The two extremes of life

ive been thinking really hard, what is the way i should be, the optimal me?

its a really hard question, and no matter what approach i take, i always seem to fail..

ill tell you why.

basically, i would say theres two sides of coin to life, that play part in our lies from the start to end.

one is the happy side, charm, happiness, expressivity and superficialty, outwardness focus.
the other is understanding of the self, pain, suffering, emotionality, inwardness focus.

so in short, inwardness and outwardness.

the problem seems, it doesnt matter which you choose, things end bad anyways.

for me personally: when i focus on inwardness, im truly one with myself, i understand the reality, but i dont enjoy anything, i wont see a reason to socialize, it doesnt serve a purpose. but at least i experience reality vividly.. lols (even though its very dark..)

while on the other opposite, i become very charming, im extremely expressive, i even enjoy exhanging superficialties with a smile on my face unlike in the other state, im just grumpy with the attitude "whats the point!" in this state there is no negativity, only pleasure, but on downside.. its so shallow, superficial, fake....... it _seems_ to satisfy me but its ultimately repetitive and superficial. on this state im also very focused on my goals, i work alot to make myself more skillful, but i _never_ get to the step two because i know i wouldnt get to the step three so whats the point of moving further from acquiring the skills?

i can remember, before i got the idea that im ugly, as a child, before that i was very charming and experienced everything deeply, but then there came some scars into the other side of coin so i lived majority of childhood under the inwarding side of the coin. now ive spent some years on the outwardness side and at one point, i realized i had completely forgotten who i even was, so i recognized its time for inwardness.

now im around 75% outward, 25% inward. i wonder if its even possible to reach that ideal perfection when you have both balanced, but what do you fellows think about this theory?

i think buddhism covers the same idea with the outwardness being "loving" and inwardness being "logic" or something like that, but i never got into it because the terms are just misleading and psychologically incorrect, but now that ive came up with a similar theory, i realize im not the first indeed. and i dont think the outwardness is any more loving than inwardness, just cause it shows it more readily. i think this doesnt really have anything to do with morality at all.

but yeah, what do you think about this all, and how is/has it been for you?

It's an interesting theory, but I think maybe you're missing some pieces.

Being extroverted and socializing with others doesn't have to be superficial. If you're truly interested in what others have to say then it can become very deep and meaningful. Like spending time with a good friend. You're not smiling to show face, you're smiling because you genuinely enjoy their company.

Of course, that usually starts with the self. If you're unhappy with yourself, it's hard to be happy with another. I think maybe if you spend more time "re-educating" yourself about the important things might help. You learned the idea of ugly, but that doesn't make it true.

There are many ideas we cling to throughout life that are completely false...like I sometimes feel like I'm not good enough, but it's just a silly fearful thought. I cling to it and it hampers my progress when in fact it's not true. It becomes an excuse not to do things. "Don't go on the river raft trip, you're not good enough." It's a stupid thought that keeps me "safe" because when you don't try you can't fail. The trick is to notice the lies and replace them with a truth. "Yes, I'll go on the trip because it will be fun. I am good enough."

But yeah, I think that balance is within reach. Anyone can attain.

Well, firstly you're not the only one with identity issues including "who am I, could I be better that what I am?", I have this complicated issue sometimes too.
Secondly, I'm not great at expressing myself so apologies in advance
You wrote

"basically, i would say theres two sides of coin to life, that play part in our lies from the start to end.
one is the happy side, charm, happiness, expressivity and superficialty, outwardness focus.
the other is understanding of the self, pain, suffering, emotionality, inwardness focus."

To be blunt, and I mean no offence, I disagree. I don't believe the happy side includes all those things such as charm etc and neither does understanding of the self include all the other things like pain and suffering.
I strongly disagree with the idea of "happy side" including superficiality, because that seems to me not happiness. Or at least, it would make me unhappy to think my happiness was continually superficial (Then again we could get into that debate of, what is superficial and real? Can we ever know reality? Is my reality the same as yours?)
It partly reminds me of something Wescli posted here sometime- http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/Jediism/103806-levels-of-hppiness
Read it first before continuing sorry (as I'm going to use it a little)! Is level 1 and 2 what you feel more as superficial happiness? I'd argue that they still are real whether or not they last. Just enjoy the moment when it comes, be present!

For me, when I focus on 'inwardness', unlike you, I'm not truly one with myself, I don't understand myself, and like you I don't enjoy much of anything. Perhaps this is due to my belief I know so very little, and even the things I feel I know, I can't accept that I really know it. I might argue with myself that this difference between us is perhaps because your "I" is bigger than mine which is to say when I say I, I mean my ego, which believes it's separate from and fighting the world. Alan Watts suggests (at least I think he does) that we're not so separate from the world. We're not fighting it, because we're part of it. That gives me some small relief somehow. But what is your 'inwardness' sorry? Are you thinking of only yourself as in your body, or are you thinking of yourself as the entire universe? Generally, when I do the former, I feel down, but when I do the latter, I feel in awe of the universe, not proud or sad despite how wonderful and terrible life can be, but rather it's incredible, slightly beyond words. I hope I'm coherent and understandable sorry.

You wrote,

now im around 75% outward, 25% inward. i wonder if its even possible to reach that ideal perfection when you have both balanced, but what do you fellows think about this theory?

Simply, I don't believe in perfection of anything, although different people have different balances for which they're 'happy'. I think most of these people aren't trying to attain 'enlightenment' or perfection whether other people think they have it or not, they're just happy with who they are and their idea of the world. And I don't believe these people are happy all the time, they have their problems too...

Basically, I'm not sure what to say to you hence my ranting (or so it feels). So i'll say something someone else said to me which I like-
Everything changes.
Life is (a paradox) full of paradoxes.
Have a sense of humour, especially about yourself.

Anyway, I hope you find your answer to your beginning question and hope you are having a nice day,
Vusuki

"Happiness is the absence of the striving for happiness." ~ Chuang-Tzu

"All existing things are really one. We regard those that are beautiful and rare as valuable, and those that are ugly as foul and rotten The foul and rotten may come to be transformed into what is rare and valuable, and the rare and valuable into what is foul and rotten." ~ Chuang-Tzu

Tao Te Ching 80

If a country is governed wisely,
its inhabitants will be content.
They enjoy the labour of their hands
and don't waste time inventing
labour-saving machines.
Since they dearly love their homes,
they aren't interested in travel.
There may be a few wagons and boats,
but these don't go anywhere.
There may be an arsenal of weapons,
but nobody ever uses them.
People enjoy their food,
take pleasure in being with their families,
spend weekends working in their gardens,
delight in the doings of the neighbourhood.
And even though the next country is so close
that people can hear its roosters crowing and its dogs barking,
they are content to die of old age
without ever having gone to see it.

(Consider the governing of a country alike unto the governing of oneself ...)

Have you ever spent a half an hour looking for your glasses, keys or just whatever ... only to realise you were holding them the whole time ? Or, like Dorothy in "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz", who had from the very beginning of her adventure the capability of "going home" by virtue of the silver slippers, yet needed to learn the lessons along the yellow-brick road before fully understanding what "home" meant to her.

Enlightenment. Do we have to search for it ? Do we really need to make it into some mathematically quantifiable ratio ? And if we could just click our heels and make a wish, would we know we were enlightened ? What do we do after we've "found" our enlightenment ?

Sometimes we put a lot of effort into our charming superficiality ... that may make for a moment of mirth, but not necessarily "happiness". We also have a tendency to put a lot of effort into our misery, our boredom, our anxieties &c. The search for what we think of as enlightenment and happiness is effectively a variation of the "White must Win" (Watts) which is categorically false. Happiness, like enlightenment, are not worth pursuing.

"I know the joy of fishes in the river through my own joy, as I go walking along the same river." ~ Chuang-Tzu

Vusuki wrote: Well, firstly you're not the only one with identity issues including "who am I, could I be better that what I am?", I have this complicated issue sometimes too.
Secondly, I'm not great at expressing myself so apologies in advance
You wrote

"basically, i would say theres two sides of coin to life, that play part in our lies from the start to end.
one is the happy side, charm, happiness, expressivity and superficialty, outwardness focus.
the other is understanding of the self, pain, suffering, emotionality, inwardness focus."

To be blunt, and I mean no offence, I disagree. I don't believe the happy side includes all those things such as charm etc and neither does understanding of the self include all the other things like pain and suffering.
I strongly disagree with the idea of "happy side" including superficiality, because that seems to me not happiness. Or at least, it would make me unhappy to think my happiness was continually superficial (Then again we could get into that debate of, what is superficial and real? Can we ever know reality? Is my reality the same as yours?)
It partly reminds me of something Wescli posted here sometime- http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/Jediism/103806-levels-of-hppiness
Read it first before continuing sorry (as I'm going to use it a little)! Is level 1 and 2 what you feel more as superficial happiness? I'd argue that they still are real whether or not they last. Just enjoy the moment when it comes, be present!

For me, when I focus on 'inwardness', unlike you, I'm not truly one with myself, I don't understand myself, and like you I don't enjoy much of anything. Perhaps this is due to my belief I know so very little, and even the things I feel I know, I can't accept that I really know it. I might argue with myself that this difference between us is perhaps because your "I" is bigger than mine which is to say when I say I, I mean my ego, which believes it's separate from and fighting the world. Alan Watts suggests (at least I think he does) that we're not so separate from the world. We're not fighting it, because we're part of it. That gives me some small relief somehow.

You wrote,

now im around 75% outward, 25% inward. i wonder if its even possible to reach that ideal perfection when you have both balanced, but what do you fellows think about this theory?

Simply, I don't believe in perfection of anything, although different people have different balances for which they're 'happy'. I think most of these people aren't trying to attain 'enlightenment' or perfection whether other people think they have it or not, they're just happy with who they are and their idea of the world. And I don't believe these people are happy all the time, they have their problems too...


Anyway, I hope you find your answer to your beginning question and hope you are having a nice day,
Vusuki

"But what is your 'inwardness' sorry? Are you thinking of only yourself as in your body, or are you thinking of yourself as the entire universe? Generally, when I do the former, I feel down, but when I do the latter, I feel in awe of the universe, not proud or sad despite how wonderful and terrible life can be, but rather it's incredible, slightly beyond words. I hope I'm coherent and understandable sorry."

i think i have a natural desire for one grand inspiration that unites all of my understanding, its called many things.. here commonly the force. i prefer to call it the grand origin, origin of everything, like big bang, we are all the same, we are all connected and inseperable. and then one of the longest lasting names ive called it is "intelligence", think of it like einstein type of intelligence, not the corrupt atheist "intelligence". it has been a big issue for me, how can i be inspired by something which can corrupt so much when done wrong? (but basically i think, when im intelligent enough, i gain confidence in myself and i become invincible, because misunderstandings dont exist to corrupt me anymore. i can see that theres truth to everyone, and i wont have to fear what they say cause i understand it all in depth. cause i have that one thing which unites it all, intelligence.)

and i was implying that without the inwardness, the outwardness is superficial, makes sense, ya know?

i think of inwardness as simpy accepting whatever is inside you, sure.. you can be wrong on many things, but _cant_ be wrong about what you see in there if youre truly honest. i also think of the outwardness as a desire for change to the positive, as without it the inwardness is stuck feeling crap, no motivation to make things better.

"
Basically, I'm not sure what to say to you hence my ranting (or so it feels). So i'll say something someone else said to me which I like-
Everything changes.
Life is (a paradox) full of paradoxes.
Have a sense of humour, especially about yourself."

i think that interestingly leads back to my intelligence thing: paradoxes dont exist, (paradox = misunderstanding) and when one is truly intelligent, he can see it all working together.

from a thing einstein said, that if theres a god, its not one that cares for human affairs but rather exists in everything, so i conclude by that he was speaking about the same thing as i when i speak of intelligence, or when we speak of the force. so i guess theres a lot similarity in my way of thinking with his, and i believe people should strive for the positive intelligence like i.

It's Yin and Yang, my friend.

They exist in all corners of the universe. As for in human behavior, I've learned that when making decisions, the Taoist way is to "take the middle path".

It seems that's what you're striving for, but in my personal experience I have to pause before I make a choice when I can either go completely Yin or completely Yang, and I find the middle path, the compromise, in other words.

Streen wrote: It's Yin and Yang, my friend.

They exist in all corners of the universe. As for in human behavior, I've learned that when making decisions, the Taoist way is to "take the middle path".

It seems that's what you're striving for, but in my personal experience I have to pause before I make a choice when I can either go completely Yin or completely Yang, and I find the middle path, the compromise, in other words.

if its yin and yang, where are the dots of the other element in each element? i dont see it, to me in experience, it has been so that ive been able to be completely just one side without the other, on both sides.

i think the way to middle is through wisdom, and the way to wisdom is by high intelligence. so if you follow the virtue of intelligence, it will inevitably lead to wisdom.

i think the way to middle is through wisdom, and the way to wisdom is by high intelligence. so if you follow the virtue of intelligence, it will inevitably lead to wisdom.

Yes it is but not by intelligence alone. I think we need to accept that there are many ways to learn. Wisdom is elusive and a by product of learning not a dileberate goal. It happens when it happens. Can't push a string.

Ying Yang? It's just a drawing.

Excuse a very late reply Vilku, I did mean to reply at some point to you, but must have forgotten, my apologies.
You wrote "i think that interestingly leads back to my intelligence thing: paradoxes dont exist, (paradox = misunderstanding) and when one is truly intelligent, he can see it all working together."

I don't mean to try and put you down but I'd like to ask whether you believe it is actually possible to be truly 'intelligent' (and see it all working together)? Perhaps I'm confusing words here but it sounds like you'd like to be omniscient and know everything? I could ask in reply, are you sure it isn't all working together but perhaps we'll never be the ones to see that from our tiny points of view? Not sure we can ever completely deny ourselves (and therefore our tiny points of view) but who knows? Perhaps...