Let’s talk about Human suffering

Let’s talk about Human suffering. In some disastrous circumstances I have to cope with a situation, and share in the suffering, as it is experienced by everyone. Gradually we recover. I might experience some psychological disorder, some emotion, but not realise the complete nature of this condition. I might read about it, know of it conceptually, intellectually, but this is a limited understanding. As terrible as it is for the individual, it is a much broader experience, not the individual knowledge or experience. It is telling of a condition not generally understood, something unperceived. The individual can think they have an ability to cope with, or escape suffering, but this is a strategy developed within the completely unperceived condition of Human suffering. The suffering is the total Human suffering which we have made a way of life.
There is very little one can say to another about this, other than tell of the fact. Talking about it is limited to the basic fact, it is unperceived. Either it is realised in the communication, or it is not. Generally people find they suffer this communication, working with it intellectually, and developing verbal methods to cope with it. This is the status quo. Fundamentally with an understanding, a perception, only altered with more words and ideas, the Human suffering remains limited to the image of all the separate, susceptible, individuals who are expected to adapt and to have some kind of new understanding and perception.

Why do I live this way? It is because, psychologically, I am trying to find order. I adopt some kind of practice, like people do, study, work, hobbies, art, business, etc, and find a position in life. But what is this I am trying to arrange, to organise, in my head, actually? No, wrong question. Not that thinking. I am asking, what is order actually?

Order is freedom from the past and the future; from what should and should not be.
Order is sensitivity to whatever arises.

I am sensitive. I respond immediately. I have an awareness of the disorder, as it is known, for all its ins and outs. Isn’t this all a level of conceit? My thinking is the disorder. In another blog they are talking about the mechanics of thought, theoretically, with thought as the actor. As if the thinker, actual and psychological, is free, and free thinking is the sensitivity to whatever arises. This is a terrible duplicity.

If I see this “terrible duplicity” clearly, I can show it to those who are oblivious of it. But if I don’t actually see this duplicity in action, I’m just saying it’s real because I must have some idea of what’s going on.

You see, thought obscures what is being talked about with double speak.

Knowing what I know is not sensitivity, it is description and naming based on experience - Sensitivity is action devoid of theory, it is a response in relationship to the whole, rather than one based on choice. It is freedom from analysis and desire.

Are we capable of acting in accordance with the whole movement around us? Maybe not. Are we capable of being free from our own desires and fears - Yes. Because we are capable of seeing that the whole nourishes, whilst the self is a conflict.

Aware the self is conflict, is a responsibility, and a discipline. It is fundamental.

When awareness is, there is no self in conflict. When experience is, choices arise.

Freedom is freedom from choice. Not aiming for one bubble (experience or awareness) over another.
Freedom is the dropping away of any center as the waves (of experience and awareness) wash in and out.

As is demonstrated when one mentions what one cannot elaborate on or make clear. Why use a loaded word like “duplicity” if you have nothing to say about it?

Now that you’ve accused someone of double-speak, why not explain why, and what you mean by it?

It is incredible that I have to always say that this is a forum looking together in regard to the teachings and is talking about thought, psychologically, and is not personal. The fact that someone sees not observations, but accusations, is a fundamental confusion, and any personal response is part of that mess. A question asking for verbal elaboration for the sake of personal satisfaction is not going to make the human condition any clearer. What is it that doesn’t see the point of what is said? I think it is a pattern of thinking, called a duplicity, or another word is double speak. As you can see the point of the blog is this condition of human suffering, and I have said it is unperceived. This is, I say, is due to the way I think. The imperception, I say, is a psychological condition in the way we don’t seriously question our thinking, and have assumptions, expectations and beliefs, about what is being said.

I can go on. Basically, and we are talking psychologically, there is the division, I, you, me, him and her. This is seriously a fundamental understanding to this talking together. The way we are usually thinking is to take what is said, affected by division, and then add more words and ideas, coming from division. The division is what is driving our approach, and what we are doing is continuing to work in this division. No matter what is said, no matter how well informed it is, the approach with division, the separate me and you, is barbaric. This is the point to be understood. This fundamental inhumanity is what we repeatedly want to solve by applying, intellect, commerce, technology, invention, and war. Just saying this, and then debating it all, is just another of the techniques failing to come to the end of it all.

1 Like

If the human condition is clear to you, what objection do you have to making it clear to one who asks for clarity?

Please read what is written. The clarity, if that’s what it is, is in the reading, listening, and watching.

Please write with awareness of what you’re doing.

Regarding most human suffering (except for extreme suffering), it IS possible to deal with it without too much negativity or reactiveness. It is possible to learn that, if it is really important to you. But you must be aware of every little annoyance, irritation, anger, etc and through awareness change it. If it is REALLY important to you to LEARN to deal with unpleasantness and suffering with sanity and intelligence, then it will come about, without a doubt. But you must really want it.

1 Like

More striving? No thanks…