree, through your use of this forum, to not to resort to any self-promotion (posting the link to your websites, blogs etc) either in your profile or in the forum. If you feel that a particular content from your website/blog is relevant to a discussion in any thread, you may post that content only, NOT the link to your website. If there is any other particular need to post any links, please reach out to the forum staff first to clarify the reason and get their permission to do so. Please note that the forum staff reserves the right to accept or deny such requests.