deliverance in struggling without suffering?

There is a part of me that knows about misery all to well. I suppose it happens to do with vulnerability, or the reason for me to suggest it?

In a thesis of this kind, I take for granted the maturity process one learns how to cope,
with undertaking why suffering makes us struggle for a greater good that we may establish our own free will.

So much that impacts the course of ones history, we manage to survive the outcomes in several factors.

Much more important is that in recovering from beneath the struggle, of our hardships, we punish ourselves in a trial of self-inflicted demoralization.

What we rely on is not a phantom menace of the sort we feel the need to be saved or rescued from such agony. To recognize the pain that causes you - yourself - to cope with what the solution might be.


an off the record type of truth but nevertheless truth

Do you ever get so mad, that it confuses the hell out of you why you got mad, so in doing so (the real reason for whatever the cause was) you realize it's because you needed to get that off your chest on no uncertain terms. That's exactly the kind of idea, when getting mad is 'a healthy' constructive thing rather than just hate fueled anger? What do you do (other than come on to the Internet) to recover? Is there such a thing as recovery time, or once it happens, do you just say 'did that just happen' - 'oh yeah I guess it did. . . whatever.' then you move on with your life. I think that is the best kind. It says you've come full circle as an individual is my point.

quote:
Sure, mostly when I get mad it is because I am failing to cope with a situation (most of the time not even the situation at hand).Thankfully I have learned to recognize this fact and I rarely get mad anymore.

The better question to ask is: can there be a moral or immoral type of suffering? What strategy can one presumably deploy into action, taking with it an effective method to concentrate itself focused. If there is a moral or immoral kind of suffering in the universe as a model, then could we also hypothetically eliminate religion as a dogma, then also pursue our own judgment that devises a strategy to cope with suffering? As result: immoral or moral suffering is a struggle of the will in itself, all things being equal to this device that exists as goal oriented behavior. The answer could in fact be true; that device which acts as a 'switch' as if turning on a light bulb. The light bulb is plugged into the device, only the device must be activated for it to work! Therefore, once you deploy the device, it is to act, in a manner that you create both an internal and external conflict. Which is the type of suffering you think of if your device is plugged or unplugged? Is it internal or is it external? This kind of reasoning would suggest: you have the choice to pursue the options simultaneously. There is no infinite variable, or supreme form of justice be it right or wrong, because the choice is only one to make/ thus it can only be yours to take it in a paradox. You cannot devise a strategy without taking on the choice you make. . . it becomes automatic. The target of such goal oriented behavior is to cause the will of suffering, then to extnguish it as a struggle, which can only depend upon the type of ellicit response in changing your potential to create devoid decision into reliable solutions. Therefore, you divide the suffering mixed together with emotions, it is then blended, transfered, and transformed into a free thinking system of opportunity to unlock the device tapped within you.

So again, we are left with the same choice repeatedly, although it may seem redundant, as though there is no point to find an answer. The question can only be which type of suffering are you? An immoral kind or a kind of moral victim of the question making you apparently indifferent to the cause. Can beauty be recognized in kind of a sense that - misery can be had - without avoid feeling it as a consequence. If you are an accomplice to such an act of fearing the most basic human emotion you can think of, misery is probably the last choice you would figure to have in mind. Therefore, we can also bare in mind that keeping to a certain set of valid beliefs with the purpose of benefiting oneself is almost utilitarian in perspective. However, it is quickly learned that any human emotion cannot be fully appreciated without the opposite of it. Instead, we learn that suffering is a healing process, other then it being seen, is such an opponent to inertia of the will.

The end (result) g-o-a-l looks like this in principle:

struggle : model

1- victory

2- device= goal oriented behavior

3- devising strategy (Moral or immoral suffering)

4- defiance of your actions (misery)

5- paradox =suffering =moral =immoral

What does one speaks of in determining fate? Is misery never an option? If we follow that course of reasoning, then pure logic will tell you something different, the difference being what some people less-recognize "gods will" ask themselves what is it known as. Gods will is not something that makes one divine, or contrite, or more attentive to such immaterial things such as we experience feeling in our everyday lives. Instead, a rather contemporary view for lack of a better term, we can define what in gods will can one participate? The meaning is simple, that insofar as you recognize misery is a force that allows you to heal itself within. It is a duty, not so much in the spiritual sense, but in the dynamic from which you place yourself in a context in our everyday life. In other words, the existence you carry on with is not dependant on one thing but to grow.

do you ever get one of those days

Where you reach a certain unexpected sense of relief where 'finally' nothing feels to be going wrong? Yeah, it's one of those days alright.