Happiness (not suffering) Is The Real Enemy

[UnbornTao]

But what are they?

[Princess Arabia]

27 minutes ago, pablo_aka_god said:

Are you saying the reason I can't connect with women even when I have manny men friends is because I see them as the enemy because they are the gate keepers of my happiness(ie: sex)? 

Makes no sense at all (sarcasm)

What I'm saying in that regard is, on an intimate/sexual level, the gender we seek is the one capable of hurting us; so, since happiness is what we seek, it is capable of hurting us and in this context the hurt is in it's absence. If you're straight, can a man break your heart, no. You're heartbroken because you don't feel loved. You don't see women as the enemy but men are automatically excluded from being the enemy in this way. You don't see happiness as the enemy but suffering is automatically excluded because it's not saught after. Same thing, women are saught after by you and men aren't so men can't be your enemy in this sense. It's like a reverse psychology kind of a thing.

[Princess Arabia]

13 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It is desire in both directions isn't it?

Desire to NOT suffer.

Desire for happiness.

Happiness seeking generates its own suffering. We generate the lack within ourselves 'I do NOT have this thing, I must get it' You create the void inside.

I think there is some saying about desire/craving somewhere in my pockets

Yes, but most desire happiness, not to "not suffer". Most are telling people how to be happy not how to not suffer, even though both are pretty much the same thing but there's a subtle difference and that's what the post is pointing to. How suffering is there but happiness is being chased and that makes it more of the enemy than suffering because it's what's driving the suffering, the lack of happiness. 

[theleelajoker]

23 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

What I'm saying in that regard is, on an intimate/sexual level, the gender we seek is the one capable of hurting us; so, since happiness is what we seek, it is capable of hurting us and in this context the hurt is in it's absence. If you're straight, can a man break your heart, no. You're heartbroken because you don't feel loved. You don't see women as the enemy but men are automatically excluded from being the enemy in this way. You don't see happiness as the enemy but suffering is automatically excluded because it's not saught after. Same thing, women are saught after by you and men aren't so men can't be your enemy in this sense. It's like a reverse psychology kind of a thing.

Maybe I should try that bi-sexual thing, then all problems solved right? 

[Princess Arabia]

3 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

Maybe I should try that bi-sexual thing, then all problems solved right? 

It doubles the chances. Now you've got both genders capable of hurting you. Can't escape. Desire can be painful.

[Princess Arabia]

Here's a video that points to what I'm trying to say.

[Someone here]

Here's a meta point..anytime you side with one side of any duality be sure you got it wrong or at least incomplete. Because existence includes both yin and yang. You can't even know what happiness is without suffering and vice versa . Another example is consciousness vs unconsciousness or you can say existence vs non existence.  The only reason you think what's happening right now is consciousness or existence is because you go to sleep and lose consciousness. If sleep didn't exist..this experience right now would still exist but it won't be labelled as consciousness or existence.