"Two alternatives to acceptance occur to me: either (1) repressing this energy by ignoring it, locking it down and using discipline and control to keep it at arms length, or (2) expressing it in a kneejerk, reactive manner that so often seems to leave us worse off but at least lets the energy flow onward. Both paths, turning emotion further inward and turning it further outward, seem to have as their end a desire for finality and resolution, to dislocate the emotion. The urgency of emotion compels us to react in one of these two extreme manners, neither healthy."
There is a third alternative, incorporating both points which you mention at the end that I agree with. For example when doing math and multiplication and division, we're always simplifying the equation in order to have less equation to worry about. So we can see the act of repressing, just one of the many sides of control, while allowing can be one of the many sides of acceptance. Regardless of the actions and the situation itself, it is bringing people to the same point of discomfort. At some point thoughts will go through the reptilian part of our brain concerned with fight or flight, and literally raising our conscious awareness above that, above running away, and above confrontation, but simply being present. Similarly one can allow an emotional without acting on it, but allow the experience of it, to be felt, just as oppositional someone can allow an emotional experience and then totally act on it in an empowered, or disempowered way.
A disempowered individual has further choices and lines of actions, from paranoia, to victim, to bully. The empowered individual can take the same situation, and act in good faith, and see/ manifest/ encode a particular thought of victory. What I'm saying exactly is to allow emotions, but not to let them drive you either.
It's the difference between using and not using tact which I had to learn the hard way, how it can more easily trigger someone rather than getting them to think of the illusory antithetical nature of reality. Which is to say seeing things in black and white, encodes duality and enforces there to be two oppositional sides and two opposites. Unity consciousness would have to entrain a balance of both viewpoints allow, repress into one singular viewpoint, no longer seeing two sides but rather creation in various stages of mixture and cohesion between the two forms of thinking. One is from the heart, and the other is intellect, rationale, the cold logical side of ourselves.
Funny how much we agree when I read your article. It is very well written, and it's the main reason why I am a little miffed at why Wilcock keeps blaming his deep rooted issues on his pot addiction, when really all it did was make his mental catalyst more pronounced for him to face. If speaking words is just one dimension to this multi dimensional reality, then it is these emotions that comprise of a large number of dimensions that are left untouched by manner of intellectualist driven academia and establishment.
Eckert Tolle really was one of the first to really bring forward the notion of being present with yourself to find a transcendental inner peace. I know you don't really follow Wilcock, but something that i found discusses these same things is his contacting your higher self video set. I really recommend this one if you can afford it:
https://divinecosmos.com/amember/cart/in...t/id/54/c/
It's his most hard hitting stuff on the heart of self, and has nothing to do with the stuff he's doing now. I knew about some information before I saw this, like breathing excercises and other visualization techniques, however he really compiles a great deal of stuff in one set of videos.
Tell you what just after I finished LOO, a friend who had this Chihuahua for the 3 years I knew them, it would always bark at me every day and even so much as bite my hand or me if it got the chance. One day I decided to try a thought experiment and to stop giving fear to this dog, instead I just gave love, no matter how much it barking made me feel, I just responded with love. For the first time after 3 years with nothing but being barked at, this very nervous dog that jitters a lot due to it's size, licked my hand for the first time.
I had a very big revelatory experience not understanding why it was that simple, why all I had to do was pay it forward with love, and the rest works itself out. Upon later years I realized it's because in science we say there is heat and an absense of it. We don't see cold as a thing, it's the absence of heat. Therefore there is love, and then there is the absence of love, there is no such thing as fear, and it serves to create further illusion rather than further reality. Dogs just subconsciously incorporate that to their actions and personality, so they bark whenever someone is scared of them, they can feel the fear more intuitively.