Musings

Suffering hurts. But the story we tell ourselves and listen to can infuse it with pleasure. Which is a blessing (helps us be emotionally resilient) and a curse (perpetuates our suffering). Seems to be self’s way, right: blessing and curse!

The stories we tell ourselves can help us accept and welcome suffering?
That which allows suffering to continue is a blessing?

This might be worse than the argument that the bible is true because it says so in the bible.

So other than being a post hoc analysis in order to get to a predetermined conclusion - the conclusion we want - it also begs the question : do I have a choice?

If I don’t have a choice, why do I want this particular conclusion?

Suffering is obviously a succesful process (so far) for survival - the question is : has intelligent life reached a level of complexity that can transcend the simple process? And also : Is the omnipotence of suffering the best possible process? Is total obedience to the needs of the central identity always the best option?

The idea is that of a human that is free from the known/fear/thought/experience, has more options.

They help us endure suffering. (Sometimes even celebrate it, see it as an integral, noble part of being human.) Paraphrasing: “Any sorrow can be borne if it can be told in a story.” – N. Scott Momaday

The blessing is the resilience that comes from being able to weather suffering. The curse is that the more palatable suffering becomes, the less motivated we are to end it (let it end).

1 Like

Maybe the best we can do is nudge our story towards not-story, towards non-fiction, truth?

If the ego won’t let go, if the dream persists even when the dreaming’s lucid, maybe the ego can guide itself towards a more intelligent way of being?

‘Enlightened ego’ – seems like an oxymoron, but maybe it’s not. Maybe the ego can grow up and think-feel-live more in harmony with the whole?


The last time I listened to K go on a rant about whether thought can work out that its a mess (and we all think : “hmm, is he saying that there’s a magical unknown thing that will work it out for us”) I thought : I don’t see who else needs to see it more.

Just thought: Having (being) an ego is like being possessed. Only unlike evil possessors (all those demons and fallen angels with the cool Old Testament names), we like our egos for the most part, invite them, want them to stay. They are, after all, among our most complex and lifelike creations.

Perhaps seeing the demons in our egos would nudge us towards wanting to exorcize them?

If it only nudges us, surely this is because we didn’t really get a good look?

I’m assuming Beelzebub is a more shocking sight than a hairy spider crawling up your sleeve.

I think it’s possible (though not necessarily advised!) to be fond of your demons, cozy up to them. Along with seeing that Beelzebub possessed you, you’d have to understand, down to your toes, that being possessed by Beelzebub was bad, harmful, would lead to suffering, would obscure truth. And then you’d have to be willing and able to act on that.

No doubt about it - Beelzebub will help you with this - he smells so nice, promises so much.

Indeed - its a rigged game, we don’t know the rules, and can’t even choose which pieces to move.

Yes! I mean brimstone is a bit of an acquired smell … but once you get it, YOU GET IT!!!

1 Like

When something dies, when it becomes still and siltent and the light goes out in its eyes, is it simply the turning off of a machine? Are we machines with brain-subsystems that imagine ourselves being more than machines, being souls, gods, mysteries?


Does our being mere machines or more than mere machines matter? To our experience, to what-is?

We believe stuff , and these beliefs dictate our actions - thats the drive of self. Experience reacting to experience.

Do you believe we’re just machines? Sophisticated, perhaps, but machines nevertheless.

I do have some rather simplistic uninformed opinions, yes. And these ideas feed off each other and give me the impression that I understand whats going on; reinforce themselves.

What do you mean by “machines”? not magical? Is your question : is the universe supernatural? Is our confusion having a conversation with itself?

I guess I mean: Are we material entities subject to the laws of material entities? Is mentation (of all ilk, from daydreaming to kenshos) a material process? Wholly, mostly, partly? Or not at all, as awareness-is-everything fans are wont to believe?

The whole whotsit is wobbling itself as it is - think of it all as a dessert jelly.
And some areas of the jelly (like you and me) have peculiar personal concepts (eg. machines, supernatural, mind etc) they are forced to come up with (due to all the wobbling)

Your Zen is showing! :wink:

If I was a better scholar, I would probably be able to find Dogen’s Jello recipe.

Actually, now that you mention it - I suppose this is like the waves and the ocean anology - thats zen isn’t it?

Interbeing Thich Nhat Hahn calls it

Remind me what ‘interbeing’ means? Merci. :slight_smile: