These ought to be just footnotes to what is really important right now, which is to grasp and understand the depths of your own self, or to grasp and understand the depths of your own experience of reality, the two being one whole truth in experience, but alas, apparently divided and contradictory realities in language and thought.  For many, however, these issues are not so much footnotes as the necessary a footbridge to that very problem, because worry and the illusory struggle for control over your reality lies between you and  a full understanding, thus a full possession, of either yourself, your life or your reality…

*

What you seek to control in your life is controlling your life. Haven’t you noticed that?

*

Worry and try to control…I’d be lying if I said these are tendencies I struggle against. They aren’t. I have learned that it is never, never useful or liberating to worry, and such an insight saves me a vast amount of inner tension and energy. If you can secure this truth for yourself – and the truth demands not just the mental understanding but the experience which affirms it – then worry can begin to fall away: never will you solve the problem of worry if you think the problem is outside of yourself which the worrier always does.

*

What do you actually control? Do you control the texture, temperature, duration of your experience or your body or your life?Do you control your fine movements? Do you control even a significant portion of the minutia of experience? What do you really control but for the yes or the no, reaction or else the non-reaction? You control nothing but your non-reacting to the world, let me tell you that much for sure.

*

Just some more observations here. I am trying to describe unitive realities in a language of duality, so aspects may sound contradictory: alas, our language cannot well express a reality that is A and B at the same time: well ours is A (objective), B (subjective), C (quantum field or spiritual/energetic), three different ways of looking at the one fundamental reality. I am seeking a language which bridges subjectivity and objecivity, and the term I use for this emphasis is ‘psychosocial’. I ought to flesh these out and try and bring more clarity to this but finding it impossible to edit or read my own work at the moment…

What is an emotion? Emotions are neither personal or impersonal until we make them so. An emotion is wordless, but the ways we label them, judge and personalize them are social and endless. Emotions are psychosocial energetic manifestations of unresolved, inner systemic tensions, but if you can be emotionally free thus not fear them, you can see they are also a language: and if you can master them, they can become a radical, productive power in themselves. However, emotions are far more usually in bondage to the idea, to the norm, to what other people think, thus keeping us wedded to the emptiness of non-being. Why? Because emotions are socially and historically enslaved beingness. They relate to human evolutionary-historical work – it is what produces and then churns the world. It’s what in the East they call karma. It’s what I see as part of a social-historical emotional structure and structuring force of life.