Hi Rafael,
When you say:
The only thing I can control is my reaction to my emotions.
I just would ask, if we already saw that there is no "I", what exactly is that which claims control over the emotions?
True. If there's no "I" then there's no "I" to control emotions. But then what's the reaction to emotions? For example,"I" am driving and another person cuts me off on the road and then "I" have a fit of road rage. If there is no "me", my anger doesn't stem from "me", the construct & personal identity of V; my anger stems from my brain interpreting the situation as a stressor and the emotion of "anger" pops up as a response, right? If "I" get out of the car and start to argue with the person, my neurons are telling my muscles to get up and they are telling my vocal chords to shout at the person? I'm just a bunch of cells with bacteria & viruses reacting to the environment? I just have a conscious to be aware of my own existence as a whole but not can't fantom its parts?
This is still hard to swallow. I feel like I get it on an intellectual level but it's hard to understand on a deeper level. I'm slowly getting there but I have many old habits. I'm still attached to the idea of "me" as a person because I'm getting something out of it. "To be Special", "To be an Individual" "To be different": those are the ideologies that are valued in my society.
It took over 20 years of identifying with "me" so I guess it will take time to breakdown the construct down.
I also feel so limited with the English language to express what I want to say without referring to an "I" or "me". It's so ingrain in language.