Enlightenment and Suffering

[neoxenos]

The Buddha said that life itself is "suffering." It is better though if we say it is "dukha," meaning more exactly dissatisfactoryness.

Di satisfaction of the current state, the desire to avert from this current state and crave something new, is the temporal phenomenon.

For example, when watching a movie we wish to change our sitting positions in order to regain the comfort we had so-and-so minutes ago. That comfort goes away though, with time. In conclusion we can say that dukha is the outcome of time, and more concretely, that dukha is time itself. Time is suffering.

The temporal aspect of Man is that type of mental matter that clings to the craving and aversions of time. The mind is a form of energy that the consciousness, another form of energy, uses as a tool to order and label the universe around it. When the mind begins to crave/avert a certain label (of a sensation), and this can be anything from sex and drugs to video games and books, then the element of time is produced within the mind. The element of time is personified as the infamous ego. Hence the temporal phenomenon begins: we crave those sensation that give us pleasure and avert from those sensations that produce pain.

The problem is that when the mind is locked inside the ego that says, "I like this..." and "I do not want that.." then the mind is no longer able to do its job of making order of the experiences of the consciousness, because instead of observing the situations of Good and Evil we just turn off the observing factor, indulge in aversion or craving. In other words, we ignore our experiences because we are too identified with what we like and what we hate. And how can we verify this? Simply attempt to remember your week in its entirety. There is, no doubt, many gaps, and it is these gaps that constitute the sleeping consciousness. We can take this phenomenon to many levels. We can not remember our previous lives because we were never really there, we were sleeping. If one can not recall their entire life, all their previous lives and every event of the universe until this point, then this one has a sleeping consciousness, because the Being is always the Being and will always be the Being. The Being was at the beginning of time because it is beyond time itself.

Innocent ignorance is one thing, we all possessed this until we ate the Fruit of Good and Evil. Then we became aware of Good and Evil, however, the difference is that we now ignore our experiences and this leaves us in a type of ignorance that is painful. It is painful because we ignore the bad things in life instead of understanding them. Death for example: If we find pain in the death of our loved ones then we have observed life and death yet. We expect God to forgive us even though we ignore that we have not forgiven our enemies. We expect God to love us even though we hate our enemies. Thus, when the harsh reality hits us in the gut, we wonder, "Why me?"

The truth is we are ignoring ourselves. We ignore our worst attributes.

We ignore our suffering too, through many vices: gambling, debauchery, drugs, alcohol.

Then when we wish to be sober for a minute, to look at the Divine Light and yearn to absorb ourselves within the bosom of the Eternal Mother, we can't because more pain and suffering come our way, and observing this fact is even more painful. So we stop attempting to do this and return to our ignorance.

Every action of hate, every deed of guilt, every criminal silence and every scandalous word, every bad thought, every treasonous emotion that we CREATE every moment of our lives adds fuel to the Vehicle of Suffering and nothing will stop it until we stop feeding it. The man or woman who truly attempts to end their ignorance and begin to see the state of their interior will find not only desires from this life, but dark and wicked desires that have accumulated throughout the ages. That is the temporal phenonemon. Time has not brought us simplicity (enlightenment) it has brought convolution (suffering).

Time and the evolution-involution cyclic process of the consciousness can only bring out a complication-diffusion cyclic process of energies, it will never reach the Absolute Abstract Unknowable because this latter Non-Being has nothing to do with the 4th Dimensional unstable surface we call Time.

Therefore, to return the Mind to its natural state in Eternity requires that we remove the temporal cravings and aversions that ensnare the mind within the 4th Dimension. In order to do this we must first "know thyself" which means, we must remove our ignorance, our conscious and unconscious ignoring. This type of observation, the observation of the Vehicle of Suffering, it not pleasant, but to ignore it is to only enhance it.

People change everyday through mechanical processes: a new job, a new wife, children, a new fad... but these things have nothing to do with a real internal change. The independent transformation is done through harsh auto-observatory efforts. The internal independent transformation is the only thing that can transform our lives into something that is not dependent on the day, the year, the new house, the car, the husband, the kids, the money, the death, any situation that is based on Time. This is where true enlightenment shows its fruits, the radical happiness. The radical happiness is the "root" and this root is the Being that we can stop ignoring (darkness) and begin to observe by pointing the light of the consciousness inward, thus enlightening ourselves little by little, day by day.

The ordinary man only knows pleasure and pain. Happiness and love are more rare than a dimond today.

This is my experiential view on the connection between enligthenment and suffering.

 

[Mus Zibii]

Wow, well put. No matter what reply I give its going to sound simplistic now. I'm of the opinion that balance in dissatisfaction or suffering is completely unobtainable. Even what could be called pleasure is just a biological response meant to drive some base imperative. The first time I saw the facial expressions that accompany orgasm and how similiar it is to a look of agony I went off of sex almost completely. I felt like writing a letter of apology to Saint Augustine.

In my limited knowledge of Buddhism, I took the doctrine of doing away with want and desire to alleviate suffering as more in tune with what natural instinct dictates rather than an opposition to ego. But to do otherwise (as Buddha and Buddhist probably ascertained early on) would be following the path of the contrarian.

 

[Avinash]

The Buddha said that life itself is "suffering." It is better though if we say it is "dukha," meaning more exactly dissatisfactoryness.

Namaskar all,

There's very little I don't like about Buddhism, but one thing is, that it takes the idea of "life is dukha" as a starting point. Not quite as negative as "we are hopeless sinners in need of salvation", but still.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaskar all,

There's very little I don't like about Buddhism, but one thing is, that it takes the idea of "life is dukha" as a starting point. Not quite as negative as "we are hopeless sinners in need of salvation", but still.

Namaste Avinash,

thank you for the post.

it starts here because this is the common experience of everyday life all sentient beings have experienced this sensation before to lesser or greater degrees.

i've no need to tell you that using the actual term, dhukka, is a much better description of what the teaching is... it does not mean "suffering" as it is so commonly transliterated in the west, though it certainly contains that experience.

 

[Avinash]

it starts here because this is the common experience of everyday life all sentient beings have experienced this sensation before to lesser or greater degrees.

Namaskar Vajradhara,

It's just not the way I experience life and I would not advise anyone to take it as the starting point. Life has both pain and pleasure, neither of which are desirable from a spiritual viewpoint.

I believe that you become what you ideate on. If you ideate that you a sinner (not worthy of God's love) or that you are caught up in suffering or attachment, then that may adversely influence your spiritual progress.

 

[neoxenos]

Namaskar Vajradhara,

It's just not the way I experience life and I would not advise anyone to take it as the starting point. Life has both pain and pleasure, neither of which are desirable from a spiritual viewpoint.

I believe that you become what you ideate on. If you ideate that you a sinner (not worthy of God's love) or that you are caught up in suffering or attachment, then that may adversely influence your spiritual progress.

I must say that the vast amount of my misery ended when I begain to reconize it was there (the cause-effect relationships). I like the term dissatisfactoryness, but, maybe "non-happiness" is better. I see your point, but to me, the one who is not happy because of boredom, depression, stress, anger, anything like this, is suffering, because happiness is a right that all of us have, all of the time.

 

[Avinash]

I see your point, but to me, the one who is not happy because of boredom, depression, stress, anger, anything like this, is suffering, because happiness is a right that all of us have, all of the time.

So recognizing that there is both happiness and un-happiness (dis-satisfactoriness), why choose the negative part of life as the starting point? It may seem insignificant, but it isn't, because it's what you start out with.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Avinash,

thank you for the post.

Namaskar Vajradhara,

It's just not the way I experience life and I would not advise anyone to take it as the starting point.

you've never had the experience of losing someone that you love? you've never had the experience of a bully stealing your bicycle? you've never felt the gnawing pain of starvation eating at your spine?

you are quite fortunate to have never experienced any type of craving or thirst or desire for something which is gone or you cannot have. however, by far, the vast majority of beings on this planet have had those experiences... losing a loved one, losing something dear to them, starving.. really physical, emotional and mental suffering is treated in the same manner in our teachings, so it's not strictly physical.

Life has both pain and pleasure, neither of which are desirable from a spiritual viewpoint.

i quite disagree. without the experience of pain most people would not be spurred to the spiritual path and without the experience of pleasure (work with me here) the beings wouldn't have free time in which to practice. therefore, both conditions are necessary, in our view.

I believe that you become what you ideate on. If you ideate that you a sinner (not worthy of God's love) or that you are caught up in suffering or attachment, then that may adversely influence your spiritual progress.

to a certain extent i agree with you, however, though something may adversely effect your spiritual progess does not mean that it will. besides which... in the Buddhist tradition there is no "i" to attribute with these qualities

 

[Avinash]

Namaskar Vajradhara,

you've never had the experience of losing someone that you love? you've never had the experience of a bully stealing your bicycle? you've never felt the gnawing pain of starvation eating at your spine?

I have both pleasure and pain in my life, just like everyone else. But I don't take the negative aspect as my starting point (spirituality is not an escape-route from pain or suffering for me).

without the experience of pain most people would not be spurred to the spiritual path and without the experience of pleasure (work with me here) the beings wouldn't have free time in which to practice. therefore, both conditions are necessary, in our view.

The conditions are a fact of life but I don't desire to run after pleasure or pain. I personally was never spurred to the spiritual path by trying to get away from pain although I can imagine it may happen that way for others.

to a certain extent i agree with you, however, though something may adversely effect your spiritual progess does not mean that it will. besides which... in the Buddhist tradition there is no "i" to attribute with these qualities

If it doesn't affect your spiritual progress then you haven't ideated on this teaching that "life is dukkha". Which is the only point I was trying to make.

 

[neoxenos]

I have both pleasure and pain in my life, just like everyone else. But I don't take the negative aspect as my starting point (spirituality is not an escape-route from pain or suffering for me).

[font=&quot]To me, and I am just realizing this now, dukkha is one with the temporal phenomenon. Things can be good, but all will pass. Things can be bad, but all will pass. So I see dukkha not so much as a pessimistic "glass half empty" thing, and obviously not the optimistic "half full", but rather, the glass contains half water and half air.

[/font]

The conditions are a fact of life but I don't desire to run after pleasure or pain. I personally was never spurred to the spiritual path by trying to get away from pain although I can imagine it may happen that way for others.

Again, in my own experience, suffering or pain did not spur my intrest into finding anything even remotly spiritual. I think actually those things made dive into situations that caused more suffering.

It was always that little spark of light that told me to do otherwise....

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Avinash,

thank you for the post.

I have both pleasure and pain in my life, just like everyone else. But I don't take the negative aspect as my starting point (spirituality is not an escape-route from pain or suffering for me).

these experiences are not "positive" or "negative" in and of themselves, we choose to lable them as such, and this is emphasized in the Buddhist teachings. indeed, to take a negative view with regards to this teaching is one of the 5 fetters and it is difficult to overcome, according to our teaching.

The conditions are a fact of life but I don't desire to run after pleasure or pain. I personally was never spurred to the spiritual path by trying to get away from pain although I can imagine it may happen that way for others.

indeed, and you should not. those things are temporary, changing moment by moment. the point of this isn't that one "runs" which implies escapes or avoidance, rather, one embraces fully the experiences.. pleasure and pain without any preconceived notions.

however, there are three primary Vehicles taught in the Buddhist tradition and they correspond to the varying capacities of individual beings, as such, it is certainly correct to say that some beings do use the teachings as an escape when they initially start the praxis.

If it doesn't affect your spiritual progress then you haven't ideated on this teaching that "life is dukkha". Which is the only point I was trying to make.

hmm... perhaps i don't understand the term "ideated" to clearly. now.. of course, it hasn't effected my spiritual progress in any way whatsoever.. there is no "I" for it to effect

 

[Avinash]

Namaskar Vajradhara,

these experiences are not "positive" or "negative" in and of themselves, we choose to lable them as such, and this is emphasized in the Buddhist teachings.

So, if dukkha is not a negative thing, then where does the need arise to change it?

indeed, and you should not. those things are temporary, changing moment by moment. the point of this isn't that one "runs" which implies escapes or avoidance, rather, one embraces fully the experiences.. pleasure and pain without any preconceived notions.

That part of the teachings is no different in my own tradition. We call that teaching madhuvidya.

hmm... perhaps i don't understand the term "ideated" too clearly. now.. of course, it hasn't effected my spiritual progress in any way whatsoever.. there is no "I" for it to effect

To ideate on something means to take that something on your mental plate and create a picture of it. It can be a visualisation but also a contemplation. If you deny that there is a you, then who have I been exchanging ideas with? Should I then still continue?

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Avinash,

thank you for the post.

So, if dukkha is not a negative thing, then where does the need arise to change it?

from the arising of Bodhicitta. remember, in the Buddhist tradition there is a teaching of the Two Truths... one conventional and one absolute. conventionally, we view pain, loss, emotional distress and all that sort of thing as negative, and this is what prompts us to start practicing. from the absolute view, however, negative is a lable that we are attaching to a momentary arising of causes and conditions which simply is.

of course, as we are not able to have the aboslute view when we begin the praxis, it's the conventional view that prompts us to begin.

To ideate on something means to take that something on your mental plate and create a picture of it. It can be a visualisation but also a contemplation. If you deny that there is a you, then who have I been exchanging ideas with? Should I then still continue?

ah.. ok, this makes more sense. let me ask, in your tradition, is there a difference between meditive techniques, i.e. insight vs. contemplative?

that's a good question... i'm really not sure of the answer though. obviously, from the conventional point of view, someone is responding on this forum. ultimately, though, are the quarks that comprise this message fundamentally any different than the quarks that comprise you and me?

there is a wonderful Taoist saying that i'd like to quote, i hope that you don't mind, as it elucidates my quandry quite well, i think:

Once Chuang Chou dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn't know he was Chuang Chou. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakable Chuang Chou. But he didn't know if he was Chuang Chou who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Chuang Chou. Between Chuang Chou and a butterfly there must be some distinction! This is called the Transformation of Things.

 

[Avinash]

Namaskar Vajradhara,

..of course, as we are not able to have the aboslute view when we begin the praxis, it's the conventional view that prompts us to begin.

In my tradition we take as the starting point the idea that all beings long and strive for infinite happiness. This limitless happiness or perfect peace can never be reached by striving for limited goals (people always want more and more). Hence the need for spiritual sadhana which is the only way to perfect peace of mind.

The Buddhist starting point is discouraged for several reasons tied up with our spiritual philosophy (in which bhakti plays an important role).

let me ask, in your tradition, is there a difference between meditive techniques, i.e. insight vs. contemplative?

We don't use this terminology. We do use different approaches in our meditative techniques but when you progress in sadhana, these will start to interact and reinforce each other. I really don't know enough about the actual Buddhist meditation techniques to make a good comparison. A friend who was quite advanced in Ananda Marga sadhana did however switch over to Tibetan Buddhism without much problems and now spends half of the year in Europe and the other half in Tibet.

I'm glad to hear there is actually someone out there! From my own philosophical viewpoint however, the one whom I'm addressing is no one other than my Beloved. He is also the One who is giving me inspiration what to write or what not to write. And He is the result of posting of what was written.

It's part of our practices to take a special ideation before we undertake an action in order to reinforce this mystic ideation. We don't however deny the reality of this creation but try to remember that it is a relative state in our limited perception.