From the time that people began to suffer (this is of course: since they exist), they are intrigued by possible causes and solutions for this suffering.
As more organization came in social life and thinking, it was of course obvious that one also began to think about suffering in a more ‘organized’ way .
Buddhism for example has put ‘suffering’ at the center of its own philosophy, from the start.
Also with regard to the stories: the ‘historical Buddha’ was very moved by the sight of suffering from disease, poverty, old age and death, after having a protected (spoiled rotten?) childhood himself as a king’s son without any concern. To him the sight of suffering was a huge shock, a trauma resulting in (as they would say nowadays) ‘Post Traumatic Stress’ during a period afterwards. For him, it was in any case the reason to leave everything behind, including his wife and child, and to seek out the deepest cause and solution of suffering. The core of his teaching was/is contained in the following ‘4 noble truths’: “1) There is suffering and 2) there is a cause of that suffering and 3) there is also a solution and 4) that solution is ‘awakening’.’’
Not bad. If you have found a solution for all ‘suffering’, probably a lot of people may come to take a look
at what that solution may be. And maybe they will then be moved by the idea of a commitment to ‘awakening’ … and enter that way the ‘path’ that Buddha himself has indicated +/-2300 years ago.
Personally, I do not see how this starting point (‘there is suffering’) is unconditionally the best choice – unless truly in depth.
Of course: if people should get wings, it would not matter so much. After all, airplanes do also not always take off in the direction of their final destination. But: many who are directly attracted by a philosophy of a path-with-suffering will not get wings and in that case the initial direction is indeed important. Therefore you ought to take care of that.
‘It is not that big of a deal…’ ?
It definitely is a big deal. Millions of people are looking in a direction in which there is nothing to see what can help them in depth. However that is precisely what their ‘deeper self’ asks for. But they do not hear it. What’s more: they have put plugs in their own ears.
You can’t just find a solution for ‘suffering’ by directly basing this solution upon ‘suffering’ itself, as is nevertheless often highlighted in Buddhism.
Another sender. Another metaphor.
Eve and husband took a bite of the apple from the tree of knowledge. Apparently that was the ultimate sin, cause of all other sins and of all suffering: the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, with a lot of weeping and with the covering of own ‘nudity’.
That is interesting: here we have an ‘ultimate cause of all suffering’ and that cause has to do with knowledge. What kind of knowledge?
Another sender. Another metaphor.
Ah. AURELIS J.
If we take a closer look at both previous metaphors, we see that in the second metaphor ‘knowledge’ is seen as a cause of suffering, and in the first ‘awakening’ is seen as a solution of suffering. If we now look at this from AURELIS, with ‘the subconceptual’ and so on, then we can clarify further both the Adamian knowledge and the Boeddhanian awakening:
- the ‘knowledge’ is the conceptual knowledge, in particular: if this knowledge gets in the way (one is often reverting to it in AURELIS) of the deeper layers.
- the ‘awakening’ is the unimpeded highlighting of those deeper layers – again.
All this integrated, we can pose it as follows:
if someone loses himself in a purely conceptual thinking (= materialistic thinking), on a particular domain, or even in general, then that person also loses touch with the deeper self. This creates either a large numbness or an increasing tension – the tension on the ‘flower bud’- that shows itself as suffering.
However, if the flower bud has the opportunity to open organically, the suffering is relieved/disappears. Three great traditions (okay, the third one still has to grow organically) point together to that internal dissociation, whereby the mere-conceptual thinking is getting in the way of the realization of the deeper self. Internal dissociation is – in the broadest sense – the ultimate cause of all suffering. The direction of AURELIS, from beginning to end, is that of the solving of this dissociation, so: the realization of the total person. In Buddhist terms: ‘awakening’, in Christian terms: returning to the Garden of Eden with eyes open to see.
Everything is allowed… with respect.
This last quote means: it must not stand in the way of what’s important. Each Aurelian coaching aims for a reduction of dissociation from start to finish. An ‘Aurelian way of life’ aims for a reduction of dissociation from start to finish. Absolutely not ‘heavy’. On the contrary: light as a feather.
Reduction of dissociation, enlightenment, awakening, consciousness-expanding, ‘personal growth’ …
And the Big Solution Of All Suffering?
That solution is commendable. It is, at least on a personal level, a pleasant side effect and perhaps more than that, but not merely the main goal. Oh well. Actually the Buddha also already knew that of course. It has just been a bit diluted afterwards in the tradition concerned.