Is suffering a necessary part of human condition?
 

Is suffering a necessary part of human condition? What would people who never suffered be like?

What is suffering? What is its purpose - in the long term?

***

Suffering, initially, is just part of a spectre of potential experiences that a Higher Self wanted to get acquainted with, as Harmony and residing in a state of Divine Bliss may provide conceptual understanding of suffering but not the feeling of it. Probably merging with another consciousness for a while could do it but is it completely the same as living it first-hand, in flesh, or other bounding states of existence (well, save for the scenario when no one else has ever really experienced it before)? So, I guess suffering is a concept that also needed experiencing. However, the purpose is not to get dragged by it in a permanent lower vibrational state, it is, to me, more like aimed to broaden perception of the consequences of evil/unconcerned patterns of behaviour. If you get to suffer but manage to remain aligned with the righteous teachings, you will understand how dangerous and terrifying evil could be. Maybe, if you are part of the Holy Trinity, you perceive things in a different way and this narrowing of the Self is not necessary in the first place. But for other categories of creatures it is difficult to understand how fire burns and mortal problems in general. Thus, experiencing suffering could make you more compassionate, cautious and responsible. It could add depth to the ideas of protection ways and to the approach to handling destructive phenomena.

I believe that at least some of the creatures could remain a bit naive or distant if they always live as spirits in an advanced world. Maybe some are just destined to be part of an entirely different system of functioning and purpose of living.

But I am unsure whether the danger of getting stuck in malice is worth it.

All I can say is that those who decided to fragment themselves went on a risky adventure that would inevitably become way too obscure in its stages of development, and this deserves respect.

So next time you hold a grudge, remember the splendid creature they were when you ventured together on the same path, then forgive them and pray for them to find their way back home.

I think the question of ''necessity'' is related to morality in this context, along the lines of ''should it be necessary?'' Your question strongly hints at being a normative question and not a descriptive question. There's quite a difference between the two and this is also a key difference between looking at this issue from a religious point of view or an non-religious point of view.

When I think about this topic I tend to take a normative approach. Suffering isn't as much a necessity or not, but more so an inescapable reality.
It is about physical and mental pain, and while both can be reduced in ways they are impossible to eradicate from a human life.

this goes here, that goes there, these things go over there... what is supposed to delight, doesn't delight; what is supposed to terrify, doesn't terrify. From such a POV things go in places but there isn't any reason to think one thing more or less important than another.

And it would seem, looking at things, that people run toward what they like, and away from what they don't... making suffering a convenient way to make a barrier between here and.... where? So hard to explore something that everyone else denigrates... so how many would dare try? And would they be able to dig far enough to actually see what is actually there, given things like cherubim with flaming swords doing everything they can to prevent progress?

FallingLeaves, why do you think cherubim are trying to prevent progress?
Altair, I believe suffering is something that just can happen, like, in certain circumstances that could be activated. It's not created on purpose, it's the consequence of certain factors and conditions.
You end up somewhere, something happens, it leads to a certain reaction. There isn't a plot twist, just a natural connection.
I don't believe in current religious books, by the way.

Yes I think so. Speaking from experience if there is still suffering it can create blind spots because the priority would be it needing to be healed. Then once its taken care of resumes a wider perception.

Hmm. Fear can cause suffering.

How do we know if they are always living as spirits in an advanced world? Are we assuming that. What if they also experience suffering and are doing their best to temper it.

Yeah I can attest to that lol all my attempts have done damage but I'm okay with it. This is what I got to work with and I'll do my best with it.

Nope no grudges here. I try to keep an open mind.

I believe that suffering isn't necessary, and that it is useful only as much as we learn to avoid it.

Suffering happens because we don't know what we're doing, and we're also stubborn enough to ignore the symbolic messages we get from our inner guidance.

I don't believe that the "higher self" (whatever incarnated into us here) wants to experience suffering more than we want to experience nightmare when we sleep.

Simple enough. I've had to deal with the cherubim/flaming sword long enough that I understand what was written about it to be correct... that path to the 'better place' is most definitely blocked.

There are people who do not care they cause suffering of others and people will do anything not to suffer, ie attachment. The experience of this may be necessary to see and understand and so one of the meanings of life as lessons.

I think Jesus said if you lose your life (not literally) you will see nothing last in this world, and you will save it by going to the Christian God where it does last. But try and save it, you will store up too much wealth where everybody is just around you for your money and you will lose your life.. No real friends. No real love, etc. Example Marilyn Monroe.

Losing all your loved ones will make you know only God gives life and love. But the devil just takes these things from you.

hi brian, that is the best rendition of that I've heard, and is close enough to the mark I suppose. As for norma jean, the way I heard it she wasn't given compensation to the level of other actresses in her time... thus didn't even have lots of money to compensate for being between a rock and a hard place, and with seemingly noone to turn to. Again.