The Problem of Suffering

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by Magical Realist, May 22, 2015.

  1. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,304
    Found this video trailer (9 min excerpt) that indirectly explains the causation of suffering ( individual mind vs universal mind ~ ego)
    Samadhi ~ union


    "Suffering : The egoic identification of form and thought"
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. VossistArts 3MTA3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    454
    Yeah you need to accept suffering, ideally embrace it and learn to work with it. Suffering is precious in that it is the greatest inspiration for overcoming suffering.
    The solution is dedicating yourself, making continual effort to find Solutions.
    Personally, I was fortunate to have discovered Buddhism when I was around 17. I was acutely aware that I didn't have control or understanding of my mind and that frustrated me. I felt as though I was being controlled by some unseen force. I hate feeling controlled. So, almost all the teachings I've received have been through books. Until recently. Anyways, returning to silence. Zen seemed like the most honest approach to learning about ones mind. Zazen. Sitting and watching the breath and watching ones thoughts. That is how you start to get to know yourself, your mind. You learn that your thoughts are not you. You learn to see that you have unconsciously programmed yourself to think or to react in patterned, self destructive, restarting ways. You learn to stay focused on a single thing, your breath. Your programmed thoughts start to fall away. Your gradually gain the ability to return to your breath at will, quieting your mind.
    Then after you've stabilized your mind, you have the ability to stay focused throughout your day, watching yourself and how you react to your experiences. Reactive processing is the true cause of all suffering. You'll learn techniques for analyzing and deconstructing, out understand how and why individual reactions came to be. When you see the reaction clearly, to it's root, usually grounded in ego processing ( there primitive are preserving mechanism) you see how and why reaction is often an ill constructed and unnecessary way to cope with experiences. Reacting means youre not thinking. It evolved to save our life without consideration or graduation, often leaving collateral damage in the process. Wake up to the house in fire, and flew from the building leaving the children inside.. that kind of thing. Once you see through a reaction you can then use volitional or intentional consideration to come up with much better ways to handle things. Ways that takes a much more complete view of the situation into account, solving problems and creating far less suffering for yourself and others as a result.
    This is how you gradually uncover pure mind from obstructions (reactive processing)b and reduce suffering.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,887
    Which is essentially an ethical matter, I guess. Sin is a violation, it's doing something bad. In ancient Hebrew mythology, it's about disobeying a superior (in the Garden of Eden, original sin).

    According to the myth the first humans were thrown out. It was the intentional act of the superior, imagined according to the absolute-monarch model of their ancient kings.

    So does the Judeo-Christian tradition implicitly. Otherwise, why would it matter to us whether we are living in Eden or not?

    Its explanation is that suffering is a mental state, something that we do to ourselves. It's a mental state that arises due to causal (karmic) conditions, as the result of what the modern West would call a psychological process.

    The answer to the problem of suffering is to gain control of that process. Or perhaps more accurately, since in Buddhism "we" are the process (which makes Buddhism very congruent with modern neurophysiological understandings of the mind) it's for the process to evolve in such a way that suffering no longer arises in it.

    Suffering comes as the result of our own gross and subtle behavior.

    Addressing the former, Buddhism places great emphasis on ethics so as to reduce that kind of suffering. (Notice that the point of ethics in Buddhism isn't to please a superior being, a cosmic judge. It's to produce less suffering in ourselves and others.) And note as well that the point of behaving ethically isn't because doing so is good. (Buddhism doesn't really have the concepts of 'good' and 'evil'.)

    Buddhism is entirely consequentialist, it's about the consequences of what we do, both externally and internally. The latter is very important in Buddhism and Buddhist ethics are typically conceived in the form of precepts which one adopts in living one's life, which in turn are conceptualized as rules of training. So a big part of the goal of being ethical is the changes in one's own psychology (and the psychology of others too) that behaving in such a way brings about.

    (The 'no-self' doctrine kind of reduces the distinction between 'me' and 'you'. We are all just different interacting strands in the universal flow of causality. And ultimately, that's what each of us are individually too. That realization is part of what motivated the growth of Mahayana's Boddhisattva ideal.)

    And there are things like physical pain which will always be there, so long as we are human. It's hard-wired in to our physiology, into the process. But the Buddhists say that we are the ones who turn physical pain into suffering. Their goal there is to sever that connection, to just observe pain's presence with equinamity, yes my shoulder hurts, it's sending those signals to my brain, so what?
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2018
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Vociferous Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    648
    I don't really see much of a difference in how Buddhism and Christianity handle suffering. In both, it's a somewhat natural state, and avoiding it requires the actions of the self, whether those actions are externally proactive in making better decisions or internally proactive by denying desires. Both seem to do a bit of each, since avoiding some bad decisions requires denying desires and denying desires results in avoiding some bad decisions. Maybe the only real difference is the justification for the self-imposed ethic?
     
  8. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,412
    You need this; ahimsaprajnanibbanachakra.
     
  9. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,507
    Yet circumstances beyond the individual's control do arise.

    I think some Buddhists consider some Karma to be a form of Hell. It's not a direct threat, but it is implied.
     
    Vociferous likes this.
  10. VossistArts 3MTA3 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    454
    Another big difference between Christianity and Buddhism is that in Buddhism you have actual meditative practices that facilitate steadying the mind to be able to better focus on becoming aware of reactive thoughts and behaviors. Recognizing and deconstructing reactivity allows one to see the faulty nature of reactive processing, to be able to let it go and replace it with volitional thinking. That is key to clarifying the mind and using it to it's full potential.
     

Share This Page