Sign in to follow this  
Guest

What does it feel like to have feelings?

63 posts in this topic

Guest

I understand human feelings very well but I don't exactly know how they feel personally.

I wish I could feel them like regular people do somethimes or that I could meet someone who can understand how I see and experience life.

Sometimes it hurts inside when I think about it...Not much though its really just a small "Dam" moment then its back to what I do.

How do you experience them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well the hurt is one of them, so you already have a starting point... dont worry about how other people feel, there are lots of people who also dont know how they feel but just are not aware of it. i think it is a very brave thing of you that you admitted to yourself that you feel hurt by not knowing how you feel.

in my experience, when there is hurt, there is not much room for other feelings and emotions to surface until that hurt is acknowledged and felt.

there are other feelings that feel as awful and even worse than hurt, and there are so many feelings that feel so much better, and they all tell you where youre at when you can listen to what they say. but the door to each and every one of the other feelings and emotions is through being with the one youre in at the very moment. try some of the processes you can find on this website, if you want to "get better at feeling" thats exactly the right place for information on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A feeling can be described as an aesthetic imprint we receive from an attachment that we have. It is the opposite of anesthesia or the numbness associated with detachment.

It is like experiencing your essential self as being foreign to your body, as a result of the attachment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
10 hours ago, Lilia said:

well the hurt is one of them, so you already have a starting point... dont worry about how other people feel, there are lots of people who also dont know how they feel but just are not aware of it. i think it is a very brave thing of you that you admitted to yourself that you feel hurt by not knowing how you feel.

in my experience, when there is hurt, there is not much room for other feelings and emotions to surface until that hurt is acknowledged and felt.

there are other feelings that feel as awful and even worse than hurt, and there are so many feelings that feel so much better, and they all tell you where youre at when you can listen to what they say. but the door to each and every one of the other feelings and emotions is through being with the one youre in at the very moment. try some of the processes you can find on this website, if you want to "get better at feeling" thats exactly the right place for information on that

The hurt I spoke of isn't hurt in the sense you would think.  Its the sadness energy I speak of when I say hurt I don't feel any pain in the slightest but I still can recognize the energy thats created by the thought of not being able to feel.  

Its really complicated to explain its like eating candy but not being able to taste it.  I know what I ate or in the case of feelings what vibration that is but I can't feel it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
10 hours ago, Lilia said:

 

 

5 hours ago, CherieJ said:

Yamanu everyone experiences feelings differently. You say you understand the concept of feelings can I ask what sensations to you get when you are in different situations? For example when you see something that frightens you? What are the sensations in your body? Sometimes we don't understand them however try to open yourself to experiencing the sensations in your body. Look at something or someone you love, how does it feel? How does it feel when you hurt yourself? Do you laugh and cry? 

You feel 'hurt' inside when you 'think' you don't feel feelings, however the fact you 'feel hurt' tells me you can 'feel'. 

I don't feel fear or love.  I don't feel happiness or saddness.  I can recognize the vibrations of these energies but as far as saying I'm happy or sad that would never be true.  If I say I'm sad then I mean that the energy I feel at the moment is dense and heavy, not that I feel bad.  If I say I'm happy I just mean that the energy I feel is light and thin.    

Kinda hard to explain.  I don't feel sad or happy or love but I know what the energies that those labels attempt to describe feel like. 

I hope that made sense. 

I more want to know how other people experience feelings than try to feel them myself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, Akurabis said:

A feeling can be described as an aesthetic imprint we receive from an attachment that we have. It is the opposite of anesthesia or the numbness associated with detachment.

It is like experiencing your essential self as being foreign to your body, as a result of the attachment.

I don't have any attachments I've tried to gain some before but I just don't feel anything for anything.  Even things I place higher value on I can't seem to care about they are really just prioritized according to how I believe life should be lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand correctly, sadness energy is coming from your attachment to a possible world in which you do feel what other people feel. You are aware of a lacking in that respect, and the contemplation of it can be adequately described as sadness energy.

Because the awareness of your lacking is from a thought attachment, the feeling or pain  is cerebral. To imagine what others feel, imagine the awareness coming from another part of your being. Observing the physical example, pain is simply your body's way of drawing awareness to a particular issue.

How would the heart draw your awareness to a particular issue?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
4 minutes ago, Akurabis said:

If I understand correctly, sadness energy is coming from your attachment to a possible world in which you do feel what other people feel. You are aware of a lacking in that respect, and the contemplation of it can be adequately described as sadness energy.

Because the awareness of your lacking is from a thought attachment, the feeling or pain  is cerebral. To imagine what others feel, imagine the awareness coming from another part of your being. Observing the physical example, pain is simply your body's way of drawing awareness to a particular issue.

How would the heart draw your awareness to a particular issue?

That's the closest anyone's ever gotten to understanding what I mean dude you must be pretty smart. 

I am aware of all issues simultaneously always.  There's never really an issue with me there's just one thing thats bothered me forever...Who I Am

I don't actually want to experience that world because I feel like I was born this way for a reason and if it was to learn to feel those things then I wouldn't understand them but I do.  I'm a Pisces.

I really just want to be around people who can understand where I'm coming from so I have someone to talk to who can respond and doesn't look dumbfounded. Its the feeling alone that gets my energy heavy sometimes cause I don't know anyone else who is like this and that sometimes makes me wish I was like everyone else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 minute ago, Akurabis said:

Ah, "Who am I?" is the greatest question. We should talk about it sometime.

Yes, camaraderie is important, and awfully hard to find.

Do you know how to find out who you are?  I've tried but no matter how many times I make it an intention to dream about it or to have a vision I never have one.  I meditate all day and I feel calm and serene while I do it I'm relaxed I see colors behind my eyelids but I get no results.  You can private message me if u want but I really want to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
17 minutes ago, Akurabis said:
18 minutes ago, Akurabis said:

"I" certainly doesn't - how could something see itself? We use mirrors, of course.

What is not-I?

How about a deeper explanation of your view on this subject

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahahahahokay, okay, puns aside (I can never resist), I'll try to explain my view. Remember that bit about mirrors for later.

I is a problem. Throughout all the problems that you can ever experience, I guarantee you are the common factor. Our personalities are a collection of faults, nothing more.

Ah, but I have betrayed myself. This is ego I am discussing. Let us not attack this straw man and try to really get at the question.

Let's begin with common factors: Is there one or more common factor between all instances where "I" is an actor? Yes, there are two broad factors - my consciousness and the universe. The universe is always a common factor between anything and everything, so let's begin to examine the more rarefied commonality.

Wherever I am, I am conscious. When I am not having any kind of conscious experience (whether dreaming or in meditation), I am not.

Are there any instances of there being (my) conscious experience without my being present? The answer is no. Do "I" have any mechanism or influence on my conscious experience - in other words - am I fundamentally distinct from my conscious experience? If the answer to this question is "no", then I believe we can safely define "I" as being my conscious experience.

If "I" is fundamentally distinct from my conscious experience, then what is it? What is the mechanism by which I may safely draw distinction between the two? I am the one who is doing the conscious experiencing, or the one observing. My conscious experiences shape and affect "I" and vice versa. In this way, we can say that they are distinct.

What about the other common factor, the universe? Certainly it is a logical implication that the universe extends further than our conscious experience of it, so we can say that those two are distinct from each other, but what of the Universe and I?

Is there any instance of the universe being present without "I"? For me, no, but I can conceive of others being present in a universe without me. What about a universe with no "I"s to observe it? Oh, tricky - I cannot. Logically too, it does not make sense, for there to be anything at all, there must be something to experience it (it is a necessary quality of being).*

*This leap is a problem for most people. The mainstream "science" has invested a lot of effort into making sure people can conceive (albeit in a false manner) of a universe existing without observers (cold rocks in space, etc). They say that this is proven, but I can assure you, it is not by observation.

So, the three are closely tied together, and the edges are blurry. One really has to think through it quite a few times.

Observing the general geometry, the observer and it's conscious experience mirror each other, and are both part of the universe, or totality. All this is to say...

"I" is the interior dimension of the universe.

 

Well that's my best stab at it today (and while working my desk job too), I hope it isn't too muddled and inelegant.

Let me link you a paper by David Chalmers about the nature of consciousness, which may work as further reading if interested.

http://consc.net/papers/nature.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
12 minutes ago, Akurabis said:
14 minutes ago, Akurabis said:

Hahahahahokay, okay, puns aside (I can never resist), I'll try to explain my view. Remember that bit about mirrors for later.

I is a problem. Throughout all the problems that you can ever experience, I guarantee you are the common factor. Our personalities are a collection of faults, nothing more.

Ah, but I have betrayed myself. This is ego I am discussing. Let us not attack this straw man and try to really get at the question.

Let's begin with common factors: Is there one or more common factor between all instances where "I" is an actor? Yes, there are two broad factors - my consciousness and the universe. The universe is always a common factor between anything and everything, so let's begin to examine the more rarefied commonality.

Wherever I am, I am conscious. When I am not having any kind of conscious experience (whether dreaming or in meditation), I am not.

Are there any instances of there being (my) conscious experience without my being present? The answer is no. Do "I" have any mechanism or influence on my conscious experience - in other words - am I fundamentally distinct from my conscious experience? If the answer to this question is "no", then I believe we can safely define "I" as being my conscious experience.

If "I" is fundamentally distinct from my conscious experience, then what is it? What is the mechanism by which I may safely draw distinction between the two? I am the one who is doing the conscious experiencing, or the one observing. My conscious experiences shape and affect "I" and vice versa. In this way, we can say that they are distinct.

What about the other common factor, the universe? Certainly it is a logical implication that the universe extends further than our conscious experience of it, so we can say that those two are distinct from each other, but what of the Universe and I?

Is there any instance of the universe being present without "I"? For me, no, but I can conceive of others being present in a universe without me. What about a universe with no "I"s to observe it? Oh, tricky - I cannot. Logically too, it does not make sense, for there to be anything at all, there must be something to experience it (it is a necessary quality of being).*

*This leap is a problem for most people. The mainstream "science" has invested a lot of effort into making sure people can conceive (albeit in a false manner) of a universe existing without observers (cold rocks in space, etc). They say that this is proven, but I can assure you, it is not by observation.

So, the three are closely tied together, and the edges are blurry. One really has to think through it quite a few times.

Observing the general geometry, the observer and it's conscious experience mirror each other, and are both part of the universe, or totality. All this is to say...

"I" is the interior dimension of the universe.

 

Well that's my best stab at it today (and while working my desk job too), I hope it isn't too muddled and inelegant.

Let me link you a paper by David Chalmers about the nature of consciousness, which may work as further reading if interested.

http://consc.net/papers/nature.html

None of that answered my question at all that barely had anything to do with it actually.

Regarding the universe with no I's to observe.  Its necessary for us to remember that the universe Observes and monitors its expansion through the I's.  The I's however are more a mechanism for expansion than observation.  The thought that there must be an I to observe suggests that the observative abilities of the We that the I sprung forth from were inhibited in some way.  

This thought, though sensible at first, truly makes no sense.  Even now as the now seemingly singular I's exist the true I which is We consciously connected, not unconsciously, still has a focal point from which all I's are monitored and this I, the one aware of the totality of the We, would exist to observe even if all other I's were to cease existence by flowing unconsciously back into the We which is Prime I or I Prime.  That is counterproductive however there would be no point in this entire reality if it inevitably would lead to only I Prime being conscious again.

The point of the existence of seemingly singular I's instead of I as We is for all I's to eventually reach the awareness of the first I that sees all, knows all.  That is, the I's would become omnipresent in the We yet still aware of their own existence and able to distinguish between the two without creating separation of Identity.  

As far as the notion that conscious experience shapes/affects I and vice versa.  That is to a very small degree unless one is conscious of the totality of the I to begin with.  All the unconscious must fuse with the conscious for that to survive as pure truth.  That is to say, unless you are aware and conscious of all, then that is 99% false as our singular I is only 1% if we truly give Us the respect that We deserve.  Us being the Totality of I's including I Prime.

This is a fun discussion albeit seemingly pointless.  Though, there is a reason for everything so I'll derive that soon if it was meant to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
27 minutes ago, walt said:

That ouch you feel when you read my critiques of you. That's a feeling.

What I feel when I read what you post is boredom overwhelming boredom.  

Its like reading the bible.  You know its just a bunch of shit thrown together that may mean something but there's definitely a much better more orderly read that wastes far less time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this