What is Suffering?

And Can Suffering Really End?

Introduction: Confusion from Traditions

This is a tricky (and possibly touchy) subject to broach. Partly because native English speakers use the term “suffering” commonly with respect to the seeking journey, and in many different senses. But a large part of the difficulty comes from the word “suffering” being the typical English translation of the Sanskrit word duhkha (in Pali dukkha) — a word very famously used in the Buddhist tradition of The Four Nobel Truths.

Duhkha is a very interesting concept and can be a lot of fun to discuss. But the traditional employment of it in The Four Nobel Truths is generally unhelpful to English-speaking audiences when the word is rendered as “suffering,” in my opinion. And this is where the “touchiness” may really come out. I do not desire, nor intend to offend anyone in the Buddhist communities out there. But I just plain disagree with this part of the Dhamma as it is usually presented in English.

I have a forthcoming essay on this (possibly potent) sticking point. Here is the gist of the hurdle we need to clear to move forward: Your Fundamental Nature is real and present, right here, right now. It’s not a concept, nor is it philosophy. You are not a concept. The traditions, religions, and holy books are all purely conceptual. That’s what words are: concepts. Therefore no religions/tradition/scriptures contain the Fundamental Nature that you need to understand. The truth of the Fundamental Nature that you are is already here. If a tradition or book points you to it, what is being pointed at was there before you examined the tradition or book. So you don’t need the traditions in the first place.

Vanishingly few people responsible for shaping the traditions that we have today had a perfectly clear understanding of the Fundamental Nature; or if they did, they valued tradition more highly than direct insight, paving the way for obscuring such insight. Consequently. the traditions can cause far more confusion and place far more stumbling blocks along the seeking path than there would be if someone just committed to investigating their true nature without being overly-concerned about the traditions. Of all the people I’ve conversed with online that have a clear understanding, I don’t know of a single one that held to a tradition/religious practice.

Confusion about “suffering” is a perfect illustration of this point. Per the Wikipedia link above, it lists the first Truth of the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta as follows:

Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.

I’m not going to argue against any of the above as being “dukkha” — that would be a philosophical argument within a tradition that I do not belong to. I have consumed a lot of information about what that word supposedly means, but perhaps I simply don’t understand it correctly. My bone to pick is: in that passage above none of the circumstances mentioned is necessarily “suffering” as the term is used in everyday English. Each circumstance might be concurrent with suffering, but only before “full awakening” to the Fundamental Nature. After awakening there is no suffering in any of that, even though the circumstances still might (or will) happen.

My critique: Birth is not and never will be suffering. It’s just birth; a new life beginning with unbounded potential and nothing inherently good or bad, initially. Aging is not suffering. It’s just aging. It can be a painful and inconvenient, but there need not be any suffering in it. Aging is just how the appearance of life unfolds “over time.” There is only suffering if there is the resentment/resistance to aging. Experiencing dislikes is not suffering. It’s just more of “what’s going on.” There is only suffering if there is resentment/resistance to appearance of the dislike. Separation from what is pleasing is not suffering. Experience is constant flux. Everything comes and goes, the pleasing and displeasing alike. There is only suffering if there is resentment/resistance to the cessation of pleasure. Why resist the inevitable? Not to get what one wants is not suffering in the least. You already didn’t have it, so not getting it means nothing has changed — and even that will change in due course. There is only suffering if there is resentment at not having got what one wanted. The five aggregates are simply a concept, not your true Fundamental Nature. Ardent clinging is behavior we are taught to do. Finally, suffering is totally unnecessary and optional.

In short, you shouldn’t call pain, dislikes, difficulties, etc. “suffering” because those things are inevitable and only end at death. If people want an end to that kind of so-called “suffering” then death is the only answer. But death ain’t much of a living! Most people would like some kind of end to some kind of suffering on this side of the grave. Thankfully, there is permanent relief from a kind of “suffering” this side of the grave! Let’s take a look at what that entails.

Resentment & Resistance: Framing

The only general and simple thing in the English language that makes sense (to me) to call “suffering” is the resentment or resistance to the spontaneous circumstances of life. There are many other things that can also be referred to with the term “suffering,” but those get pretty messy to sort out. So let’s start with the simple, then more to the more complex.

I find a very useful, shorthand definition of “suffering” to be: resentment/resistance to the spontaneous circumstances of life. It can help this idea to gel by considering an antonymous phrase: “peace of mind.”

There is a “perfect peace of mind” available and that is the end of suffering, as I define it. Not only is such peace of mind available; it is, in fact, your default state. That may sound unbelievable, but if get to know the Fundamental Nature for what it is, you will find out how that is your default state.

Suffering, as I define it, is a mental reactivity against the natural, spontaneous unfolding of the appearance of this life. It is a natural tendency, but gets greatly reinforced (intentionally or inadvertently) by our elders and peers from the earliest age. So there’s no reason to be surprised that we do it! It gets so thoroughly habituated while we are still quite young that it usually stays with us our whole lives. However, it is completely unnecessary, counterproductive, and painful. So overcoming this habit can be a profound relief!

How does one find the permanent end of suffering? One must come to understand their Fundamental Nature. This is the whole point of inquiry and the seeking journey. Once you realize what the Fundamental Nature is — and that you are that — then “proper perspective” on the appearances of life become automatic. Further, this condition is permanent.

Resentment & Resistance: Do They End?

Unfortunately, here’s where things get more convoluted. Again, courtesy of traditions promoting unhelpful or inaccurate expectations. To get clear on the End of Suffering we must ask a very specific question: What does the end of suffering look/feel like?

I have yet to come across a traditional framing that comes close to how things actually end up looking/feeling like. Granted, I haven’t dug deeply in the traditions from a scholastic standpoint. But by and large they seem to paint a picture of a “sage” that strikes me as rather inhuman. This supposedly-“realized being” is someone who is unfazed by anything. Someone with no passions. Someone who never gets angry, or sad, or afraid. For a person to have those attributes it would require them to also be someone who can never be pleasantly surprised, someone who can never love, and someone who can never experience joy, happiness, or heartfelt laughter. What a miserable, boring existence!

I totally agree with many traditional Indian philosophies that life and the world are maya. But in that appearance of maya, things appear to be coming on here as if I’m a human being. It’s not coming on like I’m an apple tree, or lichen on a granite outcropping, or a northern cardinal, or a wild boar… but human! What fun! What a delight!

When one comes to fully understand the implications of the Fundamental Nature (and being it), one is free to be fully-human naturally! The maya of humanness is what’s going on, so one is totally free to “go with it” — to joyously “get lost in the role.” This is the true Sage. Someone who loves, and plays, and jests; someone who can get sharply angry or heartbroken. So it’s not that “resistance” or “reactivity” themselves vanish utterly with full awakening. They are a part of the human game; sometimes an important part! What happens is that they become tempered.

An illustration: after awakening, because one sees clearly that flying off the handle is utterly pointless, one ceases to do it… very much. But — occasionally — one will want to fly off the handle because that is the natural reaction in the moment. And when the Sage does fly off the handle (which could be classified as resistance or reactivity), there is no suffering in it. How? The suffering that does not exist in this instance is the lack of reactivity/resistance against being supposedly-reactive/resistant in the first place!

The Sage knows fully well that the (possibly pointless) flying-off-the-handle reaction is happening — and is fully committed to it. This is playing the human game with gusto! This is true freedom. Obviously the Sage knows there’s no point in flying off the handle. But the Sage also knows there’s no point in not flying off the handle sometimes (when doing so would not cause someone else to suffer). After all, there’s no “point” to anything. Everything is always “just what’s going on” and of no “ultimate significance.” A Sage is free to swim in the stream of Tao however seems good to them. This means it’s impossible to prescribe the behavior of the Sage. But in all the Sage’s actions, from the serene and the sublime to the ridiculous, there is an unshakable peace of mind. That is the end of suffering, and a freedom worth having!

It’s impossible to catalog all the differences between the “unnatural” resistance/reaction that is the suffering of the “average person,” and the “natural,” tempered resistance/reaction that is free of suffering in the Sage. The differences become obvious in simply living life before and after crossing the threshold of awakening to the Fundamental Nature. Now let’s look at some other common notions about constitutes “suffering” and see how awakening impacts them.

Guilt & Shame: Framing

First: what is the difference between guilt and shame? In common vernacular the terms are interchangeable — or at least they are very often used interchangeably. A quick survey of psychology literature reveals there is no consensus on the differences between guilt and shame. Although every article I’ve looked at insisted there is a difference, they usually disagree with each other about what the exact differences are.

I prefer to think of “guilt” in a legalistic sense. You either did something bad (guilty) or you did not do that bad thing (not guilty). I’ve found one psychology article that agrees with this point and then concludes that the bad feeling one has about having-done-the-deed is “shame” and the bad feeling one has about one’s self-worth for having done it is also “shame.” The article advocates for two different kinds of “shame,” which flatly contradicts most other psychologists’ claims that the former is “guilt” and the latter is “shame.” But those advocates who don’t want two kinds of shame are usually left dismissing “guilt” as a legalistic status in order to do so. What a mess! Even worse, some equate “guilt” with “remorse” and/or “regret,” which are totally different things in my book. What a mess, indeed!

So I will concede the common notion that the words “guilt” and “shame” are interchangeable. Though, in doing so, I’d just avoid using the word “guilt” altogether, much to the annoyance of most psychology writers. Oh well. I’d say “shame” is feeling bad for something you’ve done. If there’s an additional “feeling bad” that is, having done something bad, you now feel your self-worth is diminished — what many psychologists would call “shame” — then I’d also call that “shame.” Again, this will be much to the annoyance of many psychologists because that’s using the same word (shame) for two different modes of feeling bad. They could say it was being sloppy. But I don’t care because this second sense of feeling bad is impossible without the first sense. The second set of bad feels is derived from the first set of bad feels. The second set is, therefore, not nearly as important as the first!

To clarify: if a person never felt they had done something bad in the first place, then there would be no basis upon which to negatively evaluate their self-worth. Herein lies a clue: if you don’t want the second set of bad feels (diminished feeling of self-worth), then don’t act in a manner that generates the first set!

Clearing up the derivative, second-order shame is automatic if you address the root cause: the first-order “shame” of having done something wrong. Now, what specifically causes the first-order set of “shamey” bad feels? You have to intentionally do something that you think is wrong. It’s not more complicated than that! Why would you ever do something you genuinely thought was wrong intentionally? Herein lies another key clue to the end of suffering: don’t intentionally do anything you think is wrong.

Now even the fully-realized sage will, at times, inadvertently cause harm to another. The sage is still human! Humans make mistakes. But there is no guilt/shame in making and honest mistake. They “just happen.” A mistake is a learning opportunity. You don’t have to be a sage to simply learn the lessons, make apologies, and then clean up the messes.

Guilt & Shame: Do They End?

But the true sage is forever free of guilt and shame because they never intentionally do what they think is wrong. This may sound super-human, but there’s an all-too-easy way to get there. As I discussed at great length in my essay about morality — sages are perfectly free to do whatever they want. Right and wrong are forever a mere matter of one’s own opinion. If sages don’t have any guiding moral principles they hold to, then they can decide that just because they want something that is reason enough to consider it “good” or the right thing to do.

For example, say a fully realized sage wants to take sexual advantage of his students. If he has no internalized moral principle that says “don’t,” he very well may go ahead and take advantage. He does so because he wants to and is free to. There is nothing in him that says doing so is wrong. And so he acts with perfect integrity (although we on the outside would call it perverted integrity) and commits such acts without guilt or shame. I really think these kinds of people are neurodivergent with respect to things like psychopathy, antisocial tendencies, and cruelty. The perfect freedom of full awakening actually enables these undesirable characteristics.

And here I am, spilling the beans… good thing that you, dear reader, are such a well-adjusted and compassionate human being!

For the rest of the awakened beings, it’s natural to not want to cause harm to others. So the sage simply doesn’t ever try to harm others. Even if a sage makes a mistake and causes harm, they will experience no guilt and shame. Because they didn’t intentionally do what they consider wrong. The inadvertency defuses guilt and shame before they start. The sage probably will feel bad about doing something wrong and want to make amends. But there is no suffering in this. How? Let’s continue:

Regret & Remorse: Framing

This is almost as messy as the guilt/shame morass. Psychologists and lay people alike define both terms differently. So it may or may not be appropriate to say the End of Suffering entails the End of Regret and Remorse. That may or may not be true depending on how you define regret and remorse.

Some people define regret and simply wishing things had gone differently.¹ Not even feeling bad about how things went; just wishing they went differently. If there is no emotional component to it, then doing so is a stupid waste of time and energy. This sort of nonsense does effectively end with awakening. Things happen how they happen, end of story. Idly wishing things to be other than they are makes no sense. Full awakening entails always instantly being cognizant of thinking as thinking. Most thinking is unnecessary. Thinking that is both unpleasant and unnecessary to the sage gets nipped in the bud.

Now if one defines regret as feeling bad about how things went AND wishing things had gone differently, this is a mixed bag. The feeling bad can certainly happen after awakening (but that doesn’t constitute suffering). But the wishing absolutely would not happen for the reasons given above. The wishing itself IS the “suffering” in regret.

I define regret as just plain feeling bad about how things happened. Again, the feeling bad is not impossible after awakening. So in this definition there is still regret after the End of Suffering. But there is no suffering (i.e. no actual “wishing otherwise”) in experiencing regret.

Remorse is most commonly defined as feeling bad specifically for having caused harm to others. This may be a useful distinction for some (many? most?) people. But for me the “regret” definition collapses into this definition. I defined regret above as “just plain feeling bad about how things happened.” Yet I can’t think of any reason why I would feel bad about how things happened unless I harmed someone else.

So for me (and perhaps just me?) remorse and regret are exactly the same thing. Why would I ever feel bad about how a situation went down if no one was harmed in the situation? If no one was harmed, there’s literally nothing to feel bad about. At least that’s how it seems to me.

Regret & Remorse: Do They End?

So, again, depending on how you define regret — can you feel bad about the way a situation went down if you didn’t harm anyone? — maybe it does cease with the End of Suffering? The only “regret” I feel is when I harm someone else, which is usually the definition of “remorse.” But after crossing the threshold, there are two important things to note: 1.) in none of this is there ever any real “wishing” that things were different than they are (that would constitute “suffering” in my book) and 2.) any harm I do to others is always inadvertent; it’s an honest mistake.

So even if I cause someone harm (inadvertently, of course), I don’t “regret” it (in the wishing sense) nor do I “feel remorse” (as in lamenting my conduct). Again, this is because I never intended to cause harm. Don’t get me wrong, I definitely do feel bad, of course! It hurts to know you’ve cause others to hurt. But a mistake is just as mistake. You learn from your mistakes, clean up the messes, and move on. Always trying to do better going forward. There is no suffering in any of that.

Dissatisfaction: Framing

Here is yet another term that can be defined in different ways. And, again, depending on the definition/usage, one may or may not be able to say dissatisfaction ends with the End of Suffering. But like regret/remorse, if you define it in such a way that it does still happen after awakening, then there will be no suffering in it when it does occur.

Some people define it as the simple feeling of disappointment when your expectations are not met. By this definition, it will still happen after awakening (although, as mentioned above, there will be no additional suffering in the experience). There is just simple disappointment, which is not a problem.

But the more interesting idea of dissatisfaction is in the big, broad-stroke sense. “Chronic dissatisfaction” as Alan Watts talked about it. Mick Jagger sang about it. That vague but pervasive sense that there’s something wrong with life and the world. That there should be a time when things go right. There should be a time when things hit “okay” across the board and stay there for more than a few hours. But, unless you’re supremely lucky, there always seems to be a fly in the ointment. There’s always something wonky. Often there’s at least one thing about to go — or already going — of the rails. All to often, it’s more than one thing going off; sometimes a lot more than one thing. It’s bad enough when life punches you in the face. But does it have to also keep kicking you in the ribs when you’re down on the ground in the fetal position?

What the hell, right?! That is the life of dissatisfaction. Sometimes it’s almost unbearable; making you look forward to death. Other times it’s not so bad. But even in the best of times (again, unless you’re very lucky) it’s still not quite “right.” Not quite “hunky-dory.”

Can there be such a thing as “satisfaction?” Can you actually find fulfillment in life? Good news! Yes.

Dissatisfaction: Does It End?

This itch of “The Problem” stems from a misunderstanding about who/what one is. One likely thinks they are a small, independent, alien agent in a hostile world that is not-them. “If I could just find X, then I’d be happy” is a common thought. But even if you find X, you’ll find some other shortcoming in life. This is because you’re looking from the wrong perspective; a myopic perspective.

When one comes to realize the Fundamental Nature for what it is — and that you are it — one realizes that everything is contained in and a manifestation of it. You can’t talk about it really because it is everything. Talking requires division and analysis. Moving towards the Fundamental Nature takes synthesis and integration. Can you get back to that-which-contains-all-that-there-is?

When you realize that all-that-there-is comprises the manifestation of the Fundamental Nature (and, again, that you are it), then you realize: you are everything! How can “everything” lack anything? It can’t! You can’t find fulfillment “out there” because the Fundamental Nature is already full! Full of everything that there is! This version of “The Problem” — and it’s solution — turn on points of perspective and nothing more.

This great “dissatisfaction” is irrevocably dispelled in full awakening. Even so, the appearing human life and mind will still go on much the same as they always did. So you can still expect to have simple expectations; and to feel disappointed when they don’t come to pass. That’s okay. At least life isn’t boring! And things could always be much worse. After awakening, as with before, you just try to roll with the punches.

Frustration: Framing

Frustration is usually defined as annoyance, irritation, or anger arising due to being impeded in an effort or goal. Unlike the fluid and manifold definitions of guilt, shame, regret, and remorse, frustration is pretty clear cut. However, like “dissatisfaction” there seems to me to be two different “levels” or “scopes” of frustration that awakening impacts differently.

The first is the mundane, single-instance (perhaps “acute”) frustration. An example: on a typical morning something goes wrong in the morning routine, setting you behind the typical pace of events. But this morning you have an appointment to make as well, and you’re running behind. If everything went just right you might make it to the appointment on time. As you are hurrying to head out your door, you realize you can’t find your car keys. But you know you set them in their usual place last the last time you used them yesterday! Where could they be? The window for “just right” timing is almost closed and you’re flummoxed. You start looking around… did I accidentally drop them on the office desk? No. End table near the front door? No. Jacket pocket? Maybe… what jacket was I wearing? No… maybe it was a different jacket? No, no keys there…

As the search continues — and the “just right” timing window has closed — frustration ensues. Your mood isn’t improved when you finally find them on the floor under where you last set them (because they had fallen when the table was bumped at some point yesterday). And every impediment on the way — stupid other drivers! — likewise is met with hair-trigger irritation. Such things happen to me all the time.

Awakening has little impact on this low-level frustration. It’s much more a personality disposition then anything else. If you have always been a somewhat cranky, and fairly easily-irritated person before awakening (I was), you will continue to be one afterwards, although the severity of the reactions will be tempered.² This is simple psychological habituation; informed by both personal history and emotional predisposition.

Teachers who insist that automatic reactions of frustration of this kind should not happen after awakening are completely wrong. You might as well say you should not make any vocalization when you accidentally run your shin into a hard object. Such reactions are perfectly normal and don’t necessarily constitute a problem or suffering. To be more precise: they constitute exactly as much of a problem or suffering as they bug you. If such reactions don’t bug you, then they are not a problem and there is no suffering in them.

Again, such reactions are mere habits. Judging a habit to be “good,” “neutral,” or “bad” requires conceptual thinking; and the conclusion you reach will simply be your opinion and nothing more.³ There’s nothing wrong with that situation — it can’t be any other way! So if you conclude it isn’t a problem, then, by definition, it isn’t a problem. And you can’t be caused to suffer by what isn’t a problem.⁴

It is definitely worth closely examining your patterns of this low-level frustration. But don’t let teachers erroneously tell you what are the “proper” levels of it in life are. They aren’t you. And if they insist that such reactions should not be there, they are tipping their hand; they are revealing they have a hang-up on this point. You can always tell a perfectly-realized teacher (very rare) from a partially-realized one (~99.999% of them) by the hang-up test: If a teacher has hang-ups, they haven’t fully gotten the point yet.

The second type of frustration is the “high-level” (or “chronic”) frustration; very much analogous to the high-level, chronic dissatisfaction above. The difference between unmet life expectations (resulting in dissatisfaction) and unrealized life goals (resulting in frustration) are very fuzzy in the big picture/grand scheme of things. The perspective shift with awakening and subsequent solution to chronic dissatisfaction is almost exactly the same as in regards to frustration as well.

Frustration: Does It End?

When one fully realizes that the Fundamental Nature contains everything-that-is, one realizes that you can’t add anything to “everything.” That doesn’t mean all goals drop away, forever and always. But they cease to be pressing to the point of causing undue stress.

For example, after a person is dead, it makes no difference to the dead person whether they were a financial success or a financial failure. A gift of awakening is to realize that very irrelevance on this side of the grave. Your goal to be a financial success can shift from overtly wanting to be rich, to just wanting to avoid the hassles of having too little money. Having too little money can be a real pain in the ass (ask me how I know). So there’s nothing wrong with being motivated to avoid those hassles. But the pressure is off because you realize that, ultimately, it doesn’t matter one way or the other what happens. Life will unfold however it unfolds.

We can and do make strategies and take action. But we can never know the real consequences of our actions before we take them. Or even after! So there’s no expectation that life “should” unfold any particular way. That is to say, when awakening fully “sinks in” one realizes that rigid life expectations are totally unjustified. So one abandons them.

If there are no high-level life expectations, there can be no high-level frustration when things don’t go well. And that is the end of frustration that comes with the End of Suffering.

Hopefully the foregoing has clarified ways of thinking about suffering and the implications awakening has on them. For as many words I have poured out on this topic, even that has not done justice to it. Such is the nature of discussing the ineffable. But I hope the essay at least helps eliminate some confusion and misunderstandings out there.

The main takeaway is to get clear on the Fundamental Nature, and that you are it — the true meaning of Tat tvam asi. That project is very much possible. Once it’s done, there will be no more confusion.

Do you want to know the Fundamental Nature?

The Way is not a matter of knowing or not knowing. Just abandon everything, return to yourself, and look within. Who is this? Spare no time! It waits for no one.

Just as you are, look and find out: who at this moment is the master who sees and hears?

- Bassui Tokusho

Mud and Water, 2nd Edition, trs. Arthur Braverman, Wisdom Publications, © 2002 A. Braverman, pp. 88, 106.

1. I don’t agree with that definition. But, because many people think in those terms, it needs to be addressed.

2. Both the ease-of-triggering, and the intensity of the reaction will be significantly reduced due to full awakening. But the tendency is habituated, so it will not typically be eliminated. I highly doubt it can be eliminated fully because it is similar to an anger reaction. An anger reaction occurs because you care about something that is under threat. Frustration occurs when, specifically, a goal you care about it thwarted. It is a special case of anger (a mild one). But to eliminate frustration altogether one would require one to stop caring about one’s goals, which seems a very silly objective to me.

On a personal note, not only were my reactions tempered (in the senses of ease-of-triggering and their intensity), there was also an attitude change. I still have them, but before I would be genuinely irritated. After, they are now almost a source of amusement. The angriest I’ve ever been since the final threshold-crossing event was brought on by a kitchen plumbing project. Something that should have been so simple was being nigh-impossible, and I was stuck in a very painful position in the sink cabinet. Oh man, I really lost it; I screamed expletives at the plumbing and actually threw my piece of pipe full force (thankfully, it was PVC) out of the cabinet, bounced it off the floor and across the room… I was so angry! And at what? Inanimate objects! As soon as the pressure-release valve of my anger had sufficiently vented (a few seconds), the absurdity of the whole situation blossomed in my mind and I burst out laughing at how stupid the whole situation was. This is now a very enjoyable and amusing memory. Incidentally, I finished the plumbing task very quickly and without incident after that.

3. It’s unfortunate that one of the most important books of the 21st Century is relegated to a footnote. But Iain McGilchrist’s monumental book The Master and His Emissary revealed fascinating, tantalizing clues on this topic of frustration. The right hemisphere of the cortex, generally speaking, is the seat of all emotions, except one. The left hemisphere is the mediator of tool use, manipulation, acquisition, and that one other emotion not mediated by the right hemisphere. Can you guess which emotion, unlike all others, seems to have its seat in the left hemisphere? Anger! Very little makes me angry any more, but one sure-fire trigger is me using tools or performing tasks to meet an objective, and to be thwarted in those efforts. That is both the definition of “frustration” and part-and-parcel to the left hemisphere’s world.

That’s just one (hugely illuminating) element in that book. The whole book is a tour-de-force and really should be read by basically every member of the western world, if not the entire developed world. Without even intending to do so, McGilchrist has produced a perfect overview of the neuroscientific underpinnings of awakening. I can’t think of a single book more important/significant than The Master and His Emissary.

4. It is worth noting that the automatic, frustration-reaction tendency can be mitigated against with protracted effort along the lines of something like cognitive behavioral therapy. If one wants to reduce the reactive tendency, there are options. If one doesn’t want to reduce it, then there’s no improvement project to be done.