|
Home
Doors
Essays2007
Essays2008
Essays2009
Essays2010
Wisdom
Gallery
Links
Bios
Contact
|
..:: Suffering ::..
By
Alan Schneider
This essay is concerned with the difficult subject of suffering,
specifically human suffering, although all biological life is
arguably affected by this omnipresent phenomenon.
In order to understand
suffering, we must first define the opposite condition for
humanity, and this is problematic for the simple reason that the obverse
perceptual state to discomfort is (much like discomfort) actually
not necessarily clearly perceptible itself. While most of us
know when we feel well or ill at ease, we probably have only more or
less vague and indistinct perceptions of these as actual
manifestations. Certainly, when we are filled with joy and ecstasy –
states defined in psychology as peak experiences – we might tend
to say that suffering is very far away. But how often do these peak
experiences occur, and how long do they last before inevitable
dissipation begins to erode them away? And after they have left us,
how then do we feel and perceive ourselves to be? Well, or perhaps
disappointed and empty, somehow? Even the lesser pleasurable
sensations are subject to this same waning phenomenon – they all fade
from consciousness and experience in the absence of ongoing
reinforcement. Thus, positing a baseline of well-being in the pleasure
zone is something that presents fundamental logical and psychological
flaws for the observer.
Probably a more valid notion
of optimal well-being is the scientific concept of homeostasis –
organismic equilibrium or balance. Homeostasis is the manifestation of
median levels of well-being as observed statistically across time, and
utilizing many successive observations in the process.
Homeostasis allows for an average perception of our condition across
time that incorporates high, moderate, neutral, low, and depressed
levels of functioning and self-perception, but generally posits a state
of overall need gratification – we have most of what we need
most of the time, and feel satisfied with our perceived condition at
least some of the time. The great adversaries of homeostasis
are age, and its inevitable partner, infirmity. With the passage of
time, regardless of other factors, the attainment of satisfactory levels
of homeostasis (whatever they may have been) becomes more and
more difficult for the individual. This even applies to entire
cultures and societies – as they age across time, they pass into
dysfunction, decay, and eventual collapse – to be replaced by other,
newer forms that will be ascendant for awhile, and then follow the same
path.
If we assume a relatively
healthy, functional individual, existing in a relatively healthy,
functional society, then a relatively high level of homeostasis is to be
expected as previously noted – most of what we need, most of the time,
feeling satisfied at least some of the time. The problem with this
assumption is that it is almost never the case in reality,
because life’s inevitable turbulence continuously upsets the process in
youth, and permanently upsets it in old age. When this
additional factor is introduced into the equation, we see that even
homeostasis is still problematic, modest as it is as a measure of
well-being. Peak experiences notwithstanding, the truth is that we are
actually frustrated and dissatisfied most of the time. This is the
justification for Buddha’s observation that all of life is dukkha
– suffering – and this is the real “homeostatic” condition!
Those of us who have not been Karmically fortunate enough to have had
peak experiences frequently do not even know they exist, and consider a
relatively painless day to be a “peak experience”, though they may not
have any specific knowledge of this concept. Those of us who have
been fortunate in this respect are nonetheless still cursed to seek
the recurrent experience of such conditions – desire action – a
search that is ultimately doomed by the passage of time.
Thus, frustration,
dissatisfaction, and debilitation form the baseline human perceptual
state – defined by Buddhism as the blanket ignorance of the rote
human condition – and we are left with a very different understanding of
what the obverse of this state may be. If peak experiences and
pleasurable states are inherently sources of implicit frustration and
suffering, what states may hold forth hope? If ignorance is the real
median, what then is its opposing number? The Eastern spiritual
traditions are all in general agreement that this opposite conscious
manifestation is the condition of Enlightenment – the perception
of liberated consciousness above and beyond the limited bodily, sensory
experience of material living. What, then, is this state of
Enlightenment? How may it be attained? What is its ultimate impact on
human suffering?
To begin with, to experience
Enlightenment we absolutely must turn away from the continuum of
the physical senses and the external sensory modes of knowing, and the
only way to do this while still present in the flesh is to refocus our
consciousness within upon the inner modes of knowing and
being. And, while simply examining our thoughts and feelings from the
perspective of waking conscious awareness is at least a beginning, we
must dive deeply into our unconscious mind to make substantial
progress in this quest. This requires the observation of dream or
dream-like symbols either in sleep, or in a similar related state of
relatively defocused awareness – i.e. trance induced by some
practice such as yoga, meditation, or chanting. As long as we remain
focused in the physical senses, we are doomed to experience suffering
and ignorance of greater or lesser extents. The answers lie within,
and are encoded in the symbolic language of the unconscious. Once we
have determined what tool of internal self-examination will work for us
– and this alone may be the undertaking of many lifetimes – then we must
learn to understand and interpret the meanings of the often fantastic,
disturbing, and always perplexing images that we encounter in the
inner experience. This is where the real challenge of Enlightenment is
encountered – understanding and interpreting the language of
subconscious psychological symbols. The reader should make no mistake
about the fact that it is these images that determine all other
awareness.
The work of understanding our inner
symbolic thought is the second step in the departure from the
surface level of comprehension (i.e. ignorance), and is, if anything, an
even more daunting task than learning the way in to the region where
these elements of psychology predominate in consciousness. There are,
in reality, at least three basic sets of symbol interpretations –
Freudian, Jungian, and Individual – and each one has its own validity as
a system. The best approach incorporates then all, and proficiency in
even one area of the three is often (although not necessarily
always) a lifelong undertaking. I cannot even begin to cover this
material in this little essay, but what I can do is to describe the
basic method that I use on those all too frequent occasions when I
encounter some symbol, or set of symbols, that defy my comprehension.
I say all too frequent in the knowledge that the mind is an
ever-evolving, ever-changing condition that has as a part of its
intrinsic nature to constantly produce new symbolism as a key
portion of its regulatory and growth processes.
Initially, I use a reasonably
extensive understanding of primary Freudian symbolic meanings that has
been amassed over this lifetime, and compare these to what is currently
on display in my unconscious. This will frequently not be sufficient
to resolve the symbolic paradoxes present, at which point I delve into
my registry of Jungian archetypal symbols – in fact, if I sense a
significant amount of Jungian collective imagery in my symbolism, I may
start there, and not with Freud. The final step is to
conduct an inner dialog with myself, in which I frame the general
question of what a given symbol or symbol set means to me on a personal,
individual level. This involves a deeply sensitive intuitive probing
of my personal past experiences that can be very intimidating to
perform, but generally always yields the final answers which I seek.
And there may well be symbolic material that is not well understood even
after all of these techniques have been employed – for a very telling
reason.
And what is this
reason? The answer to this question resides with the ultimate nature
of the universe and consciousness, and here one must take a leap of
Faith, and consider that the apparently mechanical universe of physics
and chemistry in all of its enormity and majesty is still only a surface
phenomenon that conceals a profoundly hidden Truth: that the universe is
a Consciousness unto itself at the deepest level knowable from
our human perspective. Whatever this Consciousness may be labeled
verbally, it is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent in manifestation
and action, both in the superficial material sense, and in the extended
supernal condition of its full expression. This level of Being is the
ultimate and final source of all causality, and if it does not wish us
to gain an understanding of the symbolic transmissions that, in fact,
originate with it at the core of all consciousness, then
that comprehension will not be forthcoming no matter what
interpretive technique we attempt.
Now, there is, of course, a
key process that enables as much of this comprehension as is possible at
any given time, and this process is Sacrifice. If we are
willing to offer a truly significant level of personal sacrifice to this
quest in order to attain the knowing that we seek, then it will
be forthcoming. There are many aspects to this sacrificial expression
– time spent in meditation, study, and introspection, the conversion
from a selfish personal lifestyle to a humble, simple life of poverty,
chastity, discipline, and quiet grace, the effort spent in submission to
the Truth of Consciousness as the ultimate truth in the universe, and
the effort spent in submission to the Divine Will as opposed to our
limited and delusional personal will. Obviously, this is a tall order
for any of us, but consider this – if the Truth of Consciousness (which
I like to refer to as the Self) is ultimately the only real
condition, aren’t we better off knowing this and living accordingly?
Why continue in a pathetic effort to preserve a doomed illusion when the
Truth can be embraced and will result in Eternal Liberation through
Enlightenment? Why continue to suffer by choice when we can, with
sufficient personal sacrifice, defeat the illusions of desire and desire
action and live in Grace and Peace thereafter?
As much of the Self can be
known as we are willing to encounter, because only the Self is
real anyway – we, as bodily ego states, are not – at this level
of manifestation we are merely transitory and evanescent little blinks
of the Eye of Eternity. Why not live in the Eternal Light of that
brilliant and illuminating Oculus instead? Yes, this requires a
massive adjustment of conventional consciousness and thought, and yes,
the outcome is well worth the effort made, because at least one of the
rewards for this attempt is the cessation or considerable amelioration
of most of our human suffering, the vast majority of which is the result
of our ignorant personal choices in the first place, though we so often
know this not. The acquisition of this Self Knowledge is the
greatest gift of Enlightenment, and it is attainable through the
means just described herein.
It can be argued that our personal and collective Karma will always
operate on this Physical Plane as the governing mechanism of conscious
development, and this may well be true, but consider also that anyone
who suspects the illusion of this existence for what it is has taken at
least the first step on the Path back home, and we all potentially have
this capacity. Therefore, we all have the right, entitlement, and
responsibility to deeply examine our lives, because, as the famous Greek
philosopher Socrates once said, while on trial for his life for
heresy, “The unexamined life is not worth living!”
- With Love, Alan -
(Copyright 2010, by Alan Schneider)
Return to Top
|