G-d created pain as the way to teach us these lessons because whether we learn these lessons or not is OUR CHOICE - not G-d's decision - it is a Bechirah decision whether we learn and improve. And G-d looked at the world and He saw that of all the infinite possible ways to create the opportunity to learn, people will respond positively and improve best if the lesson is taught through the medium of pain.
In other words, G-d said, "OK, people, your job is to learn lessons. Its your choice if you want to learn them or not, and I will teach them in the way that you will choose to learn them the most."
Then G-d looks into the world and sees what will happen if he teaches lessons in every conceivable way. He sees that people are going to ignore the lessons the LEAST if they are taught through the medium of pain.
So G-d says, "OK, you want it this way, that’s what you will get." Because not leaning the lesson, not doing teshuva, not getting a kapara, is worse than the pain. And if we would be on the level to respond to our sins without feeling pain, then we would not need it - but the reality is that people chose the method of G-d's running the world, since they do not reach high levels without being prodded by the pain.
Pain is also a punishment for wrongdoing. And there HAS to be pain as punishment because otherwise there would be no justice if people would just get away with doing bad - PLUS there would be no motivation for people to do good. SO pain is also a deterrent - and it is needed because people choose not to be deterred if there is no pain awaiting their bad choices.
If a person does a sin, the pain he receives is like a slap on the wrist compared to what he would have gotten in Olam Habah. When we get to Olam Habah and we see how many sins were erased because of pain we suffered in this world, the only question we are going to have is why didn’t Hashem give us more pain to erase more aveiros??
There is a Gemora Yerushalmi where Rabi Akiva meets Nachum Ish Gam Zu. Nachum is suffering and Rabi Akiva says "Woe to me that I see you like this." Nachum answers "Woe is to me that I do NOT see you like this!"
Rabi Akiva asks "Why are you cursing me?"
Nochum answers "And why are you rejecting suffering?"
Studying Torah outweighs interfaith dialogue, so I will not be on except once and a while to answer Questions in the Judaism Q/A thread: HERE.
The fear of the L-rd is a spring of life, to turn away from the snares of death. (Mishlei 14:27)
So why is pain sometimes far greater than is necessary for that purpose? Why is it sometimes so great that those with particular illnesses, such as some forms of cancer, long for death just so the unbearable pain will end? Why is mental pain so strong it will drive some to suicide? And where does deliberate infliction of pain fit in, such as torture? I don't see where the 'blessing' is in those cases
An omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God would not have come up with pain and suffering as it can be in reality. As I find the thought of a malevolent God too horrible to contemplate, the only alternative is obvious.
do you think you have a perfect wisdom to know why God has created pain? there are things that our brains cannot percept , so we have no knowledge at all to ask "why god created this, and why that , and why that.." maybe for us it does not make sense or looks horrible but there could be a very smart reason for that.
in Islam there are "Why-s" ,but with logic, not for everything there is "why", bc a 'why' leads to another 'why' and that 'why' to another 'why' and you end up with the 'why' of Stero Spaces commiting suicide.
I usually don't attempt to explain what an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God would "come up with".
We come back to faith again, don't we?
To be human is to die....why would God create us to eventually die?
That I would have thought both Christians and muslims had an answer for. How could there be an after-life if life didn't end?
Pain is something human beings have to deal with.
Of course it is. There is the Buddhist path to escape it, of course, but that would take us woefully of topic!
format_quote Originally Posted by vpb
do you think you have a perfect wisdom to know why God has created pain?
Of course I don't. I don't believe there is a God and therefore that He created anything.
there are things that our brains cannot percept , so we have no knowledge at all to ask "why god created this, and why that , and why that.." maybe for us it does not make sense or looks horrible but there could be a very smart reason for that.
There may well be, but as an argument that carries no weight at all unless someone can suggest what that reason might actually be. Anything else, as I said, is 'just' faith. Or less kindly, in this particular instance, just avoiding the question because the obvious answer is inconvenient.
So why is pain sometimes far greater than is necessary for that purpose? Why is it sometimes so great that those with particular illnesses, such as some forms of cancer, long for death just so the unbearable pain will end? Why is mental pain so strong it will drive some to suicide? And where does deliberate infliction of pain fit in, such as torture? I don't see where the 'blessing' is in those cases
An omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God would not have come up with pain and suffering as it can be in reality. As I find the thought of a malevolent God too horrible to contemplate, the only alternative is obvious.
Why do you say that the pain is far greater than is necessary? That is an assumption you have made which I am not so sure is actually true. Indeed it may be that the increased pain is a symptom of just how extremely out of kilter that one has become from what God intended for us.
But, even if we accept your premise, I'm not sure how that disproves anything with regard to G-d, which appears to be what you attempted to do with the statement. In a fallen world, why would we be surprised that even things that are meant by G-d to bless us are not also impacted by the fall.
I mean (non)-----Viscera in medicine refers to an organism's internal organs. Non-Visceral as in non- organ related-- something you can grab with your hands... I am sure other meanings exist but that is the one I meant
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
As we grow older we make an amazing discovery about pain. It is not a curse and it is not an evil.
Pain is one of the best gifts Allah(swt) has granted us. It is an ideal teacher and protector. Strangely there is no physical thing called pain. It is a perception of an event. We could have been created without it and function quite well. There are many creatures that apparently do not experience pain. They do just fine.
However, because we do have the gift of pain we learn to avoid that which displeases AllaH(SWT) or that which can cause us harm. It is a prodding that guides us and helps us stay on the straight path. we do not understand how great of a gift it is until we reach the point of reduced ability to experience it.
^^^^^^ I'd love to hear of that Buddhist path to escape pain....Sounds intriguing
That path, the Four Noble Truths, is what Buddhism is all about. You'll find the basics in my "Questions about Buddhism" thread, but you can just as easily find them (and rather better explained, maybe) via an internet search. It's a long-term process, though, not an analgesic! Pain and suffering is inevitable, although the right life and attitudes can reduce it, until we escape the realm of birth and rebirth.
on a seperate note--- What is wrong with faith? or hope or dreams or anything non-visceral-- you make it sound like an abomination!
Nothing at all; Buddhism relies on faith as much as any other religion. I had not intended my remarks to across like that, and apologise if they did. The point I was trying to make is that, there not being a satisfactory logical answer, a faith-based one was necessary to preserve belief in God as Christians and muslims perceive Him to be.
format_quote Originally Posted by vpb
why would I want to spend time explaining you about such a thing , when you don't believe in God? it's just waste of time.
How you spend your time is up to you, of course. I would say, though, that my disbelief in God is at least partially founded in that nobody can come up with (what I consider remotely) satisfactory answers to this question, or indeed the 'problem of evil' in general. If they could, I am sufficiently open minded to re-consider.
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
But, even if we accept your premise, I'm not sure how that disproves anything with regard to G-d, which appears to be what you attempted to do with the statement. In a fallen world, why would we be surprised that even things that are meant by G-d to bless us are not also impacted by the fall.
'Disproves'? No, nothing either proves or disproves the existence of God; if it did we wouldn't be having this discussion. As to a "fallen world" that dips rather into areas of Christian theology I don't know enough about to comment sensibly on.
As we grow older we make an amazing discovery about pain. It is not a curse and it is not an evil.
Pain is one of the best gifts Allah(swt) has granted us. It is an ideal teacher and protector. Strangely there is no physical thing called pain. It is a perception of an event. We could have been created without it and function quite well. There are many creatures that apparently do not experience pain. They do just fine.
However, because we do have the gift of pain we learn to avoid that which displeases AllaH(SWT) or that which can cause us harm. It is a prodding that guides us and helps us stay on the straight path. we do not understand how great of a gift it is until we reach the point of reduced ability to experience it.
Nice to see someone who is smart enough to agree with me.
I think when it comes down to it --much of what we believe is theoretical and subjective! hence the term belief! ... whether Atheists, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jews or Muslims...Everyone will philosophize at some point-- I don't see a superiority conceptually of what some deem logical over let's say the so-called illogical explanations that are extracted from the Noble books! It is all subjective and Death is the final truth --the decider! We'll all know one way or the other then, either by being nothing or by being accountable!
Peace
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
elhamdulilah Woodrow, fisebililah etc etc gave really good logical explanations.
Trumble, isn't it sufficient to you for all these logical answers that you got from them?
as I said, no matter how much people explain to you and bring explanations, you're not going to accept it, bc the problem is at the "belief in God". How can you accept something that God has created, when you don't accept God at all?
elhamdulilah Woodrow, fisebililah etc etc gave really good logical explanations. Trumble, isn't it sufficient to you for all these logical answers that you got from them?
No, because I don't consider the arguments convincing. That is no criticism of the posters involved, I have a huge respect for Woodrow in particular but I doubt even he would consider the points raised to be valid, sound, logical arguments. The issues have been considered for two millennia, if not longer, by people far brighter than any of us and they have never been able to come up with such an argument.
as I said, no matter how much people explain to you and bring explanations, you're not going to accept it, bc the problem is at the "belief in God". How can you accept something that God has created, when you don't accept God at all?
I'm not quite sure what you mean. I 'accept' pain and suffering, of course, they exist. To Buddhists, indeed, that existence fundamentally defines our own. If you are saying that a belief in God is necessary to understand why He (as a hypothetical entity) might have created anything I would disagree, although I don't see any route to argue either for or against that contention logically. It would be an interesting one for Ansar should he happen to drop by.
are there really answers to questions like this?
how to explain a baby screaming in pain because he has some horrible disease? a child in agony banging his head against the wall or rocking and crying in pain?
there are no explanations for this, why try?
each man thinks of his own fleas as gazelles
question authority
What is wrong with faith? or hope or dreams or anything non-visceral – you make it sound like an abomination!
caused me to have a “double take”, because the common meaning for ‘visceral’ is
relating to deep inward feelings rather than to the intellect.
Thereby, I read your question as:
“What is wrong with faith or hope or dreams or anything [intellectual]?
which is not what I expected you meant -- and apparently not what you meant.
My response to the question that you addressed to Trumble (although Trumble obviously needs no help from me, but by responding, I can address a question that, in another thread, you asked me but I chose to deflect) would include the following points.
1. All animals (including humans) make visceral decisions (e.g., to duck when a projectile is coming at their heads).
2. Humans surpass the rest of the animals (as far as we know) in our intellectual abilities; therefore, for our continued survival, it would seem to be wise to use our intellectual capabilities to their fullest extent.
3. As a part of our intellectual capabilities, we generate faith, hopes, and dreams (or maybe better than ‘dreams’, ‘goals’, since I’m quite sure that my German shepherd also dreams!). In addition, though (and importantly), we can use our intellectual capabilities to evaluate our faiths, hopes, and goals, e.g., to see if they’re logical, to estimate probabilities that our hopes and goals can be achieved, to evaluate the evidence supporting our faiths to determine if confidence in them is justified, and so on.
Thus, I agree with Trumble that there’s nothing “wrong” with faith, hopes, goals, or anything visceral [usual meaning, including “emotions”], but I would argue that we should then apply our non-visceral [intellectual] capabilities to evaluate them.
As per usual, Bertrand Russell said it better, in response to question similar to yours but emphasizing what we would normally call “blind faith”:
We may define ‘faith’ as the firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. Where there is evidence, no one speaks of ‘faith.’ We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence. The substitution of emotion for evidence is apt to lead to strife, since different groups, substitute different emotions.
In particular, history shows that reliance on (visceral) emotion to “justify” faith (the “proof-by-pleasure fallacy”) has been especially damaging to the possibility of peace between people of different “faiths”, whether the people are within a single family or within different tribes or nations. And thus the singularly prophetic nature of the remark attributed to Jesus: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.”
And I would add (even though it may stir emotions) that my impression (derived from limited data) is that women and male homosexuals may be particularly vulnerable to the “proof-by-pleasure fallacy”, since they seem to have particularly sensitive emotions.
caused me to have a “double take”, because the common meaning for ‘visceral’ is
Thereby, I read your question as:
which is not what I expected you meant -- and apparently not what you meant.
My response to the question that you addressed to Trumble (although Trumble obviously needs no help from me, but by responding, I can address a question that, in another thread, you asked me but I chose to deflect) would include the following points.
1. All animals (including humans) make visceral decisions (e.g., to duck when a projectile is coming at their heads).
2. Humans surpass the rest of the animals (as far as we know) in our intellectual abilities; therefore, for our continued survival, it would seem to be wise to use our intellectual capabilities to their fullest extent.
3. As a part of our intellectual capabilities, we generate faith, hopes, and dreams (or maybe better than ‘dreams’, ‘goals’, since I’m quite sure that my German shepherd also dreams!). In addition, though (and importantly), we can use our intellectual capabilities to evaluate our faiths, hopes, and goals, e.g., to see if they’re logical, to estimate probabilities that our hopes and goals can be achieved, to evaluate the evidence supporting our faiths to determine if confidence in them is justified, and so on.
Thus, I agree with Trumble that there’s nothing “wrong” with faith, hopes, goals, or anything visceral [usual meaning, including “emotions”], but I would argue that we should then apply our non-visceral [intellectual] capabilities to evaluate them.
As per usual, Bertrand Russell said it better, in response to question similar to yours but emphasizing what we would normally call “blind faith”:
In particular, history shows that reliance on (visceral) emotion to “justify” faith (the “proof-by-pleasure fallacy”) has been especially damaging to the possibility of peace between people of different “faiths”, whether the people are within a single family or within different tribes or nations. And thus the singularly prophetic nature of the remark attributed to Jesus: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.”
And I would add (even though it may stir emotions) that my impression (derived from limited data) is that women and male homosexuals may be particularly vulnerable to the “proof-by-pleasure fallacy”, since they seem to have particularly sensitive emotions.
You are a fascinating character and you have much to offer... Makes me wonder why on such a beautiful Sunday you'd rather spend your time arguing semantics on a forum rather than enjoying the sun with your family?...
To me it seems you have a bit of chip on your shoulders from current events or previous events? I don't think "Good" makes the news or history for that matter!.. History speaks of Opium wars and 15 million peasants dying under Mao Xedong-- unparalleled losses --and no religion to blame as culprit. Strange!
.. it is the nature of man--- but man as a part of humanity which is much like an ocean comes in a full spectrum and I like to believe that most of that spectrum is good! ..you are drunk ominous events. it is unfortunate! and that seems to dictate your views of the world around you...Even dictates your view of a (G-D) that sadly you'd pass up the opportunity of knowing through his creation in favor of science fiction!
I am a Muslim and not a Christian and can tell you for a fact that when Jesus (PBUH) stated (I didn't come to bring peace but a sword) he meant something utterly different than the horrors you ascribe to him!--- what a horrible error it is to take a sentence out of context and apply it where it doesn't fit!
Lastly: My religion makes me feel empowered not vulnerable-- I am not subjected to laws that disable me from getting a divorce when battered--- that inhibit me from seeking knowledge if I am capable of reaching it... that disables me from having my own business and financial freedom.. that denies me my inheritance -- that would dictate that I give up my salary to a man should he seek alimony on the account that I make more than him! My rights are reserved by religious laws... which I affirm is radically post modern especially in a society that not 70 yrs ago was asking a woman to move to the back of the bus for the color of her skin, or even subjects me to lesser pay for doing the same type of job as my male counterpart-- or reduces me to working as a street worker because I am unable to provide for myself otherwise.... Your man made laws I can argue easily were pitiful and still continue to be --- religious laws uplift one from falling into the desires of the lower self! now, I am going to be honest with you-- I am not keen on quoting dead philosophers and their subjective views.... It is a nice casual read on a day like this--- but I wouldn't let it influence my perception!....... Opium is the opium of the masses not Religion!
Peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Well, for those who object to the "faith' ideas that have been presented, let us talk about pain in terms of those that are not believers, and now I don't mean humans, I mean animals. (At least they are not believers in the sense we mean it when people talk about believing, so let's leave any other philosophical questions about their ability to have faith for another thread.)
Evolutionary theory would say the sense of sound developed so that a creature could better search for food and avoid predators. Sight enables us to do these things and also to notice if we are about to fall into a pit or off a ledge. Taste encourages us to eat a healthier diet. Smell can warn us of the toxicity of some items; of the presence of food, friend or foe; and helps us bond with one another. Now think of pain.
What benefit is there to pain from an evolutionary perspective? Just like several of us have now already said, it warns us. It warns of injury. It warns of disease. It warns the creature that something is wrong and thus spurs it to take action to modify its behavior in such a way that gives it the best chance to survive. Not all creatures pain receptors are as well developed as others. Thus that are more well developed appear to be at an evlotionary advantage over those that are not as developed. So, that would make pain a gift.
Now follow that line of reasoning. If we have developed yet an even higher order of pain perception beyond mere physical pain, to experience pain at the emotional level, it must be because we are also emotional beings. We need each other, we are social creatures and depend on the bonds we have with one another in society to be emotionally healthy. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that we are not whole individuals unless connected with other people in emotionally healthy and satisfying relationships.
How about spiritual pain? Is there such a thing as a spiritual level of pain? Have you ever felt pain in your soul? If you find that experience to be true, what does that tell you about yourself that you might not have ever considered before?
Last edited by Grace Seeker; 03-20-2007 at 01:08 AM.
I agree with Grace Seeker's first point -- plus most of the rest that he wrote. Spinoza (1632 - 1677), commonly called the “father of psychology”, wrote
…pleasure and pain… are states or passions whereby every man’s power or endeavor to persist in his being is increased or diminished, helped or hindered.
It appears, however, that possibly because he had no family, Spinoza didn't extend his idea about pleasure and pain to include our similar feelings for "family" members -- with each person deciding the "extent" of his or her family, out to an including the view held by some Buddhists (and even some Christians) to include all living things in "the family of life".
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
cheers.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks