Life experiences represent interaction with "God"

[Keit]

You may find this short (7 minute) video interesting. It is titled "pain is not suffering". It goes on to very briefly discuss some neuro-imaging study observations related to the topic of pain, physical and emotional.

Thanks for the video, obyvatel. Very interesting.

So the message from the vid is "pay attention to the pain and you can diminish/avoid the suffering"?

Maybe the message is that experienced meditators learned how to deal with unpleasant experiences without trying to shut them out? The lector said that they they had their "conduit/channel" open, but still experienced diminished suffering, while the newbies were able to achieve same results by shutting out or ignoring. So perhaps the difference is learning how to "interpret" and deal with the same information or event? Like Neo from Matrix, who at the beginning dodged bullets, but later didn't even have to!

 

[Keit]

[quote author=Joe]
Suffering so often throws us into a state that is pretty much the opposite of being aware and self-observation, but I think that if we can 'rise above it' in terms of our understanding of WHY we are probably suffering, to give it meaning, that it can really transform the experience in terms of the physical and emotional impact.
[/quote]

Could this "giving meaning to the experience" is one of the major things that put us aside from the animal world? And the one that allows us to take the "fast track"?

Recently I listened to a lecture on the topic of pain. And the speaker said something I am not sure is really true. She talked about the importance of analgesia in animals in order to reduce their suffering, because while humans can consciously understand that the pain they feel at the moment some day will lessen and pass, the dog can't grasp it and therefore thinks that the pain will last forever.

And while I agree that we absolutely must lessen the suffering of the creatures in our care, I also think that when it comes to the perception of it, the complete opposite from what the lector said would be more valid. It seems that while animals may suffer greatly, not sure if they have the same concept of "time" as we do, and therefore the same level of "despair" or other negative emotions that may arise from the realization that the pain "may never end".

It seems that we humans have an ability to "modulate" our experiences and either "be drown in sorrow" or "rise above it". Maybe this "choice" and ability is what makes the difference and allows us to experience "evolution" not as something that gradually progresses through genetic and generational modification as we see in animals, but as something that is possible even during one "lifetime"?

And speaking of animals and hardships, and how they are probably being perceived in a different way, here's a video that demonstrates this point very well. And it also demonstrates that Mother Nature is all about "just being". Not being just evil, or just good. Now imagine if instead of geese parents and chicks these were humans. It could be a good script for a Hollywood movie with a lot of drama, and both suffering and joy!

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Yg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Chu]

On the above; the question could still be asked, why would anyone do something that is not in alignment with their intrinsic nature? Why would someone not know what their intrinsic nature is and align with it? What's the point in having an intrinsic nature to begin with if you don't naturally follow it? Maybe the point is to strengthen it? Like it's an 'embryo' of a certain nature and needs to be 'grown'? But why is suffering a part of that process of growing, or why is suffering involved in unwittingly choosing something not in alignment with our nature? Couldn't we just say "oops! wrong bar!"

Argh... No idea. Maybe God has a funny sense of humor! ;D But seriously, perhaps "God" figured out that when things are given easily, not much is learned? Or maybe because it's like everything else in the Universe, chaos/order, positive/negative, etc., and "God" knows you have to "taste" a bit of everything in order to know what to choose? Maybe some interference from Entropic forces, like what Laura talked about on the Wave regarding "wonderers", who are basically often crushed so that they cannot fulfill their mission, unless they can surmount the obstacles? After all, this is the nature of the planet we live in, and it is STS oriented, as much beauty and wonders as our planet also houses. Finally, maybe because if there was no suffering involved, and people weren't made to choose via a struggle/friction, then there would be no Free Will? Well, I suppose there would be, if you were able to say: my essence is Being, and I choose Being, for example. But still, how could one know for sure unless one had "tasted" both, so to say? For that, we would need to know for sure what our intrinsic nature says, and this reality doesn't seem to allow for that.

That said.... WHY???

I think, as others have said, that suffering is just a term that we use to describe the experience of not being in alignment with what is natural for us at a deep level (as the quote from Laura you posted also makes clear). I suppose I could just as well ask the question, "why does a fish suffer when it is out of water?" Or better, "why do we suffer when we have no air to breathe?" Well, because that's the way we are made! I think at that point continuing to ask "why are we made that way?" might be getting into solipsism, which is probably against all our natures! :D

I suppose what I've been trying to get at here (unbeknownst to myself), and I think all of your responses have helped, is a different conception of the idea of suffering, and maybe with that different conception, a different experience of suffering itself. Suffering so often throws us into a state that is pretty much the opposite of being aware and self-observation, but I think that if we can 'rise above it' in terms of our understanding of WHY we are probably suffering, to give it meaning, that it can really transform the experience in terms of the physical and emotional impact. This is, after all, one of the things that the Cs have said on more than one occasion in more than one way, that learning can be fun! that we can have only positive emotions, if we choose! That suffering is just our perception.

I think you nailed it there. If we don't "rise above it", basically it comes down to identifying with our "suffering", making it all about ourselves, or simply wallowing in it without taking any action, or seeing it as "unfair" while it is just what it is.

Funny, this whole thread reminds me of this joke:

A very religious man was once caught in rising floodwaters. He climbed onto the roof of his house and trusted God to rescue him. A neighbour came by in a canoe and said, “The waters will soon be above your house. Hop in and we’ll paddle to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

A short time later the police came by in a boat. “The waters will soon be above your house. Hop in and we’ll take you to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

A little time later a rescue services helicopter hovered overhead, let down a rope ladder and said. “The waters will soon be above your house. Climb the ladder and we’ll fly you to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

All this time the floodwaters continued to rise, until soon they reached above the roof and the religious man drowned. When he arrived at heaven he demanded an audience with God. Ushered into God’s throne room he said, “Lord, why am I here in heaven? I prayed for you to save me, I trusted you to save me from that flood.”

“Yes you did my child” replied the Lord. “And I sent you a canoe, a boat and a helicopter. But you never got in.”

Perhaps suffering, crises, shocks, etc. are like the boat, the helicopter, etc. We either learn to see them as opportunities to learn, gifts from God (in which case it's not "suffering" as we understand it most of the time, but more like a muscle training, a fun challenge, etc.), or we choose to think that God is unfair for not solving our problems.

 

[Carl]

The above all makes sense when I think about every day adversity, overcoming challenges to achieve goals, and generally progressing.

What I can't seem to reconcile it with yet is the wider world where children get raped and butchered everywhere, where people are imprisoned and tortured, where entire families are burnt alive with white phosphorous, and where all that is good and loving seems to be almost defenceless against the onslaught of brutality and misery in the long run.

I can accept my own suffering has a purpose. It is within reasonable bounds and allows me some room to grow and maneuver, and seems just difficult enough for my current "level". But what about the type of suffering I described above? Do some souls actually choose that? Call me negative, and it is rather 3D thinking, but I just don't get it.

 

[Ocean]

I believe suffering makes us stronger. Very strong. Strong enough to take on the world.
From terrible suffering, there is a transition. An awakening. And not far along the road, one feels gratitude to be able to live this life. And to live life, to the full, each and every moment.

Can Suffering Make Us Stronger?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-darkness/201111/can-suffering-make-us-stronger

Often turmoil and trauma just seem to be destructive and negative. But in the long term, these may be balanced—or even transcended—by powerful positive effects.

You've probably experienced the negative effects in your own life, or at least been aware of them in people close to you—for example, a soldier who has returned from combat and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder; a woman who has recovered from an episode of cancer but who can't sleep at night and feels a constant anxiety that the disease will return; a person who's been through a painful divorce and feels intense hatred and bitterness to her ex-spouse; or a person who feels depressed after becoming disabled through an accident. Other long-term negative effects may be dissociation, aggression, self-hatred, and even dissociative personality disorder (or multiple personality).

However, in recent years, psychologists have become aware of phenomenon known as ‘post-traumatic growth.' This term was originally coined by the psychologists Richard Tedeschi and Lawrence Calhoun, who interviewed many people who had suffered traumatic life-events such as bereavement, serious illness (such as cancer), housefires, combat and becoming refugees. They found that, for many of these people, dealing with this trauma was a powerful spur for personal development. It wasn't just a question of learning to cope with or adjust to negative situations; they actually gained some significant benefits from them. In Tedeschi and Calhoun's terms, they experienced ‘positive life changes.' They gained a new inner strength, and discovered skills and abilities they never knew they possessed. They became more confident and appreciative of life, particularly of the ‘small things' that they used to take for granted. They became more compassionate for the sufferings of others, and more comfortable with intimacy, so that they had deeper and more satisfying relationships. One of the most common changes was that they developed a more philosophical or spiritual attitude to life. In Tedeschi and Caohoun's words, their suffering led them to a ‘deeper level of awareness.'

Another psychologist, Judith Neal, studied 40 people who went through ‘post-traumatic growth' after life-events such as serious illness, divorce or the loss of a job, as well as near-death experiences. Initially, most of them experienced a ‘dark night of the soul', where their previous values were thrown into question, and life ceased to have any meaning. After this, they went through a phase of spiritual searching, trying to make sense of what had happened to them, and find new values. And finally, once they had found new spiritual principles to live by, they entered a phase of ‘spiritual integration', when they applied these new principles. At this point they found new meaning and purpose in life, together with a gratitude for being alive, and even for having been through so much turmoil. (I discuss many other striking examples of ‘growth through suffering' in my new book Out of the Darkness: From Turmoil to Transformation. (link is external)) In some ways, it seems, suffering can deepen us.

The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was certainly no stranger to suffering. For most of his life, he suffered from excruciating migraines which left him incapacitated for days, as well as terrible stomach pains. He was forced to retire from his professorship at university at the age of 35 due to his ill-health, and spend the rest of his life in isolation. He never found a wife or girlfriend, was ostracized by his intellectual peers—because of his unconventional ideas—and had very few friends. He was so unsuccessful as an author that he had to pay for his books to be published, and even then, many of them were pulped by the printer. Eventually his writings did begin to filter through to appreciative readers, but by then he was showing signs of mental instability. At the age of 45, he had a complete mental breakdown and spent the last ten years of his life in a catatonic state, living with his mother.

However, Nietszche had remarkable powers of resilience, and always thought that his suffering was beneficial to him. He saw his suffering as ‘the ultimate emancipator of spirit' which was essential for his philosophy, since it ‘forces us philosophers to descend into our nethermost depths...I doubt whether such suffering improves a man; but I know that it makes him deeper.' His experience was that when a person emerges from episodes of illness, isolation or humiliation, he is ‘as though born again, he has a new skin,' with a ‘finer taste for joyfulness.' In the The Prophet, Kahlil Gibran makes a similar point when he writes that, ‘The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy you can contain.'

This doesn't mean that we should welcome suffering, or purposely seek it out. But when it does appear in our lives, we should be aware that, beneath its negative surface, there is an opportunity for growth and deepening.

 

[ROEL]

Life/reality is the manifestación of a school where there are lessons upon lessons to learn. The way we learn these lessons, depending on our capacities and commitment is the actual way/quality of interaction we have with "God". I think.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

So why is the suffering "necessary" in the walking - and many other - examples? To speed up the learning? And is that then the purpose of the suffering aspect of learning? To speed it up? As the Cs mentioned somewhere, it's like the "fast track" to learning?

It might help to imagine a world without any sort of suffering, whether that be physical pain, having our self-importance bruised, worrying about ourselves, worrying about others or the world in general, feeling remorse, etc. I don't necessarily think that suffering is a divine commandment: "Thou shalt suffer! And thou shalt suffer repeatedly and harshly!" Rather, I think it just comes down to the idea that in a free-will universe, more often than not we need pleasant and unpleasant sensations and feelings in order to learn.

Just look at the people without a sense of pain. They have to be extra careful, because they might break a bone, get a serious cut and infection, etc., because they can't feel it and learn to avoid those life-threatening situations. It's not that they absolutely NEED to suffer. It's possible that such a person can avoid any situations in which their lack of pain would lead to some bad consequence. But it's unlikely, given the 'open' nature of this world.

And just imagine your life if you couldn't feel remorse or anything like it. You might do something really wrong out of ignorance, but you'd still feel good about it. Nothing that you learn about another's suffering would make you feel anything less than super. So you'd have no motivation for change. Again, perhaps it's not that learning in such a case is utterly impossible; it's just highly improbable, given the way our bodies and minds work. (Our minds and bodies being results of an evolutionary process with its own degree of freedom - thus we're stuck with whatever quirks and tendencies it has given us.)

So I guess you could say that suffering of one sort exists as a means to 'correct course', to tell us when we're not on the right track. Another kind of suffering tells us that others around us aren't on the right track, that humanity as a whole isn't on the right track. And this suffering prompts another type of course correct: what can I do to be a positive influence for others.

Because let's face it, in a world with free will, there are plenty of opportunities to take the wrong course of action. For every true observation you can make about any given thing, there are billions of false ones. For every 'right way' to make a chair, there are billions of wrong ways. And when you factor in more complex tasks, like figuring out the best way raise children, or the best way to create a healthy, sustainable society, the possible ways of screwing up just multiply. Then you have to factor in other people and beings who actively want to screw you over, because they want something for themselves that your ideals and actions may prevent. (That's essentially what ponerology is all about.) And of course, some individuals will choose to rape, torture, and murder.

In such a world, we are surrounded not only by 'accidental evils' like chance tragedies and 'innocent lies' but also by some quite nasty, deliberate ones. Other people are just as free as we are to lie, cheat and steal. And it hurts when we're on the receiving end of it. And if we have a little bit of a conscience, then the suffering of others will cause us to suffer too. Again, I think it's possible to imagine a world where all this doesn't HAVE to be the case. But it's just very highly improbable, given the fact that there ARE degrees of freedom at all levels of reality. Every person can't get it right 100% of the time. And that creates conditions ripe for suffering of one sort or another.

Maybe the degree to which we suffer is the degree to which we have screwed up in the past and assimilated bad information about the way we work, and the way the universe works. This isn't necessarily because someone is out to get us. Our parents may be totally ignorant about something; they may have false beliefs. That affects us from a very early age. So we are raised seeing this and other aspects of reality backwards. Like Hesper said, this can be as simple as eating chocolate cake. Unbeknownst to us, we are eating something that slowly but surely destroys our bodies, messes with our brains, and thus negatively affects the way we think, feel and act. Suffering is like a signal to ourselves that "there is a better way to go about getting what you're looking for."

And if what we're looking for is a long way off, then it just may be the case that we have to 'suffer through it', even if the goal doesn't come in our lifetime. OSIT!

 

[Keit]

Just stumbled upon a supposedly French proverb, which seems rather relevant:

Misfortunes are, in morals, what bitters are in medicine: each is at first disagreeable; but as the bitters act as corroborants to the stomach, so adversity chastens and ameliorates the disposition.

I can accept my own suffering has a purpose. It is within reasonable bounds and allows me some room to grow and maneuver, and seems just difficult enough for my current "level". But what about the type of suffering I described above? Do some souls actually choose that? Call me negative, and it is rather 3D thinking, but I just don't get it.

Yes, I think this is the most hard thing to do, to read news on a daily basis and see so much senseless and horrible cruelty. It seems almost inconceivable that people would be able to survive in such situations. It is daunting, depressing, and our own "good fortune" seems like cheating. It is even more pronounced when we remember history, and how except for the possible Golden Age long long time ago, humanity knew more suffering and cruelty than not. Basically, suffering has been humanity's old and loyal companion.

Not sure if we can know all the possible reasons, but here's one idea, for example:

Q: (L) Why have black people, in general, for most of recorded history, been living in such primitive conditions with such primitive mind set?
A: Isolation from modern interaction.
Q: (L) Why is this?
A: Karma. Punishment for past society which was cruel master hierarchical.

Knowing about those possible reasons doesn't really make it easier, though. But I think that rereading carefully Laura's quote from High Strangeness that Chu posted can at least offer some explanation as to "why". Even it is hard, it does allow us to learn about reality "as it is".

 

[luke wilson]

So why is the suffering "necessary" in the walking - and many other - examples? To speed up the learning? And is that then the purpose of the suffering aspect of learning? To speed it up? As the Cs mentioned somewhere, it's like the "fast track" to learning?

It might help to imagine a world without any sort of suffering, whether that be physical pain, having our self-importance bruised, worrying about ourselves, worrying about others or the world in general, feeling remorse, etc.

In one of the Ra transcripts, they say such a universe existed but it was deemed unsatisfactory due to the lack of catalysts.

I can't find that particular quote but found some interesting ones regarding suffering

95.25 Questioner: I have often wondered about the action of random and programmed catalyst with respect to the entity with the very strong positive or negative polarization. Would one or either be free to a great extent from random catalyst occurring such as great natural catastrophes or warfare or something like that [that] generates a lot of random catalyst in the physical vicinity of a highly polarized entity? Does this great cat, then, have effect on such random catalyst upon the right-hand path?
Ra: I am Ra. In two circumstances this is so. Firstly, if there has been the pre-incarnative choice that, for instance, one shall not take life in the service of the cultural group, events shall fall in a protective manner. Secondly, if any entity is able to dwell completely in unity the only harm that may occur to it is the changing of the outward physical, yellow-ray vehicle into the more light-filled mind/body/spirit complex’s vehicle by the process of death. All other suffering and pain is as nothing to one such as this.

We may note that this perfect configuration of the mind, body, and spirit complexes, while within the third-density vehicle, is extraordinarily rare.

19.17 Questioner: Can you tell me what bias creates their momentum toward the chosen path of service to self?
Ra: I am Ra. We can speak only in metaphor. Some love the light. Some love the darkness. It is a matter of the unique and infinitely various Creator choosing and playing among its experiences as a child upon a picnic. Some enjoy the picnic and find the sun beautiful, the food delicious, the games refreshing, and glow with the joy of creation. Some find the night delicious, their picnic being pain, difficulty, sufferings of others, and the examination of the perversities of nature. These enjoy a different picnic.

All these experiences are available. It is free will of each entity which chooses the form of play, the form of pleasure.

42.9 Questioner: What is the difference in terms of energy center activation between a person who represses emotionally charged responses to emotionally charged situations and the person who is balanced and, therefore, truly unswayed by emotionally charged situations?
Ra: I am Ra. This query contains an incorrect assumption. To the truly balanced entity no situation would be emotionally charged. With this understood, we may say the following: The repression of emotions depolarizes the entity insofar as it then chooses not to use the catalytic action of the space/time present in a spontaneous manner, thus dimming the energy centers. There is, however, some polarization towards positive if the cause of this repression is consideration for other-selves. The entity which has worked long enough with the catalyst to be able to feel the catalyst but not find it necessary to express reactions is not yet balanced but suffers no depolarization due to the transparency of its experiential continuum. Thus the gradual increase in the ability to observe one’s reactions and to know the self will bring the self ever closer to a true balance. Patience is requested and suggested, for the catalyst is intense upon your plane and its use must be appreciated over a period of consistent learn/teaching.

34.6 Questioner: Thank you. Can you give me examples of catalytic action to produce learning under each of the following headings from the last session we had… Can you give me an example of the self unmanifested producing learning catalyst?
Ra: I am Ra. We observed your interest in the catalyst of pain. This experience is most common among your entities. The pain may be of the physical complex. More often it is of the mental and emotional complex. In some few cases the pain is spiritual in complex-nature. This creates a potential for learning. The lessons to be learned vary. Almost always these lessons include patience, tolerance, and the ability for the light touch.

Very often the catalyst for emotional pain, whether it be the death of the physical complex of one other-self which is loved or some other seeming loss, will simply result in the opposite, in a bitterness, an impatience, a souring. This is catalyst which has gone awry. In these cases, then, there will be additional catalyst provided to offer the unmanifested self further opportunities for discovering the self as all-sufficient Creator containing all that there is and full of joy.

77.17 Questioner: Now, would it be possible for this work of our density to be performed if all of the sub-Logoi chose the same polarity in any particular expression or evolution of a Logos? Let us make the assumption that our sun created nothing but, through the first distortion, there was no product except positive polarity. Would work then be done in fourth density and higher as a function only of this positive polarization evolving from our original creation of sub-Logos?
Ra: I am Ra. Elements of this query illustrate the reason I was unable to answer your previous question without knowledge of the Logos involved. To turn to your question, there were Logoi which chose to set the plan for the activation of mind/body/spirit complexes through each true-color body without recourse to the prior application of free will. It is, to our knowledge, only in an absence of free will that the conditions of which you speak obtain. In such a procession of densities you find an extraordinarily long, as you measure time, third density; likewise, fourth density. Then, as the entities begin to see the Creator, there is a very rapid, as you measure time, procession towards the eighth density. This is due to the fact that one who knows not, cares not.

Let us illustrate by observing the relative harmony and unchanging quality of existence in one of your, as you call it, primitive tribes. The entities have the concepts of lawful and taboo, but the law is inexorable and all events occur as predestined. There is no concept of right and wrong, good or bad. It is a culture in monochrome. In this context you may see the one you call Lucifer as the true light-bringer in that the knowledge of good and evil both precipitated the mind/body/spirits of this Logos from the Edenic conditions of constant contentment but also provided the impetus to move, to work and to learn.

Those Logoi whose creations have been set up without free will have not, in the feeling of those Logoi, given the Creator the quality and variety of experience of Itself as have those Logoi which have incorporated free will as paramount. Thusly you find those Logoi moving through the timeless states at what you would see as a later space/time to choose the free will character when elucidating the foundations of each Logos.

In conclusion, it seems that suffering causes distortions which in turn causes movement/restlessness which in turn causes seeking which in turn causes progress which in turn causes a deeper more varied understanding of life/things which in turn is what the universe wants. The end.

 

[Carl]

So I guess you could say that suffering of one sort exists as a means to 'correct course', to tell us when we're not on the right track. Another kind of suffering tells us that others around us aren't on the right track, that humanity as a whole isn't on the right track. And this suffering prompts another type of course correct: what can I do to be a positive influence for others.

Because let's face it, in a world with free will, there are plenty of opportunities to take the wrong course of action. For every true observation you can make about any given thing, there are billions of false ones. For every 'right way' to make a chair, there are billions of wrong ways. And when you factor in more complex tasks, like figuring out the best way raise children, or the best way to create a healthy, sustainable society, the possible ways of screwing up just multiply. Then you have to factor in other people and beings who actively want to screw you over, because they want something for themselves that your ideals and actions may prevent. (That's essentially what ponerology is all about.) And of course, some individuals will choose to rape, torture, and murder.

In such a world, we are surrounded not only by 'accidental evils' like chance tragedies and 'innocent lies' but also by some quite nasty, deliberate ones. Other people are just as free as we are to lie, cheat and steal. And it hurts when we're on the receiving end of it. And if we have a little bit of a conscience, then the suffering of others will cause us to suffer too. Again, I think it's possible to imagine a world where all this doesn't HAVE to be the case. But it's just very highly improbable, given the fact that there ARE degrees of freedom at all levels of reality. Every person can't get it right 100% of the time. And that creates conditions ripe for suffering of one sort or another.

The way I see it, suffering in order to correct course would have already resulted in a pretty awesome society by now, were it not for deliberate people. Yeah, there are a billion ways not to make a chair, but with a tiny bit of intelligence and correction of mistakes, you could get there pretty fast. 4 legs and a seat, or even a tree stump would suffice. Not trying to take an analogy too literally here, but to further it: it would not take humans too long to learn to get along if the "natural process" was allowed to be followed: People make innocent mistakes, decide to do better next time, society becomes more tolerant, the talented, helpful people rise to positions of leadership and help teach others how to live a good life. There would be drama and problems, but there would not be the absolute insanity we see before us today.

One can only conclude that conscious, deliberate evil and destruction is also part of the natural process, and that some parts of the Universe can be worse than hell. That 50% of the universe really is one big evil hierarchy of feeding in infinite service to self. For those of us who feel that this is certainly not what we want to be a part of, why did we come here? The C's kind of answered that. On one level we were enticed by the "pot of gold" and entrapped, and on another level we knew we were becoming entrapped, but recognised the value in the lessons here. Or maybe back then, thousands of lifetimes ago, we hadn't yet decided whether we wanted to be STS or STO. Now after so long we have come to know are true nature, and maybe we are ready to leave? But the bus home hasn't quite arrived yet. I don't know.

 

[obyvatel]

[quote author=Joe]
So the message from the vid is "pay attention to the pain and you can diminish/avoid the suffering"?
[/quote]

Yes. The "paying attention" is visceral and grounded on sensation. Cognitively it is like asking "what is this" in the present moment.

There is a story about the Buddha where another monk asked him a bunch of questions about the relationship between karma, reincarnation and suffering. Buddha gave an analogy. If a man is struck by an arrow, his immediate concern is the fact that the arrow is embedded in his body and how to deal with that. In other words, deal with "what is". Questions like "who shot the arrow", "why he shot it", "why pick him as the target" etc are valid questions, but it is better to try and answer them after the arrow has been extracted from the body.

The general theme of attending to the pain in the present moment through body awareness and sensation is advocated by trauma specialist Peter Levine as well. Like the study Ocean shared, Levine wrote in "In An Unspoken Voice" that trauma can be a gateway to transformation. Part of the relevant excerpt is here.
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,23581.msg261313.html#msg261313

Regarding the ISOTM quotes on suffering which Luc shared, my understanding is that "intentional suffering" is accepted as part of working towards an aim. Suffering happens when we work towards an aim. Suffering is not the aim, nor is it something to be glorified, nor is it to be avoided.

 

[RflctnOfU]

Regarding the ISOTM quotes on suffering which Luc shared, my understanding is that "intentional suffering" is accepted as part of working towards an aim. Suffering happens when we work towards an aim. Suffering is not the aim, nor is it something to be glorified, nor is it to be avoided.

I think in connection with intentional suffering is G's idea that all things tend to turn into their opposites - which was hinted at by G in the statement about a subtle joy entering into things on the way toward a conscience without contradictions. An example of things turning into their opposite would be a child with a hoard of candy. Mmmmm Mmmm! :). It is deliciously sweet and oh so good...until, it isn't so good anymore. The bellyache that follows such indulgence is suffering indeed, but it is mechanical suffering ---> if 'A' then 'B'.

In my own experience with trumpet, practicing to get ready for a recital, or audition, or heavy concert, yields a great deal of suffering, but the joy experienced when the work put in yields substantial results, which become more or less permanent, is a thing of sublime beauty. In connection with all of what was just said I am reminded of G's teaching on involution vs evolution. In a sense both directions 'become their own opposite', but in the case of involution, the general theme is mechanicality, while evolution is conscious. Make sense?

Kris

 

[luke wilson]

What I can't seem to reconcile it with yet is the wider world where children get raped and butchered everywhere, where people are imprisoned and tortured, where entire families are burnt alive with white phosphorous, and where all that is good and loving seems to be almost defenceless against the onslaught of brutality and misery in the long run.

This is somewhat straight forward to answer....

Because someone somewhere decides to do all the above. That person in this world, in this universe has been given that right to inflict pain on another. All they have to do is make the choice to do so.

Is it unfair on someone who doesn't want to deal with this crazy psycho? Yes.... 100%. But the rules of the universe is that it is a 'free will' universe i.e. people can do whatever they want to the extent others will let them or they will let themselves. Another person could equally make the choice that enough is enough and go about doing something about those 'ruining' the experience for others. BUT the end result is that we have a big hive of activity which ultimately is what the universe/God wants! OSIT.

The C's kind of answered that. On one level we were enticed by the "pot of gold" and entrapped, and on another level we knew we were becoming entrapped, but recognised the value in the lessons here. Or maybe back then, thousands of lifetimes ago, we hadn't yet decided whether we wanted to be STS or STO. Now after so long we have come to know are true nature, and maybe we are ready to leave? But the bus home hasn't quite arrived yet. I don't know.

Again, part and parcel of what you are feeling... the need to get out, the dissatisfaction, the feeling of injustice, the frustration... all these are things God wants! You are producing feelings God wants to experience. Through you he is experiencing all this stuff... through another, something else... the more varied, rich, deep, the better...

Also, with the 'desire' to get out, to 'not want to play', all these is being taken from a perspective 'locked' within the game. There is no privilege of the higher, 'outside the game' perspective that will be granted to you, within your lifetime here.... to think of it within the great immense of 'time/existence' the number of times you have incarnated in 3rd density in this period of lizzie control is TINY compared to the time that has actually been/is/will be... the 20 something years you've lived thus far in this lifetime is like, omg, so small, that to make demands (internal, in what you want) and to expect the universe to turn on those demands is almost like magical thinking... but then in a weird twist... the internal milieu you find yourself in, is what the universe wants to experience... you by being here, experiencing everything, learning, suffering, doing whatever it is you choose to do, not choose to do... you are giving God what he wants.

Whatever role you played in this design, even who you are, how you know yourself, 'carl', the bipedal 20 something year old male living somewhere in the UK in the year 2016 worried about abc, all that could be shattered to a million pieces if you were granted a view from 'outside the sandbox' as it were... to be free is not necessarily to be the carl you know right now, the one you identify with, the one you feel or the one you think is you... you might be 'free' and not think.... "thank goodness I'm out of that godforsaken place". This is a possibility you know... then what do you do next? Get yourself back here... only to say you want out... to get out... only to want in... until you become dizzy. You've no idea right now... welcome to the sandbox!

PS: There is no bus to 'home' because home is everywhere/anywhere. There is no real-estate out there sign-posted, 'home to carl'... as if the universe/God would care about such things!

 

[Windmill knight]

I had always thought that suffering was related to learning simply because getting out of your comfort zone is required to learn and that is, by definition, uncomfortable; and intense discomfort equals suffering. But you guys are way too deep now by page 4 or 5 of this thread!

For a trivial example of what I mean: it was cold today in the morning, and when I woke up my bed was warm. I didn't want to get up, but I did because if I didn't, I would stay there all day and nothing would get done nor learned. So I suffered a little and paid the price. But then the day was kind of fun and productive, which is enjoyable, although it also came with some minor sufferings that come with putting effort into something. So learning requires a little bit of suffering but it is indeed also fun.

At the level of the brain, I've read somewhere that it will do its best to spend the least amount of energy, which apparently happens when it's just going through the routines without being challenged with anything new. It will even try to trick us into not getting it to work through those challenges, so it complains and makes us pain when we are trying to learn something new. Again, the same principle applies: that of changing oneself (or at least one's temporary comfy state) as a requirement to learning, and that means stopping being who we are, which brings some amount of suffering.

The principle escalates at all levels, including psychology and esoterism. Sometimes you are faced with the dilemma of changing your life circumstances big time because that is what you know to be right, but is also something that will carry a lot of problems because changes are troublesome and scary. Afterwards, our new circumstances will become the 'new comfy', and so another big change might be required for further big learning.

But, if not being aligned with our true nature is what makes us suffer, shouldn't we suffer less with every step of the way towards true alignement? I think so. Presumably, there will be a time in which we have changed so much into whom we were at the chore, that things will be easier. But who knows.

I can accept my own suffering has a purpose. It is within reasonable bounds and allows me some room to grow and maneuver, and seems just difficult enough for my current "level". But what about the type of suffering I described above? Do some souls actually choose that? Call me negative, and it is rather 3D thinking, but I just don't get it.

Yes, I think this is the most hard thing to do, to read news on a daily basis and see so much senseless and horrible cruelty. It seems almost inconceivable that people would be able to survive in such situations. It is daunting, depressing, and our own "good fortune" seems like cheating. It is even more pronounced when we remember history, and how except for the possible Golden Age long long time ago, humanity knew more suffering and cruelty than not. Basically, suffering has been humanity's old and loyal companion.

I don't think there is a purely 3D way to answer that. I think we just need to have faith that from a higher perspective, it all makes sense and serves some purpose. Do some souls actually choose that? Can't know for sure, but if you read that book 'Life between Life', apparently people who are put in hypnosis and asked about the period between reincarnations, speak of planning of lives and yes, sometimes they did choose that for different reasons. Others, it appears that they simply made wrong choices while alive, deviated from the original plan and 'accidentally' landed in the wrong experiences.

Anyway, the fact that we don't know for sure, yet that's the way it is, should get those of us lucky enough not to have sufferd that much, motivation to make this planet a better place.

 

[caballero reyes]

Hi,RflctnOfU.
In reply 56 you wrote:

"but in the case of involution, the general theme is mechanicality, while evolution is conscious. Make sense?"

But, if we think:: "But in the case of NATURE, the general theme is mechanicality, while evolution is conscious".
So, if nature is mechanical, then nature mechanical is something against which we must fight. It then makes sense, now ?