Sufferings

Kinfonet Discussion
1

Say, Mr.X dead, and you attended the funeral. When you go near to son/daughter/wife/father/mother of Mr.X, what will you say? How will one respond?

Say, Mr. Y is suffering and comes to share that pain/sufferings with you, how will you respond?

Will you say “Oh… this is not my sufferings and only yours. Don’t share emotions with me and seek a support or an answer from me. I can’t help. Just don’t say anything to me, and observe it, look at it and end it?”
Or
Will you share those pain/sufferings??

It’s very astonishing to see people that say “Don’t share/express emotions with me, because those are not ‘mine’, it’s yours and you should not seek answer/support and should stop expressing it, have to end it by looking at it”.

Will one behave in this same way (like behaved to a stranger) even attending funeral or attending pain of spouse/children/parents/friends/colleagues???

I’m very curious to know is this the way people speak to a stranger that “If you have any questions, bring it on. But don’t make answers/statements, don’t express emotions/feelings to me, It’s your sufferings/emotions/statements not mine, just stop expressing those, I’m not here to share those with you, and to end those look at it, or else we can’t be in relationship when we share emotions/etc…”.

Is this the way relationship going on in families/ to strangers??

If one is suffering, should he have to stop expressing it to others and go and shut the door and observe and end it and only after ending those, come back and speak with people to create a better relationship with people? Is this relationship?? No emotions should arise or expressed or shared by people?? What is going on really in world?? Why people become this much addicted to ‘your sufferings and not mine, I won’t share yours, you must end it and only then we can have relationship’?

Is emotions a wrong/bad thing in relationship?? One should not express emotions? Other should not share those? Are we really humans or a conditioned robots seeking better relationship by ‘ending emotions’?

Thank you.

2

Why are you treating all this theoretically, Viswa? Pain in life is real. But when you come along and say, ‘I am in pain,’ why are you telling another person this? Are you willing to share what it means not to be in pain, not to be anything? Or are you concerned only with your own sense of misery which prevents you from finding out exactly what you are?

3

See Paul.

Again I’m asking, is this the way people respond to someone, if they speak out with fear/pain?

When you’re wife is crying, and comes to speak with you, will you say “are you concerned only with your own sense of misery which prevents you from finding out exactly what you are?”

Is this relationship??

People cry, people suffer. They are enough with loneliness and comes out to share with it. Is this the way other should “keep asking questions about 'why concerned only to your sufferings, your pain, your anxiety, your, your, your”

Is this way people really speak someone in relationship??

If it goes on like this, only suicide remains as going on everywhere.

When someone shares emotions, let any emotions be, they are try to express and share it. Why people keep on asking them “to end it, to stop it, to find the root, etc…”??

Is this how you speak in any funeral you attend, when someone is lost a father and he cries, and when you go near him, and when he share, you say “are you concerned only with your own sense of misery which prevents you from finding out exactly what you are?”

4

Again, this is a theoretical question. You are not my wife. You are someone saying, ‘I am in pain,’ to a group of strangers. Why are you saying this? I have put this question to you now three or four times. Why are you telling someone that you are in pain?

5

See, again and again and again, you keep on separating people as “you are not important like my wife” and it is a theoritical question.

I am like your son. Any stranger if comes and shares, is this all you say “very theorytical”?

Not at all speak with them like you speak with your wife/etc…??

Is this all relationship with strangers are anything all about?? Just share questions, get answer, move on. Don’t share emotions with me, you are not important like my wife is…??

Only concerned about ‘my people’ and ask “why should I be concerned with you? You are not important to me”.

I see you like a father to me, and as every human. I share whatever I feel to share, and there is no restriction/personal things to me “I should not share this to stranger”, because no one is a stranger to me. What about you?? What about everyone here??

6

But I am not like your father. I don’t know what I am in relation to you and you in relation to me. All I hear is someone saying, ‘I am in pain.’ Why are you saying it? Tell me. Get to the root of the pain, for God’s sake. If it is real enough, we shall deal with it.

7

Thank you Paul… I came to see things completely, how people behave differently to different people but not same to all…

You showed me from your ‘questions’ How much people are concerned “who are you to me like my son, I won’t treat you the same way as I be with ‘my people’, and only we are here to explore things, questions, but not share reality/emotions, and only here to speak like robots seeking root/answers to end, and move on so that, I will have a better relationship with ‘my people’…”

See Paul.

I’m suffering now. And as it is an online discussion, you cannot see it with your eyes, and so I express in words.

If you see your son is suffering and says to you “Dad. i’m suffering a lot in relationship”

Will you ask hi, “Hey son,
are you concerned only with your own sense of misery which prevents you from finding out exactly what you are?”

He says “Dad, I’m in end of it. I’m not interested to know who am I? Or why I’m suffering. I just want to share it with you, because I couldn’t handle it or else, I’m out of my control.”

Will you keep on asking your son “No. No.No. You should not share it with me. You should observe ‘why you are painful’, you should look at it, and you should end it. I can’t help you with this. Don’t seek support from me.” (I KNOW THIS REPLY IS NOT YOURS. BUT YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT I GOT FROM THE YESTERDAY’S DUSCUSSION).

Do people really mean that? Don’t they have any interest to let people/stranger share what they feel, but only their own ‘my my my’??"

It’s good to know that, you are really open to share it with me. But, does everyone here in dialogues? Why do everytime emotions arise, people block it in discussions? Is it that “I have enough emotions with me. I don’t want stranger’s”?

I am in pain, I share. People say, don’t share, keep it with you and end it, I’m not interested in it.

Let my pain, it’s root, set aside now.

What’s really going in dialogues?? Is this going this way all time in dialogues??

Is it really a conditioned place only for ‘question and answers’ or ‘questions, observations, questions’, but not any relationship?? Not Any free flow??

It’s good to know that you are okay to share go through this by coming front and look into “sufferings/pain” I share, but everyone here in dialogues??

Yesterday, when Alistair said “I’m very much painful, I’m leaving. Sorry.” He vanished. I felt really painful of that and felt I’m also responsible for his leave, so pain raised too high.

I brought up the pain, people neglected to hear it. Again I brought up the pain, people didn’t want to see why I felt painful, what really happened. I think only Liora heard about it, and shared her concerns, but no others ready to go into it. Again I raised as I felt continuously being responsible for Alistair’s leave, and again it thrown away, and people said “Don’t bring emotions, we are not interested. We are only interested in questions/observations.”. Really?? Is this all you people keep on speaking about responsibility/love/etc… intellectually finding it out, but in practical situations “Not interested. Sorry. You and your feelings are not important to me”. Again Really they mean that?

Thanks a lot… What a beautiful relationship we have…

8

There is no ‘my people’ - there are only people on this world. And we are two such people. So, for the umpteenth time, why are you saying, ‘I am in pain’? Be as concerned with the question as you are with the pain. Then we may start to share something.

9

kannagi,

When Charley sees someone in sorrow, tears come to Charley’s eyes… The fake person, the liar will have loads to say, to rationalize. That’s how one knows that that person is only functioning out of thought. Any child in tears doesn’t need words, they need to be hugged. It is a cold-blooded person, detached from themselves, from reality, who might say, “You are only venting”, and other rationalizations… Beware of such a person…, right?

1 Like
10

So your ‘I am in pain’ is directly connected to X’s ‘I am in pain.’ Right? Have I heard you correctly?

11

Then if you are interested , you ask him what the problem is, what is wrong in the relationship, etc… not throw esoteric ideas that you are interested in , at him , which he has no interest in. Those ideas are for here , for people who have seen the futility of ‘escape ‘, not for people who have no interest in them.

1 Like
12

Post #1:

Kannagi,

As I see it, to ask, “what will I or you do, what should I/you do, if such and such should happen in the near or distant future” means tackling or approaching the question through time. Isn’t it so? This approach includes recalling what I HAVE done in the past, and what I should have done, and comparing it to what I “should” do in the future.

Can I, can we, solve all possible relationship quandaries before they occur? To me, this approach to relationship problems is not reasonable and valid. We all have ideas, ideals, theories, positions, conclusions, and so on, about what is right action in difficult situations. We also know/remember that we sometimes, often or inevitably fall short of our ideals. No? Then what value do ideals have? They are useless in guiding us, as I see it. What is the point of deciding today what I will do tomorrow when I am not in control of what I do today? I see that in the face of obstacles or challenges, I succumb to emotion/conditioning. Seeing that - being aware of the reactions as they arise, isn’t there immediately action of a different kind? Where self-understanding is “nurtured” in this way, understanding acts in relationship, as I see it. So I don’t have to “prepare” for tomorrow. I need to prepare for tomorrow in certain fields of life, but not in relationship.

What is it to share pain or suffering? Can it be done through effort, through a decision of the intellect? Through effort, I can try to conform to an idea, but that is not compassion, is it. If I have compassion, compassion acts. If there is no compassion in me, then compassion cannot act. I cannot deliberately be compassionate, can I.

So is there any point in deciding today what I should do tomorrow (which is unknown) in relationship? Isn’t it rather appropriate, reasonable, sensible to understand what triggers my behaviour and actions in the moment they arise? In the present moment, am I aware of fear, anger, conceit, arrogance, indifference, selfishness, violence within, and compassion? In this moment, can I repress, suppress or force myself not to feel the emotions which arise? In this moment, do I see that I justify or rationalize my actions, and so on?

2 Likes
13

It’s directly connected to it or not, I don’t know. What’s the matter. Why sir you try to find the ‘root’?

14

There is no root, except your own confusion. That’s what we are dealing with.

15

Thanks for your observation Huguette.

See, I’m not bringing up any idea or way or etc…

Someone/Me approach you with much sufferings and couldn’t handle and come to share it with you by saying “My Grandmother is dead or I couldn’t forget some things/person lost or Any content of sufferings”. What is the first thing one respond?

“I’m sorry for the pain you go through. Don’t worry.”- Isn’t it? It’s not limited to personally related members, but any stranger one responds.

Why I say specifically this is, even if it is a condition or not - I don’t care, because see, If a person comes to you and wants you to share something - It means he really wants to share it with you so he might relieve some little pain in sharing. That’s all.

While he/she comes to share, if people don’t respond with a little comfort, the sufferings will boost up in him more by people asking “Questions, questions, questions, etc…”. Even in one of Krishnamurti Dialogues, he brought this situation “Sir, a normal person comes and wants to share the pain with you, and assume it as me, I come here to share it with the sufferings going on in me, respond.” People in that discussion, keep on bringing up many and many questions, observations, etc…, but you know a person goes through hell, will he have any energy to ‘observe’ the sufferings/root/etc…?

Not at all. He couldn’t handle the pain and comes to share. He doesn’t want to get into the root of it, look at it or any other, but just to share.

In that discussion, finally Krishnamurti says “If someone comes with that Pain, I just hold his hand and share it”. That’s all one can do. You cannot ask him to observe/etc… And this is what happens in society. When people in pain comes out to share it, no one cares. Cares in the sense, not meaning to end his sufferings, but to share with him. They say “Oh, he is a stranger to me, why I have to share it? Who is he to me like my wife/child/etc…,? Why should I do?”, and many issues in office, etc… - and suicides are all happening because of this. No one is ready to share other one’s pain, and only asks “Go to a psychiatrist”. Really???

A person in pain, is not free to look at anything, and a moral support to share it with others is only he seek, and first to share it with him, and then respond whatever ‘questions/root’ one wants to get through, because after you share, an immense energy flows through with him and then he just becomes little bit free to look at it. It’s a fact.

Charley, has really understood what is pain and what normally people seek in that painful situation, and responded with a hug. Why are the persons in dialogues here are being like Robots, when any words typed/heard - start to run the race of finding ‘root/answers/questions’??

A person is carrying a heavy load of say 20 kgs in his hand and really struggles a lot. He comes near you and wants to share it with you as he couldn’t handle that individually and you see his struggle. Will you keep on asking questions to him, to find the root/way to do that, when he is still carrying the 20 kgs load?
Or
Help him first by sharing it or help him to hold and drop the load safe in ground, and then speak with him whatever questions/etc…?

1 Like
16

Confusion?? How you say that?

17

You seem unable to answer one simple question directly. Are you in pain right now?

18

Post #15:

But, dear Kannagi, it does LOOK exactly that way to me, that you ARE introducing an idea, a hypothetical situation. You’re not saying that your loved one has died. You’re explaining the way you think that people should respond to someone’s grief.

Of course, there is a time for everything, and when someone is grieving, it is naturally time to face that person’s grief with them. One cannot turn away from or be dismissive of someone who turns to us in grief. Compassion arises and acts spontaneously. And it is clear that compassion cannot be legislated, ordered or forced.

Is that what we want and need, for others to be kind and compassionate? Will that solve the chaos all around and within us? Am I compassionate? Is there compassion here right now for others who, like me, like us, are struggling to express and understand relationship, isolation, anger, confusion, weariness, pain, conflict, corruption, and so on? Are we responding to or meeting each other with compassion in this moment?

I understand what you’re saying about those among us who ask endless questions, questions, questions which are unrelated to the pain and sorrow of life. Or maybe my own questions to you ARE what you mean by questions, questions, questions. Maybe I am not facing my own fear, isolation, ignorance, etc. Certainly I or any one of us might avoid the essential things in this way at certain moments. But the fact remains that one cannot force others or oneself to be kind and compassionate.

The passion to understand as much of life as we can has its own endless energy, as I see it. It cannot be ignored or suppressed though we might sometimes wish it could be. It is a guiding light in the midst of confusion. It reveals that condemnation is part of anger, division, violence, conflict, fear, and so on. So there is no point in condemning the darkness around and within us. And in the midst of sorrow, confusion, suffering, there is still great beauty to be seen. I could be wrong about all of this of course.

1 Like
19

The foundation of life,

When one builds a foundation of life based entirely on thought, the ground within is and remains fallow.

Such a person is like my go-to guy example, the big fat lie guy, incapable of saying, “I’m sorry”, i.e. apologizing, deeply and meaningfully. They are incapable of being sorrow, because of their detachment, and the fact that they have ignored the reality of correct action which is the only thing that can build a foundation of goodness.

Beware the false guru whose energy comes from a desire to understand… which derives from a layer of consciousness, i.e. ego energy, which can be quite powerful. When one turns a passion for life into a desire to get “K”, it only shows this this particular quasi-passion (actually, a desire) has become a “belief”, which has become their raison d’être, and upon which their foundation is based. It is from Charley’s point of view that one has understood that the foundation of life must be based in life, in how one comports oneself in one’s personal life, apart from anything else.

When Charley’s mind/heart offered Charley the possibility of doing the “process”, the mind/heart used other words (lol), mainly because Charley had read what K went through during the “process”, and had Charley known that that was what Charley was being offered, Charley would have said “no, thank you” !!! The moment Charley decided “yes” to that, 6 angels walked into the courtyard where Charley was sitting, and stood silently opposite Charley, and then they suddenly did a Hallelujah song and dance, and then quietly turned in unison and walked away. Reality is very different from what thought can choose to believe.

Edit: You see, understanding comes after the discovery. The words come after such a discovery. When the interest (desire) is in understanding before discovery, any discovery is only from thought, and only intellectual, and therefore meaningless. When the desire is before, it is always from thought and from the conditioning which has never been faced and understood.

Sorry, laptop stalled. One recalls Spalko (Cate Blanchett) in the film Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, saying: “I want to know everything”, and then her head explodes (laughs). This desire is so encouraged by our system of education. It is the epitome of arrogance, demonstrating an entire lack of humility, right?? Understand? It is only when one is fed up with everything that society stands for, that one has the energy to explore oneself. So, one can see that the desire to know is part of what society has encouraged for hundreds of years. It is part of the conditioning, right?? Get that??

1 Like
20

Do I have to say an answer for that?

Then, “NO”, that feeling is not present right now.

Yup.

Nope. I have a different view, feel free to check it out.

See, what happens in a discovery channel? Say they are telecasting a snake and brands it as a “New Discovery”? How do they brand it? First of all, they observe it’s shape - it’s behavior - it’s body cells - etc…, understands the whole “process”. After Understanding, immediately mind thinks it with all variety of snakes they know about it. If it doesn’t fit with already discovered snakes, they brand it as a “Discovery”. It is the same everywhere. First there happens to be understanding about a thing, then mind/thought (one may call it ‘Insight/Intelligence’ - Let it be) compares it with ‘knowledge/memory’, and brands it as a ‘discovery’ or not.

It’s the same for Krishnamurti too. I quite see things different from how K perceived it. He keep on saying about “Change”, “New”, etc…
My perception is “what-is” is always “what-is”. There is no old/new in it. Only when the mind understands the ‘what-is’, compare it with ‘old’, and calls it as ‘Change/New’ if it is different from Old. Unto me, ‘what is’ is ‘neither old nor new’-‘neither changing nor still’, no word to describe/express ‘what-is’, and every expression about it is a moving away from it. There is no need of describing/expressing/communicating it either.

yes, when desire to understand is there, it comes from ego energy too. But just wait a minute and scroll back to your/my life’s past. How do we come to know “desire to Understand” is from ego? Isn’t it we too had that “desire” and only from understanding that “desire to Understanding things is also from ego” by going through many things - had put an end to desires? So let ‘people’ go through their ‘desire to understand’ - and let them come to understand it as we done by going through it. They can’t understand from the ‘words’ we communicate, but only their own experiences can. If they have to understand it from ‘words’ we communicate, then they have to ‘belief/trust’ us as a guru/something - which you know about that.

yes, there lacks a humility. But, even when millions of people joins to this forum and reads this, they won’t understand and only stick to their experiences. The first understanding is from only their own ‘experience’. The thought of “To know everything”, makes the universe expands - and there will be never an end to it’s expansion until “to know everything” thought is present. It’s like, to understand a tree they keep on sowing the seeds, and the seeds give a new tree compared to the ‘knowledge’, and it raises again thought of ‘to know everything’ and they sow another seed and it gives again a different thing comparatively.