A Life-Changing Insight Into Listening

[Jordan of the Shire]

On 2/21/2026 at 2:03 PM, UnbornTao said:

It's your job to have it - whatever it turns out to be.

For one week, contemplate what listening is and what it requires.

Try to set aside your own baggage - especially what you think you already 'know' - and question what this act really is.

Other related questions:

• What is the act of paying attention?
• Why am I listening (hearing or reading) to this communication - or manipulation?
• What am I trying to get out of it?
• How can I step out of my own intellectual world so that I can better hear?
• Where is this person coming from, and what is their experience?

Or simply: What is actually going on in the other person's experience?

 

/\

Edited March 7 by Jordan of the Shire
I got involved in commenting on the thread contents and felt, afterwards, that pointing out irony has its own internal intention which i felt was better to let go.

[UnbornTao]

Just now, Jordan of the Shire said:

this is an amusing thread

you offer an exercise which involves listening, contemplating the origin of it, where it comes from, and contemplating ones own layers...

then theory, conceptualization, and argument ensues.

hahaha

just listen. notice where listening starts.... haha, is a difficult instruction

something about the mind.... grabs onto to things

to me, this is literally a somatic practice that doesn't involve thought. just noticing and awareness.

Cant think your way to understanding this one.. perhaps i'm wrong..

 

but will consider this Unborn, /\

Sounds good. Share what you find. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

Of course. I'm not sure how to explain why I feel certain about this. Emotions themselves are manipulations and can be uncreated, difficult as that may be.

Imagine someone is conveying an experience with no emotions - now that's a contemplation.

Feelings are a different matter. You need to be sensitive (receptive) to them.

I disagree entirely. It is hubris to me to think we can listen and be severed from emotion. There is awareness of them, which can lead to spaciousness. And they are generated by us. This does not mean there is control.

C'est la vie 

[UnbornTao]

1 minute ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I disagree entirely. It is hubris to me to think we can listen and be severed from emotion. There is awareness of them, which can lead to spaciousness. And they are generated by us. This does not mean there is control.

C'est la vie 

Not severed - just not generated or considered, irrelevant or secondary - unless someone else is processing them. Severed implies that something inherent or necessary is being removed.

Think about what good actors do in their roles. They deliberately create them on the spot as the character demands. The great ones have mastered their emotional dispositions in their craft.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@UnbornTao there can only be clarity when you understand and perceive them. Anything else is self deception.

You can have distance from them, but we do not have ultimate control. 

If we aren't aware of them, we simply arent interocepting. They are outside our consciousness. So to think they are absent for this reason is something to be wary of.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Anyway, a conversation for some other topic.

[UnbornTao]

15 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@UnbornTao there can only be clarity when you understand and perceive them. Anything else is self deception.

You can have distance from them, but we do not have ultimate control. 

If we aren't aware of them, we simply arent interocepting. They are outside our consciousness. So to think they are absent for this reason is something to be wary of.

What do you think generating them means? It's exactly what it sounds like.

I'm not proposing ignoring them if they are, in fact, experienced. Just as they are generated, they can also not be generated in the first place - or be changed at will. Again, I'm not saying this is necessarily easy. But where would they come from? Or who do you think they come from?

Notice that, relative to an emotion not felt now, there is nothing being generated - obviously. Track their origin and learn to control them like an actor. It's already the case, just unconscious. And they're not necessary, fundamentally. 

Edited March 7 by UnbornTao

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@UnbornTao creation only guarantees origin. Not authority over outcomes. 

Emotions are partly automatic. They can also be generated indirectly. 

Control in this case typically means regulation, not creation. Emotions are generally feedback signals about our internal state. 

Notice it, observe the emotion. Do not identify with it. Let it pass. This will assist bringing clarity to the listening experience (to make this topic relevant). 

You aren't going to ever completely control this process. 

Edited March 7 by Natasha Tori Maru

[UnbornTao]

9 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@UnbornTao creation only guarantees origin. Not authority over outcomes. 

Emotions are partly automatic. They can also be generated indirectly. 

Control in this case typically means regulation, not creation. Emotions are generally feedback signals about our internal state. 

Notice it, observe the emotion. Do not identify with it. Let it pass. This will assist bringing clarity to the listening experience (to make this topic relevant). 

You aren't going to ever completely control this process. 

There's of course a lot of value in noticing and observing, though I'm not sure what you mean by 'indirect' here.

This is why our spreading beliefs like "it's invented" doesn't provide us with any real understanding of the matter - unless and until it is seen for what it is, which is the tricky part. Even though you acknowledged the origin above, what follows sounds contradictory - as if you were both at the source and yet treating emotions as a third party outside the willful domain. It happens, and my choice is to deal with it, such as by letting it pass and by not identifying with it. The implication is that they simply occur, or exist outside of you, like the weather.

It's not about control but about what you're doing, consciously or not.

Think of it like choosing what clothes to wear: picking up a piece and wearing it (regulation) happens because of the first choice. And it's something continuous whenever it's being experienced. This may not be as straightforward as with our own emotions, but the good news is that we aren't at the receiving end of this process but are the main agent, whether we recognize it or not.

Great actors work according to this principle. They go beyond mimicking an expression and don't wait around for "exciting" circumstances or stimuli to create enthusiasm. They actually are sad, angry, intrigued, confused, or depressed, depending on what is required of them. At will. That's their job.

It's also possible for us to relate to emotions this way, moving one step at a time.

For example, try creating enthusiasm now.

Anyway, I lost track of the main topic.

Edited March 7 by UnbornTao

[Natasha Tori Maru]

If you are communicating with another human - there are emotions involved. It is just ignorance if you think this isn't happening.

Emotions are transmitted, received and form part of the communication - as well as words and context.

Edited March 8 by Natasha Tori Maru

[UnbornTao]

On 3/8/2026 at 6:31 AM, Natasha Tori Maru said:

If you are communicating with another human - there are emotions involved. It is just ignorance if you think this isn't happening.

Emotions are transmitted, received and form part of the communication - as well as words and context.

Of course. 

As an exercise, you can also imagine someone communicating an emotionless experience to you, and see that as possible. Just to make space around this topic of emotions. 

It's the experience we're talking about - beyond the expression. It might be that the context and other relevant details are already included in the experience being conveyed. 

Anyway, something to contemplate. 

Edited March 9 by UnbornTao