Hurts More, Bothers You Less

[hannahu108]

German translation available now!

Deutsche Übersetzung auf der Webseite des Integralen Forums

[Neuromance27]

@presentlightoftruth That just seems to represent a poor understanding of human psychology, in terms of the conceptual good and evil as if they are really separate yet mutually depend on one another to even exist in the slightest. Taking a deeper look shows good and evil exist nowhere but within the human psyche. It all has to do with judgement and ignorance.

[craigrgill]

I suspect this may sometimes be a more useful state of being and sometimes result in a greater reduction in suffering. Although sometimes a heartfelt expression sharing the same emotions may also help, especially with rapport building. It seems as though humans are able to hold more that one "position" at any one time possibly due to the ability of imagination? A bit like knowing that Santa doesn't exist but enjoying the excitement of playing along. That's the best analogy I could think of!!!

[craigrgill]

This is really a great discussion. With regard to saying "nothing bothers me", this could be literally interpreted as "I am bothered by nothing" i.e. if I perceive nothingness I am bothered. The focus is "the nothing". A bit like when someone says "I don't care" when you can see they do really! Its like trying to deny the truth with only a mental construct and without a corresponding feeling.

[craigrgill]

I think it would be a more accurate representation of the feeling to say "I'm not bothered by nothing" which would of course be considered poor use of English by most but I consider it a higher use similar to the RastafarI use of language . A double negative makes a positive mathematically. Or even better, one could say "I am happy with everything" which would batter the situation with positivity! ; )

[craigrgill]

I may choose the words differently, ie the negativity is "sensed" rather than "felt" as Ken puts it. To "feel" it, would demonstrate there is still attachment, with ones feelings determined by external stimulus. I agree, when observing great suffering it does not have to take away ones happiness, both can exist at once, however the fact that it has been "sensed"/perceived/acknowledge­d into ones awareness can alter the response one makes or actions one takes, and help alleviate it if possible.

[integraleric]

Thank you. Love it.

[cjg28]

I love ken

[shadowmongoose]

Ken knows what he's talking about. I have experienced this as well. As we develop and practice we become more empathetic towards others. We can feel the pain they feel to a much greater degree over time, but it does indeed bother us less. The suffering turns into discomfort and eventually, according to some, we may not even want to call it discomfort anymore.

[jg33brunner]

Beautiful words. Thank you.

[johnfrangiamore]

Please someone tell me I'm wrong and this chap has not got lost in getting money for his books?

[MaBu888]

I'd say you're wrong. I downloaded all of his books. I think his books have been a rehash, of good but not perfect frameworks and metattheories that a fractured world needs. Good read would be, "One Taste". The same thing what you just complained about, can be said about David Ike, although I'm not saying that about these two men. Open source integral is a more nonlinear blogosphere community that incudes Wilber's and other integral ideas as well.

[johnfrangiamore]

Thank you

[shadowmongoose]

@johnfrangiamore you are wrong and he is definitely not getting lost in getting money for his books.  I imagine he keeps saying "well you need to read the book" because he covers quite a few issues in this book and it would be difficult getting into it without going through ridiculously long explanations. Ken is the real deal. We are lucky to have him here with us.

[cacaolover]

It doesn't matter how enlightened you are we all suffer from time to time. In fact the more aware you become the more you will feel and for some this is too much others however are more capable of dealing with it that is they apply spiritual principles of non-attachment. Out of there suffering evolves compassion. So the whole idea that just because you are enlightened (whatever that is anyway) you don't suffer is just silly. tbc

[MaBu888]

Agreed.With each breath, I've tried to cultivate a presence of two enlightened qualities of the mindbody, in some intense moments: non-attatchment and non-aversion. Not worrying needlesly for the future, and not fighting to keep current order or chaos, order-chaos one.

[Naturyl]

I think I've commented before, but I want to re-iterate that this is an amazing piece of teaching. Like all of us, Ken Wilber is a mixed bag, but he definitely "has something" and it shows in this teaching. There is some egotism here, but it is honestly acknowledged and dealt with in an authentic manner. This video is worth paying close attention to.

[lovesarita]

"I don't know anybody has simply resolved that (richeting back and forth between 'hurts more / bothers you less'), and I don't think you're supposed to".

Wilber is so attached to suffering!

I wonder how he fits someone like Byron Katie into his scheme of things.... she sure aint suffering and nobody would dispute her total authenticity and enlightenment.

[MaBu888]

I'm in disagreeance. How do you know what Bryon Katie or whoever she is, feels?

[MaBu888]

Passion for what is arising outside the limiting and limited ego.

[creationofself]

If and when I achieve total liberation I will be the judge of how I feel and why I feel it, and what I do about it. Wiber is far from total libertarian. That is not a stab, and I don't think he even professed such a thing. Did the Indian prince who became known as the Buddha even really exist? Was he actually totally liberated? Though they are sound words, they are just words. Intellectually entertaining but essentially inapplicable, containing unsustainable nourishment.

[dioncat]

yes the other side...the pain...it's sooo weird...how it came with the awareness...along with extreme joy...a paradox of the 2 a roller coaster of emotions!!! find the balance!! peace!!!

[TheCoolSamaritan33]

i think ken's view is way way above date than most (like at least 90 percent) views. ofcrouse from a ver very valid persepctive increasing awareness decreases suffering. this happens because increaed awareness both makes you more conscious hence stripping away the unconscious aspects of yourself that make you suffer, and it also instills a non-dual awareness which puts you beyond suffering even when it's apparently still happening (what ken was mostly refering to)

[MaBu888]

The unconscious aspects of the psyche are to alirse and self-liberate and transmute into beneficial attributes, were I to be more 'technical'.

[Thedreamerdancing]

Ken's information is a bit out of date in my view. I have learned ways to increase awareness without also increasing suffering. I agree with thewiseturtle that bringing peace to yourself is one of the best ways to help the world be more peaceful. The scientific basis of that is a law of physics that states that two different frequencies vibrating together over time creates a single new synergistic frequency.Taking responsibility to clear your own distress uplifts everyone.

[ddj333]

Bringing peace to ones self increases peace one person at a time, individualistically. That is valid, indeed. Living a "peaceful" existence is one thing. In the realm of the absolute, the broader realm of where we all connect it can be very effective to feel the pain of others, "suffer" it in order to motivate change, the "hurts you more" part. My own peace may put me in a peaceful place, but can cause me to almost ignore the "peace" of others. My peace is the "bothers you less" part.

[Thedreamerdancing]

Many people probably do need to feel pain of others because it helps their motivation to assist humanity, but I also feel that there is a balance here. They can overdo this need: it is like they are saying "Look how connected I am to compassion because I am suffering." I think the more joyful your resonance, the more positive influence you can have.

[rockstarkey]

I thought that Ken was suggesting an increase in pain more than an increase in sufferiing. The suffering remains the same, this he refers to as Samsara, if I am not mistaken. To break it down, Ken is fundamentally suggesting that while your awareness increases your awareness of suffering also increases which causes you pain; conversely and conjointly your ability to not be bothered by that pain or by those suffering increases in balance.

And I enjoyed your post.

[Naturyl]

Yes, this is exactly right.

[DustTown]

Go Ken!

[HaZ3L777]

Ken Wilbur - Hes definately one heck of a charictar. Great writer and speaker though.

[GnosisMan50]

why does ken always have a pen in his hand? I saw him pick one up in another video when a question was asked

[sting1993]

"That was an important speech sir, and it needed to be made, but might I suggest that from this moment the rest of the discourse is conducted by those with brains larger than a grape."

[danirizzi]

Wanting to be in a position to "help" others isn't narcissist as well? I would even dare to say that it is the worst kind of narcissism...

You can surely help someone in a particular situation, but then, it is not you that helps, it is "truth", that is able to be shown through you. It happens spontaneously. But if you want to help people, if you seek that, than you are just doing ego massage...

[Guedingen]

That's sophistry and an just an excuse for more naval gazing.

[Guedingen]

There's a lot of chat here - I can only recommend voluntary work in old people's homes and hospiz, to name but two. It's there you'll be able to put certain things into practice and perspective. I believe there's an unhealthy naval-gazing and narcissism in much of what's being discussed here and elsewhere - no offence.

[thewiseturtle]

Guedingen, that's a great point, attachment to the idea that we "need to suffer" leads to an equal and opposite attachment to narcissism. Narcissism is an unhealthy need for fleeting pleasure to overcompensate for unhealthy suffering. But when you are free from suffering, you don't need narcissism, and will be far more effective and compassionate when helping others be healthy.

[ontheconcourse]

I think Ken might be getting at the development of one stage of emotional selfhood to another. Holonically speaking, the new, more accepting stage both transcends and embraces the old, more personal/emotional stage. The capacity for suffering doesn't just go away or become less important; it's still there, and it's integral, but there is now a new capacity for calmness. Both capacities are important, I think.

[ontheconcourse]

For example, a lot of people who are suffering need a certain amount of empathy... they need to know that other people recognize and feel their pain alongside them. In those cases, being completely detached and content and saying "well, that's just the way things are" would be drastically less than helpful.

[thewiseturtle]

Yes and no. In a Buddhist sense, empathizing is actually contributing to the suffering. It's a very difficult concept to grasp, especially in the highly victim-happy US. But if you're interested, check out the book "An Open Heart" by the Dalai Lama. The capacity for suffering does indeed "go away" or at least become less prominant for the enlightened.

[ontheconcourse]

I'll have to look into that, as I am not very informed about Buddhist thought. A part of me wants to believe that suffering is an inevitable and even beneficial part of being human... maybe there's a way to get rid of it, but I'm not entirely sure that I'd want to. Maybe that's because my perspective is flawed in some way, but I just like the idea that no matter how much I grow or develop, I'll still have that basic underlying tendency to feel strongly for those around me... know what I mean?

[thewiseturtle]

You will even feel more strongly for those around you if you can free yourself from the attachment to suffering. Suffering acts like a dirty window, making it hard to see clearly. Enlightenment (non-attachment) clears that window nicely, so you can really see the world clearly, and be more effective in acting to help others.

[danirizzi]

Being aware of and feeling pain are different things. (in thewiseturtle's words noticing and feeling pain). Ken says that if you see someone starving, even if you 'transcended' and knows what it means to be in the Absolute, you will feel pain and not only notice that someone is suffering. I guess that the line is very tenuous, hard to put in words. Though, he speaks of this

[danirizzi]

Though, he speaks of this two waken souls... Buda and Christ. He is telling that it is possible to be a waken soul that recgonizes both "truths". If you follow a religion called Buddhism, I can understand that you believe that the "final path" is finding the way off to real suffering and achieving a point in which "nothing bothers".

[danirizzi]

For me, today, in this very moment, being completely neutral to seeing someone starving is impossible. So I think that accepting that, just as it is, is the most honest thing to be done. Why would I want to change it? To be more "enlightened"? This seems as a lie to me...

[thewiseturtle]

I guess I'm not being clear enough here. Enlightenment means more compassion, less suffering. You see a starving person, and you don't feel pain, or fear, you feel only compassion, and find ways to lovingly (not fearfully) help them. No suffering necessary! Just love and clarity of purpose. Does that make sense? Enlightenment is the opposite of suffering and apathy. It's something entirely better: a healthy, happy, and effective drive to continually help others.

[danirizzi]

You are for sure being clear enough in your words.

[danirizzi]

Feeling pain does not exactly has something to do with being fearful. And may also has something to do with love. "It hurts more, but it bothers you less" - that is the paradox, between the waken Buda and the waken Christ. Both of them loved. Both of them had clarity of purpose.

[DonkeyofHeaven]

Enlightenment that is the opposite to anything is not true enlightenment. That type of enlightenment is just and idea of enlightenment. Com-passion means "with suffering." To have compassion is to feel and be with passion, i.e., suffering, of others. Pre-enlightenment suffering is ego suffering, post-enlightenment compassion is egoless non-dual suffering that recognizes it is Buddha that suffers.

[thewiseturtle]

Your experience may be different, but in my experience, attachment to suffering never brought me peace. Freedom from suffering brought me peace. And when I feel peace, I help bring peace to others more easily than when I am suffering. And that's my goal in life, to help the world be more peaceful and healthy.

[timmerwin]

Right, everything is both perfect just as it is. And also in need of tremendous change and improvement. Two mutually opposing ideas. And intelligence is often defined as being able to hold 2 opposing ideas in the mind at the same time.

[thewiseturtle]

I guess I wasn't clear up there. I was talking about the difference between the known present and the unknown future. You can't change anything in the present, so it must be perfect. But you can change the future, in fact, you have no choice but to change the future since time doesn't stand still. So, no paradox necessary - everything is perfect now, and we must change the future - two different things. See what I mean?

[timmerwin]

In another ken wilber video on youtube Ken says, with regard to helping others and activism and so forth, I paraphrase, 'you have to realize that everything is perfect and absolutely nothing needs to be changed, and therefore you have to work really hard at it'. Which is, of course, a paradox. "It hurts more but bothers you less." The semantics cause confusion but I think his actual belief and practice is more on the Bhuddist nonsuffering side.

[thewiseturtle]

I'm not sure it's really a paradox. While nothing needs to be changed everything will change, and the hard work is deciding how we'd like to change. Or, perhaps Ken means that the hard work is in understanding and accepting that everything is perfect...

[jay13jay13]

we know, we cant say

[thewiseturtle]

I think it might be more accurate to say that suffering is NOTICED more, bothers you less. In Buddhism, and in my own experience, I don't have to feel pain myself to notice suffering in others. In fact, the more I suffer, the LESS I am able to effectively help.

Ken seems to be attached to suffering, believing that suffering is good. Buddhism, and I, see the opposite as true. I do far more compassionate and effective things for the world when I'm free from the side effects of suffering.

[danirizzi]

More compassionate and effective things... may I ask what you mean, thewiseturtle?

[thewiseturtle]

Danirizzi, I simply mean that I can bring more health and happiness to others when I'm feeling heath and happiness in myself, rather than pain and suffering. For example, I can find creative and fun solutions when facing a dilemma, rather than throwing a fit and making everyone miserable.

[danirizzi]

Yes, I guess you are right: when we're healthy and happy, we tend to "infect" other people with it. Although, the question is: getting irritated, insecure, confused, sad, upset, also lead us to suffering. And it is just as it is: part of being alive.

Wilber is telling us that even the human being that transcended is also able to suffer really hard... If I am honest to myself, I can't believe none of you, since I haven't been there.

[thewiseturtle]

In the Buddhist philosophy, you do indeed transcend suffering. You still feel pain (physically), but you don't suffer from it (mentally), or at least not much, since you aren't thinking to yourself "this is wrong".

Thats why I say that Ken is attached to the belief that you do need to suffer, when you honestly don't. I think that's why he's kind of stuck in his theories lately.