Two Approaches To Suffering: Tenderness Or Directness?

There are two ways to address suffering: 
tenderness … “There, there; it’ll be all right.”
or direct clarity … “There’s the problem.”

Much depends on the temperament of the person who is seeking relief from suffering, and the person they’re listening to. Is it someone who pleases, or someone who is practical?

(An example: my wife went to a specialist to ask about her two knees and hip as they felt a bit stiff. He saw her walk and stared at her … “X-rays now!” She was shocked to hear that she needed three joint replacements … booked in immediately, they were that bad. Another doctor would have just given knee injections for temporary relief, as they did with my mum.)

If we need to alleviate mental suffering, we will want insightful direction to relieve that suffering. We can then empathise with others’ suffering – or knee joints. 🙂

If, on the other hand, we aren’t actually suffering, but want to hear something to feel good – something tender and uplifting to neutralised unpleasant feelings – we can get that too, but from that, we will never be able to empathise with others’ suffering.

We have a choice; 
one approach that pleases, or one which addresses the cause.

There is much ’empty rhetoric’ in the world: eloquent speech without sufficient meaningful information, intended to convince and impress others.

Does the Sanskrit word Duhkha relieve suffering?
Does knowing the term Dharmakaya explain emptiness?
Does saying the word Shunyata help us to realise the pure essence of mind?
Does using the name Turiya allow us realise that which is reading these words? 

When consciousness identifies with words, this obscures the reality of what we are now, and we suffer. Am I actually saying exotic terminologies cause confusion and suffering? Yes. So why use them?

The path to enlightenment cuts through 
intellect, confusion, sentimentality and illusions.