P. Ralston on unnecessary suffering - avoidance?

[Breakingthewall]

10 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

Indeed when life is filtered through continuity, comparison, and identity, tension becomes something personal. The Instagram example illustrates this well: the nervous system isn’t just responding to the moment, but to what the moment is taken to say about the self. Remove that interpretive lens and the energy remains, but the suffering now collapses.

That would imply there are two categories of life: that of the cell, or the animal, which is real, and its suffering is legitimate, necessary for survival; and the mental category, which is unreal, and its suffering is a kind of system error, an unnecessary loop that must be deactivated.

But reality is not like that. The mind is a living being, exactly like the cell, only on another plane, in another phase. The mind arises as an interface that interconnects separate organisms through symbolism, and it is a stable, self-preserving energetic structure, just like a cell.

Mental suffering is activated by symbolism, but symbolism is as real as the fire that burns you. When the emperor makes the symbol: thumbs-down , the gladiator says, "Fuck me." And his system releases an energetic discharge that is perceived as suffering, just as a rat's system releases an energetic discharge that is perceived as suffering if you burn it with a flame.

[Breakingthewall]

3 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Yes this is the portion you are unable to reconcile. 

See here, for a good breakdown:

And also Peter Ralston's book 'Ending Unnecessary Suffering'. 

Genuinely. I know you hate him, but you need to get past personal feelings for him and just look at the work seperate from who generated it. Look at the work for the truth that resides there. 

If you will not, then that is a loss indeed. And I do not mean to attack here - but you are essentially strawmanning Ralston. Continually. Your statements betray your ignorance to the process and possibilities. 

Up to you if you want the truth.

I ask you not to Ralston, and I said that it's possible to finish with that suffering, but the question is how 

 So, how would you dissolve it?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I ask you not to Ralston, and I said that it's possible to finish with that suffering, but the question is how 

 So, how would you dissolve it?

Through the process Ralston outlines. My answer is Ralston's answer. I take no credit ☺️

Read the post linked.  

That would be my outline.

If you like, I can cut paste it and post it again here, but I wish to credit Ralston and the user. I've used Ralston's book and process to understand what I was doing and reduce suffering dramatically.

Edited 3 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Breakingthewall]

6 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Through the process Ralston outlines. My answer is Ralston's answer. I take no credit ☺️

Read the post linked.  

That would be my outline.

If you like, I can cut paste it and post it again here, but I wish to credit Ralston and the user. I've used Ralston's book and process to understand what I was doing and reduce suffering dramatically.

I read the post, but it doesn't explain exactly how to stop suffering, he just said that he observed the suffering and how he's creating it, then he stopped creating it. But this implies a let's say , not exact idea of what means "he". 

Again the example of a Nigerian jail and gang rape when I was 9, and more, my mother sold me there to be raped in exchange of a Louis Vuitton bag quite ugly. Tell me , how to stop this rumination. I know how. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

18 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I read the post, but it doesn't explain exactly how to stop suffering, he just said that he observed the suffering and how he's creating it, then he stopped creating it. But this implies a let's say , not exact idea of what means "he". 

Again the example of a Nigerian jail and gang rape when I was 9, and more, my mother sold me there to be raped in exchange of a Louis Vuitton bag quite ugly. Tell me , how to stop this rumination. I know how. 

You need to read Ralston's book then. If you want to understand the process. It has been answered in one form or another all over the forum. Multiple times. 

The fact that you won't means you aren't serious about the topic - you are only serious about disliking Ralston. He did write an entire book on it, so perhaps there is a lot to unpack 

You want to know, right? It will require effort from you.

I do speak from experience. And the trauma / suffering I experienced was from an incident as bad as your example. 

I wonder why some people can walk away from incidents like that with suffering and trauma, and some people do not? I wonder what one person is doing, and one is not? I wonder what is going on internally? 

Contemplation questions that might assist.

[gettoefl]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

That would imply there are two categories of life: that of the cell, or the animal, which is real, and its suffering is legitimate, necessary for survival; and the mental category, which is unreal, and its suffering is a kind of system error, an unnecessary loop that must be deactivated.

But reality is not like that. The mind is a living being, exactly like the cell, only on another plane, in another phase. The mind arises as an interface that interconnects separate organisms through symbolism, and it is a stable, self-preserving energetic structure, just like a cell.

Mental suffering is activated by symbolism, but symbolism is as real as the fire that burns you. When the emperor makes the symbol: thumbs-down , the gladiator says, "Fuck me." And his system releases an energetic discharge that is perceived as suffering, just as a rat's system releases an energetic discharge that is perceived as suffering if you burn it with a flame.

I don’t think the issue is whether mental suffering is real, because clearly it is. Symbolic stimuli can trigger the same physiological cascades as physical ones. The nervous system doesn’t distinguish between fire and meaning. The key difference isn’t reality, but duration and reuse.

A cell or animal responds to threat, discharges energy, and then returns to baseline once the stimulus ends. The human mind by contrast adds something new: it stores meaning and reapplies it across time. That doesn’t make mental suffering unreal but it does make it persistent.

So the distinction is not biological vs imaginary suffering. Rather it is situational suffering versus self-reinforcing suffering. Both are real; one completes naturally, and the other loops and loops.

Your gladiator example is a perfect case in point. The immediate physiological shock is unavoidable. What magnifies and prolongs the suffering is what the symbol is taken to mean beyond the moment namely annihilation, finality, identity-ending. That layer is by no means intrinsic to the thumbs-down; it’s interpretive, and therefore correctable.

This doesn’t imply the mind is an evolutionary error. Instead it introduces a new capacity: continuity of meaning. That capacity enables culture and coordination, and also enables suffering to outlive its cause.

And thus easing suffering isn’t about denying biology, symbolism, or mind. It’s about loosening the insistence that a symbol must keep meaning what it always meant before. When that insistence relaxes, the same energetic system functions as before, but without turning every signal into an existential verdict.

Mental suffering isn’t fake. It’s just the only form of suffering that can be allowed to finish.

Anyway that's it for me and I bid you Happy New Year brother. I appreciate our occasional joustings this year.

[UnbornTao]

You can make yourself suffer something minor right now as an exercise (like feeling ignored as a result of perceiving that you're not being heard), and this may elucidate the role you play in your experience. Let there be suffering! 

Edited 1 hour ago by UnbornTao