Is Suffering Necessary?
That is THE question. Is it? Does it matter?
Suffering… being as common as we’ve noticed it to be — if you haven’t experienced enough suffering, you can easily find someone that has — based on this, we have accepted it as part of life.
So, it’s part of life. But is it [suffering] necessary? That is the question.
Can something as predominant as suffering, an aspect that seems almost fundamental to experiencing human life at its maximum capacity, ever possibly be deemed as “unnecessary”?
It is hard (for me, at least) to draw a conclusion from a world I’ve never known. A world without suffering and what that might look like to us, but also, what would it mean?
One might be heavily inclined to suspect or believe that by removing something that brings us pain would result in its antithesis; a state of bliss. Could we ever confirm this? Perhaps not.
Also, something to contemplate would be — would this state of bliss then remain and never shift? Now, that we’ve purged the entire planet of all “evil”, humans may now live in a constant state of nirvana from now until heaven. Steering clear from sadness, guilt, desperation, hopelessness, heartache, or anything of that sort.
Do humans even have the capability to maintain such a world? [a world without suffering] or would they inevitably find something that creates chaos in their lives, that would also inevitably affect the people around them?
We’ve witnessed throughout history that there’s always been a constant competition, the famous survival of the fittest — essentially: to eat or be eaten.
The recognition of suffering grew in conjunction with animal consciousness. However, I will point out (and perhaps I don’t need to) that humans appear to be the only animal to provoke suffering in others unnecessarily or in quite stupidly unnecessary quantities.
“The Universe naturally slides towards disorder”
— James Clear
There will always be a troubled child. What I mean by that is that equilibrium, at least on this planet, cannot be maintained — or not for too long. It just takes one to start moving in the opposite direction, instigating the rest. The good news that comes from this is that order doesn’t last, but neither does chaos. Both are always oscillating with one another. This, in a way, is how life breathes.
A linear life would not be as efficient at producing the results we wish to see — or need.
The way I see it, suffering is a process.
It’s a process where the end product is something refined. Without going through the process of suffering, it would not have been possible to achieve that sort of refinement. Therefore, the challenges that come with suffering should not be seen as a threat (I agree that this is one of those that’s easier said than done).
It is the only process where one can prove to themselves what they are capable of. You don’t get that sort of opportunity in the opposite realm, no to that extent, or at least it’s very different.
Altruistic acts can certainly provide us with opportunities to prove ourselves in certain regards but when it comes to how we handle the world of “suffering”, that calls for an entirely different set of skills and one that contains our innate capacity to fight back.
Now — suffering doesn’t necessarily mean we have to battle every single time; sometimes to find peace in that battle means we’ll have to put down the armor.
Suffering opens our eyes to certain aspects of life that happiness could never show us. Just like how different learning is in a classroom setting versus learning out on the streets — some lessons can only be found in certain places.
[By the way, if you think suffering cannot get worse, try suffering in silence.]
Furthermore, suffering forces us to be present and experience that very moment, as agonizing as it might be. Since we cannot avoid it, we have two choices: we either learn to look at it straight in the eyes and learn from it or run away, learn nothing or not enough, and face it again down the road. That’s all it is. It’s a teacher with a very firm hand.
One last thought.
We must understand what is good and what is bad. Because what is good, works, and what is bad, well… doesn’t. Sure, some of these are tied to what we’ve been taught in whichever culture we grew up in, some perhaps are not legitimately “good” or “bad” and simply are.
To blur the lines between the two is fine, in some cases I would even say that it is necessary — to an extent. See, if you the lines so much to where there is no longer a clear distinction of what anything is anymore and it’s all just one big blur, then what happens?
It is important that at least certain aspects do remain clearly defined in order to get certain consistent results since the results with reflect in the quality of the definition.
Lastly.
It seems we learn most when we can tell without a doubt that something did not work out in our favor, where we can say “well, that clearly was not good, I probably should not do that again” — it’s the ability to distinguish between these two opposing forces. Was that taught to us? Or are we naturally inclined to this because that is just the reality we live in and we instinctively know this?
Another example of this is our tendency to believe that the opposite of suffering [a state of bliss] is what would remain if suffering could be magically eradicated. Why the exact opposite? Why not a 3rd or 4th element that is NOT the opposite? Can we even imagine what that would be? Probably not, because we live in a reality based on duality.
Was this taught or is this the actual state of affairs?
Our world contains suffering because it is necessary just as much as order needs chaos.
