The End of Suffering?

So if "all is not well," as many seem to declare, then should we continue to see it as NOT well? Images of starvation have been around for centuries long before images could be recorded, and the images remain the same. No change here.

Do we once again demand that by making others witness to suffering, see the graphic death that we perpetrate upon ourselves, that then suffering will cease? Will experiencing more "sadness and fear" create a better world even though the world has been steeped in sadness and fear ever since the world existed?

I agree that the images cannot be denied and I feel that only the most heartless sociopath could not experience some level of sadness. But what difference will it make and what difference has it ever made to see it?

If I see the starving child and know to some degree that I am at fault for the suffering of the world because I do nothing, or do little, to stem the tide of suffering that seems everywhere, then clearly I must be guilty. And aren't we all guilty, since suffering has not ceased?

Maybe we do not actually just go about "seeking selfish joy" as some would complain. Maybe what we really do is seek ways to ease our guilt since it certainly seems clear that suffering will never end. Therefore, we feel we have no choice but to offset our guilt, else it has the potential to overpower us and consume us. Maybe that's a good thing.

Somehow we need to see suffering differently or else be consumed by guilt. And Isn't guilt suffering?

I understand that my "questioning," may be discerned as a commitment to seeing things "one way." Yet, I am committed to nothing but continued questions.

Yes, I agree, most people likely experience compassion, maybe some guilt, a little hate (in relation to agents of power), maybe even fear of what the world is "becoming." However, it seems that many see others as "cocooning." But, do they not suffer? Is there not "suffering" inherent to all living?

I do not advocate we "turn our backs on it." Actually, I only asked IF it could be SEEN differently. This may have been taken as an avoidance strategy, which was not the intent of the question.

Maybe what we see and react to are DEGREES OF SUFFERING?

I know a wealthy woman who's 12 yr old daughter has been diagnosed with brain cancer and no treatment has helped and she may eventually be terminal. This mother's suffering is beyond what you and I can imagine, until we are "thrown" into such suffering ourselves. I also know a 50 yr old, upper middle class man who has intense debilitating pain in even the simplest movements and he suffers intensely. Or the middle class woman who's husband left her and 3 children for another and this woman suffers with her future. There is the 16 yr old foster child who was brutally abused (unspeakably) by his own alcoholic parents in early childhood. This youth suffers with his past and may suffer for many years to come, if he so chooses.

None of these individuals are starving, yet they do suffer. Do these people "turn their backs" on the suffering of the world? Make no mistake, I suffer in my way, maybe you do too?

Are these examples of suffering less than or equivalent to the suffering of the starving child? Is there a hierarchy to suffering? Is physical "pain" real, while suffering is only a personal construct of the mind and thus, has no basis in "truth"? In that sense, does the starving child "suffer" or merely experience the pain of starvation?

I have also know hospice patients of varying ages who have terminal illnesses of varying kinds and many live in extreme physical pain. They know that they will die very soon. Many do not suffer at all and extend joy to all who come in their presence.

But, how can this be? Shouldn't they suffer since they are in pain and clearly they will soon be dead?

Does the gazelle in the jaws of the leopard "suffer" or do we merely project our own personal construct of suffering onto that image as well? Is peace from suffering available only through acceptance of death? Has the starving child made peace with suffering and accepted death similar to the gazelle and the hospice patients?

Do the dying correspond with a deeper truth unavailable to the 'living'?

Maybe the starving child does not suffer at all. Obviously, that statement will be extracted from this entire post as my avoidance of the 'truth.' Then so be it. I only look for a way to SEE it differently.

I feel compassion for suffering. But I also feel that this is not enough. I have worked toward relieving suffering. But, again, I feel that this is not enough.

Nothing on the 'outside' seems to relieve suffering. It disappears here, only to reappear there. Moving from place to place suffering is omnipresent. So if it's 'everywhere' and 'always,' why do we resist? Simply because we want it GONE. I believe it can be gone.

"Can I eliminate suffering in the world?" I say YES. But, if the answer cannot be found outside, then maybe its "within." I just need to find the right question to take me 'there.'

I have spent the last 25 years of my life working directly with suffering in all the billions of ways it is manifest (and this is in addition to approximately 46 yrs of my own renditions). Also, I have spent many years studying the 'mind' in order to better serve these individuals. Sadly, it has been only recently that I have begun to see that all my educational degrees and all my studying has been for nought.

There is NO truth "out there." If there was why have we not found it? When will it be found? Who will find it, "science"?

To rely on what science teaches is to rely on sensory perception and what the body teaches because science is pure sense data. I relied on this for many years and found the sciences to be essentially useless (particularly and specifically the psychological sciences!!).

I agree that compassion is not enough, But is 'action' the only thing that matters? Does compassion drives action? Does inaction result in guilt?

Essentially you can't lift the pinky finger on your left hand without "thinking" about it first (however, we have chosen to ingnore many types of "non-reflective" thought or the type of thinking were we don't reflect on ourself as the one thinking).

As someone famous once said, "The journey of a thousand miles doesn't begin with the first step, but with the first...thought."

We have centuries of "action" and little to show for it. The mind is the final frontier and we are only beginning to plumb those infinite depths (they specualte that we use only 10%).

Yet, there is much in the metaphor of "coming from the heart" that points to the type of thinking that, if permanent, complete and all-encompassing, will most certainly produce actions that are aligned with such thinking. I suppose that when our actions are aligned with infinite compassion that knows no end, suffering may no longer be SEEN. Until then suffering seems to be a part of living that demands compassionate actions.

But I do believe there will be a time when the concept of "compassion" will be lost forever since the mind's natural inclination is to experience and manifest love and/or God, ALWAYS.

I believe we are seeking a return to that natural Being that produces the cessation of suffering from a natural state and manifestations of Mother Teresa will be infinitely apparent for all to see. Actually, on second thought, such manifestations may NOT be seen at all, since it will be the norm and business as usual.

If we are all Mother Teresa's who will assume the role of sufferer?