To what extent can ownership of a problem contribute to the solution? And why do we 'avoid'?

ANSWER by Mr P: "When a situation arises which causes ‘concern’ or anxiety, it is a customary default behaviour to distance oneself from the subject of discomfort. This is a natural and ‘obvious’ reaction. But what is not so useful, is to resist elimination of the threat.

Now the aspect of ‘threat’ which one most naturally refers, or is drawn, to is that of physical threat. By learning to understand what causes physical possibilities of danger, one judges what works within boundaries. By learning that to fall hurts, one avoids the act of falling - and by grading the level of risk, one learns to take calculated estimations of impact.

But what of emotional and mental risk of danger? How does one assess how we might be ‘punished’ by the elements of falling off an emotional or mentally-aware cliff? How to avoid the jaws of the emotional tiger? And so, how does one navigate a terrain one cannot see?

A ‘problem’ is not a problem if there is no risk. Risk brings anxiety. At the source of all anxiety is perception of a problem, and this problem will only be emotional. No other reason.

Navigating the emotional terrain between intention and outcome is the journey man takes during his or her physical-spiritual lifetime. I refer to the combination of physical and spiritual existence, for it is in the combination man experiences ‘feeling’. Without spirit coursing his veins, man would not have access to reason or the act of ‘reasoning’. In his internal reasoning he justifies and quantifies his actions (and it must be remembered all ‘non-action’ is also a statement of action). By creating meaning he, or she, evokes emotion. And the more ‘spiritual’ the reasoning, the greater the dimension of reason to be enjoyed.

But at the root of all emotion lies intention…and outcome. One may, for instance, intend to share words of comfort, but only cry tears of desperation, or intend to ‘stand up’ for oneself, but cower helplessly alone. These are just two examples of disparity between one’s intention and what arises. The ‘in-between’ is the emotion which ‘gets between’ the desire and the fulfilment. For in the absence of fulfilment, discord is created and perception of ‘risk’ ensues.

‘Risk’ as an energy is the by-product of not feeling able to create outcome without emotion arising in the process. It is the perception of forthcoming unwanted emotion which stops man moving forward, and the emotion becomes the obstacle.  But since emotion is ‘his’, or ‘hers’, by turning away, by avoiding, the emotion becomes ‘of’ one and created ‘by’ one. Slowly man begins to avoid himself – the risk now being intense disconnection and loneliness of spirit.

Ownership of the risk – the individually perceived emotional risk – is how solutions are created. In truth one can only own one’s own emotions – no-one else can – and by using the emotions and mental awareness as barometers of comfort, one begins to ‘see in the dark’. As the emotions are addressed, heard, and dispelled, outcome comes forth to meet intention. In the absence of emotion, solutions, fulfilment and creativity abound.

But what of this notion of an emotion-less world? Surely not to be desired, you might ask? Well, this is where it gets interesting…for in not ‘avoiding’ emotion, one can begin to ‘feel’ and experience it; to, whilst it passes and offers navigation, ‘enjoy’ its offering…and then to let it go, with freedom and availability for the next moment, and the next, and the next…

Using one’s emotions, one’s perceptions of risk and one’s fears of ‘disturbance’ to enhance ones clarity and vision enables solution, yes - but more excitingly, it enables the flood of alternative and unrestrained emotions perhaps not yet enjoyed to their fullest…the emotion of joy, beauty, resonance and freewill. For in the freedom from risk, one enjoys the pleasure of partaking."