Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2018 16:00:39 GMT -5
Googles definition of suffering is "the tendency to derive pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from one's own pain or humiliation." It doesn't imply that the masochist is suffering. I don't see him deriving joy from suffering, just from his own pain and humiliation. He obviously doesn't experience pain and humiliation as suffering, right? Yes, I agree with this. Actually, I think masochism is more a pleasure-from-pain thing than a joy-from-suffering thing, so I'm okay if masochism is taken off the table. Merriam-Webster includes "a taste for suffering" in their definition.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 1, 2018 16:08:59 GMT -5
This is quite an astute observation. So there can never be ~proof~ for the existence of God. Any proof would always be individually subjectively objective. I withdrew my original post because upon rereading it I saw it is as a kind of indirect attack on folks who disagreed with me. I'm not smart enough to get the term "individually subjectively objective." Not astute at all. I have enjoyed your posts on QM. Deleted (you have to delete your copy of my copy).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 1, 2018 16:27:26 GMT -5
To me the poem below explains loss with or without suffering. It helps me see a less narrow understanding. The Dakini Speaks My friends, let’s grow up. Let’s stop pretending we don’t know the deal here. Or if we truly haven’t noticed, let’s wake up and notice. Look: Everything that can be lost, will be lost. It’s simple — how could we have missed it for so long? Let’s grieve our losses fully, like ripe human beings, But please, let’s not be so shocked by them. Let’s not act so betrayed, As though life had broken her secret promise to us. Impermanence is life’s only promise to us, And she keeps it with ruthless impeccability. To a child she seems cruel, but she is only wild, And her compassion exquisitely precise: Brilliantly penetrating, luminous with truth, She strips away the unreal to show us the real. This is the true ride — let’s give ourselves to it! Let’s stop making deals for a safe passage: There isn’t one anyway, and the cost is too high. We are not children anymore. The true human adult gives everything for what cannot be lost. Let’s dance the wild dance of no hope! by Jennifer Welwood Well spoken and quite poignant, and I feel it has a potentially universal appeal, regardless of this divide you made reference to. For me it's evocative of Mckenna's "human adulthood".
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 1, 2018 19:59:22 GMT -5
No. You and Andy haven't been listening to me, and you still aren't. You heard 'let go of the other desire' and you stopped listening and ran with it. well that's one of the central points. Simply, who/what lets it go? I mean, it makes 'rational sense' to 'let it go', and I can see why you consider it to be adult and mature, because functioning in the world we have created sort of requires it. The systems we have created, all require the ability to basically suppress desires, and instead create an illusion of 'deciding' and 'letting go'. If folks didn't do that, a lot would struggle to go to work probably. These folks have to 'commit to their decision' in order to pay the bills. Even folks who generally like their work may not like their work every day, but are still obliged by the rules of the work place to show up. 'Committing to a chocie' is an ability that humans take for granted, but it's an odd thing. It perpetuates the movement behind the illusionary separate self. I'm not really interested in discussing 'the illusion of self' or 'committing to decisions' right now.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:15:31 GMT -5
Surely we can assume that if there is a pill one can take, a plaster we can use, or a mode of action that can alleviate physical suffering for an individual, group, or race, we are likely able to be consciously aware of the cause/effect, however complex it can get. But, that is not really getting to the core of existential suffering, lack of being at one, or being out of alignment with what is. It has been put forth that exploring the deeper questions and becoming ever more conscious of the ways mind moves, contracts, or goes unconscious might increase the chances of the fruit ripening and falling. Awakening to and (hopefully) waking up from that illusionary sense of separation is the turning on of the light needed to see suffering for what it is, and not just its shadows. Carry on. Yeah, that pill comes with a price.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:24:32 GMT -5
The latter is a form or the former, and the way to end it involves removing the conditions upon which it arises. This does get into a bit of a grey area when we take it to extremes, such as, as far as a situation like liberation with life-force remaining, to say the least. But any disagreement there probably won't be about whether such a state is possible, just about what it would entail. Well, I disagree. The undeniable fact is that folks willingly endure all sorts of physical pain, and sometimes, quite joyfully so. Here, I can't resist making this point with a personal story. In my ski bum phase I had the day down to a science, especially at my favorite spot. You see, the name of the game, is, time on the slope. I had the perfect nook in the base lodge picked out for early-afternoon access to hooks so I could hang a shirt to dry, knew exactly what I was gonna have for lunch (no gratuitous fats, no sugars, just enough fluids -- but no more), had an optimized system for what I'd carry on my person, and would pattern my movements around the trail system in such a way as to maximize the chance for as many runs possible. The strategy is to get there as early as you can, take only those breaks that the body absolutely demands, and then literally race the lifts at the end of the day before they'd stop spinning. So one day near the end of my tenure it's late afternoon with less than an hour to go before closing. I have this calculus running in my head that by then was completely intuitive and required no computation: the lift with the greatest vertical took a little less than 10 minutes on the trip, and if I really pushed it I could get back down to the bottom in a little over 5. On this day I was off out on the perimeter of the place, which is quite a sprawl, and I knew it would take some time to get back to the base area. My feet were screaming, both from the confinement of the boots and the cold. My back was stiff from all the banging on the bumps, my inner layer was soaked with perspiration and on the chair, up in the wind, it took less than a minute to turn into clam-city. I was thirsty, tired, hungry, and I needed to take a leak. But I knew that stopping back at the base meant losing at least one run, maybe even two. The time it takes to kick off the ski's and walk into the place was 3 minutes in and of itself -- and that not accounting for the heightened need to lock your gear near the end of the day. There were plenty of days when the timing was just right ... where I'd go back out for that last 3/4 hour all nice and dry, comfs and recharged, and those are good memories too. But not on this day. At the top of the chair, I thought "ah ... the hell with it", started pole-ing like a fiend for the fix, and didn't stop until they roped off the line to the lift. It was glorious. Priceless. And epic. That's the power of focus. With that come enormous resources.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:31:24 GMT -5
I'm not clear if you think biological self awareness begins at 2 and above. Conceptual self identification seems to begin around age two. And that's what we call a person here. (That was for SDP)
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:36:01 GMT -5
If anybody questions whether animals suffer or not, watch the film Buck. (Buck has tremendous empathy with horses because he was physically and emotionally abused by his father when young, great film). And again you want to present film evidence of suffering. You can't watch an animal and know what's going on subjectively, and for the same reason you can't even know if they are experiencing at all. If the context is film evidence, i.e. after the fact, I agree. In a larger context though, i.e. real-time right here right now in the moment, I disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:48:35 GMT -5
I think Tolle's 3 options can get us along a little further in this discussion about suffering. Given that most people are afraid of dying, that leaves them with only 2 options - changing the situation or accepting it. And given that most also don't know how they create their own experiences, that leaves them with practically just 1 option - accepting it. And so, as Thoreau said, most people lead lives of quiet desperation. Now, the animal is not afraid of dying and the same seems to apply to babies. And as A-H and Seth assure us, from the non-physical, there are no regrets if someone should cut out early. That's why I would say even though animals have the capacity to suffer, they rarely do because they have no resistance to the walk away option. They relax into the inevitable and let nature take its course. Choosing is always easy when you are in touch with your inner guidance. But it can border on self-torture when you only have your intellect to rely on. So I would say it's easy to be a human, but not easy to be a person. I basically agree but I would say that even though animals don't have the existential fear, the suffering can be intense and pure in its form because they don't aggravate or add layers of existential fear to the suffering. It's just...suffering. It's not suffering AND mental desperation suffering. And in my words, I would say it is easy to be a human if there is no misidentification and false belief. If we are talking about the subjective kind of suffering then the time factor seems to be all-important. Intense physical pain that only lasts a micro second isn't going to cause suffering. Intense physical pain that last hours or longer certainly does - no matter what your realization status. So if suffering here means intense physical pain over a longer period of time, then I agree.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 20:54:34 GMT -5
Well, I disagree. The undeniable fact is that folks willingly endure all sorts of physical pain, and sometimes, quite joyfully so. Here, I can't resist making this point with a personal story. In my ski bum phase I had the day down to a science, especially at my favorite spot. You see, the name of the game, is, time on the slope. I had the perfect nook in the base lodge picked out for early-afternoon access to hooks so I could hang a shirt to dry, knew exactly what I was gonna have for lunch (no gratuitous fats, no sugars, just enough fluids -- but no more), had an optimized system for what I'd carry on my person, and would pattern my movements around the trail system in such a way as to maximize the chance for as many runs possible. The strategy is to get there as early as you can, take only those breaks that the body absolutely demands, and then literally race the lifts at the end of the day before they'd stop spinning. So one day near the end of my tenure it's late afternoon with less than an hour to go before closing. I have this calculus running in my head that by then was completely intuitive and required no computation: the lift with the greatest vertical took a little less than 10 minutes on the trip, and if I really pushed it I could get back down to the bottom in a little over 5. On this day I was off out on the perimeter of the place, which is quite a sprawl, and I knew it would take some time to get back to the base area. My feet were screaming, both from the confinement of the boots and the cold. My back was stiff from all the banging on the bumps, my inner layer was soaked with perspiration and on the chair, up in the wind, it took less than a minute to turn into clam-city. I was thirsty, tired, hungry, and I needed to take a leak. But I knew that stopping back at the base meant losing at least one run, maybe even two. The time it takes to kick off the ski's and walk into the place was 3 minutes in and of itself -- and that not accounting for the heightened need to lock your gear near the end of the day. There were plenty of days when the timing was just right ... where I'd go back out for that last 3/4 hour all nice and dry, comfs and recharged, and those are good memories too. But not on this day. At the top of the chair, I thought "ah ... the hell with it", started pole-ing like a fiend for the fix, and didn't stop until they roped off the line to the lift. It was glorious. Priceless. And epic. yes, there are a ton of examples of activities that come with a level of suffering, but there is also value, purpose, satisfaction, pleasure and joy in the activity. I can relate to the skiing example. Weight lifting is likely another good example. I used to suffer to an extent when playing rugby, but there was still a level of enjoyment in it. I imagine that a lot of jobs come with suffering, but the pay offs are good (I don't just mean financial pay offs). You can also look at the story Laughter shared in the context of contrast, resistance and relief. The extreme contrast made the relief factor a lot more noticeable (or epic).
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 1, 2018 21:08:31 GMT -5
At any given moment, one can either be suffering or experiencing joy. Not both. Well I disagree. For example, giving birth can likely come with suffering and joy (I can't personally testify though lol). There are lots of examples, but that does seem quite an obvious one. Suffering isn't the bugaboo or bogey man that it is often painted to be. It CAN be (and I can testify that for myself), particularly when it is experienced as being choiceless and without any value. At its worst, suffering is pure hell. At its most mild, it isn't much more than empathizing with someone else's suffering. I mean, our friend gopal says he suffers when he watches Game Of Thrones lol, but he also enjoys it I assume. Yes, good point. The way Laughter told his skiing story, it was a story of pain and not suffering because there was a purpose and a way out. If you take that away, it would be a story of suffering.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 1, 2018 22:24:49 GMT -5
Bunny uses his bunny brain. There's a difference between a sense of self, and mind/body identification. The latter involves a story that forms the basis for psychological suffering. So a bunny uses what's at it's disposal in order to distinguish one thing from another . If what's at it's disposal is a bunny brain, then it still needs to identify others in reflection of how it perceives itself . You say it's rather more a sense of itself rather than an identification of itself . That would infer that it just has a sense of what another bunny is or what a carrot is without identifying that . I can't see how you can separate a sense of yourself in reflection of another bunny without identifying that it's another bunny and not a carrot . A sense of self would be a recognition of self without the complex thought structure that references that self. It's that structure that most animals can't form, and which leads to suffering.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 2, 2018 0:10:39 GMT -5
yes, there are a ton of examples of activities that come with a level of suffering, but there is also value, purpose, satisfaction, pleasure and joy in the activity. I can relate to the skiing example. Weight lifting is likely another good example. I used to suffer to an extent when playing rugby, but there was still a level of enjoyment in it. I imagine that a lot of jobs come with suffering, but the pay offs are good (I don't just mean financial pay offs). Well, the thing is, the pain was intense, but I was oblivious to it, 'cause all I wanted to do was .. GO! There are certainly more dramatic potential examples of this type of scenario, with much more intense pain and a greater gravitas to the motivation. While I know we disagree on this point, there's no way I would describe what it felt like at the time as suffering. So I'd opine that it's an example that illustrates how pain can happen free of suffering. And I'd say that it's an example that's independent and regardless of any sort of existential realization.Yes, really good example. It's all about focus.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 2, 2018 0:38:20 GMT -5
Do you really want to open that can of worms again? If we think we're saying something absolutely true about relativity, we're deceiving ourselves. The closest we can come to a truth is that ultimately nothing is true. I've said that dozens of times. We need to get comfy with uncertainty. By the same token,you can't use the 'nothing is ultimately true' card to support a solipsist assumption. The liar's paradox in disguise?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 2, 2018 1:13:48 GMT -5
I agree giving birth is a poor example (for either of us to use) but I would assume there is suffering during the birthing process, followed by joy at greeting her child into the world. If Gopal is enjoying the show, he's not suffering. If L is plotting the maximum ski time possible, he's not suffering. I think your mistaken that suffering has to exist alone. At its most intense, it can seem as if it does, and I can speak from personal experience on that. Most of the time though there is a level of suffering and other stuff going on. Hence, why that poet spoke of folks leading lives of quiet desperation, he's onto something. Many folks are suffering pretty much all the time, but it is a low grade suffering, and mixed with other qualities. Why do you believe that suffering has to exist alone? I think you are making it more complicated than it is. That poet is referring to existential suffering which is somehow always in the background and comes to the forefront when your mind isn't occupied with something else. Laughter's point was specifically not about existential suffering. So his example works for both the enlightened and unenlightened ones. If we mix these two kinds of suffering it can only get confusing. If we then also equate pain in general with suffering then it really gets messy. That's why I see Enigma taking such a hard line and not moving one inch. So you have a point there that the two kinds of suffering usually coexist and overlap but treating them equally would be a mistake even though on a personal feeling level they may feel exactly the same (at times).
|
|