The Dalai Lama as well as other authorities instruct us unequivocally to pay attention the suffering of others. Indeed, it is broadly accepted that ignoring the suffering of others is, at best, morally lacking. The seemingly obvious calling — to pay attention to others’ suffering, raises a question: What is the upside of reflecting on others’ suffering? How does it make the world a better place? The answer is not obvious. It is actually easier to see how paying attention to the insurmountable suffering around us can be demoralizing, disempowering and thus make maters worse.
Serious contemplation of the horrific conditions to which a substantial fraction of the human race are subjected to tends to elicits a negative mental state. It is normal to feel deep sadness in response thinking about the unfathomable suffering of innocent men, women and, especially, children. The discrepancy between the living conditions of members of the middle class (not to mention the upper class) and the living conditions of countless disenfranchised members of our species (more than two billion humans don’t have safe drinking water at home!) often elicits guilt, despair and a sense of helplessness. The inability to promote measurable corrective changes is readily frustrating.
Nothing positive is accomplished by the triggering of these emotions. Self-righteousness indignation may feign making a contribution but, in reality, it adds nothing of substance. Arguably, the world becomes slightly worse with every person who become more depressed, frustrated, and burdened by irrational guilt. The suffering and disenfranchised members of our species certainly reap no benefit from it.
Therein lies the problem: Actively ignoring others’ suffering is morally wrong and can not support the pursuit of happiness. Yet, paying attention to it is also problematic, if all that it contributes to is negative mental states. The solution to the problem calls for an option that enables paying attention to others’ suffering in a way that supports sustaining a positive mental state. I think that such an option exists. Moreover, it is neither elusive nor particularly challenging, but implementing it does require a mental practice.
This practice is geared toward cultivating gratitude and dignity. Contemplation of others’ suffering with simultaneous attention to gratitude and dignity reduces the likelihood of an ensuing negative mental reaction. Moreover, it has a potential to contribute to positive mental changes.
The gratitude part of the practice is fairly straight forward. When you think about the suffering of others, make sure you recognize that which you can be grateful for in your life. Simply, let the suffering highlight the value of what you have in your own life (especially the hidden value — that which you might otherwise take for granted). (For a detailed discussion of the practice of cultivating Gratitude go to: http://wp.me/P7aKBB-aP .)
For example, when you think about victims of famine think about the mind-blowing luxury in the ordinary access to your local grocery store. Or, if you attend to the plight of refugees (or the local homeless) bring your attention to the splendor of having an ordinary home to live in and a bed to sleep in.
Irrational guilt can interfere with this process. To negate it, pay attention to your intent (behind that which you may feel guilty of). Guilt (as discussed in detail elsewhere) feelings are appropriate, even crucial, when one acts out of a negative intent (i.e., self-centered or selfish). Guilt is often triggered automatically, even when one’s intent is irrelevant to the situation at hand. In this setting, when guilt lacks a rational foundation, it is worthless; habitual guilt doesn’t serve a purpose (arguably, regret — for the way things are, is a more relevant emotional response than guilt).
Managing irrational guilt can be supported by a systematic reflection about the nature of fairness, beginning with recalling it’s definition. Fairness has two definitions. According to the first one, fairness is the adherence to an agreement or a contract. Where there is no contract there is no basis for considering fairness or unfairness.
According to the second definition,fairness is the deliberate attempt to allocate a resource in a way that reflects the magnitude of the needs for that resource. Where there is no deliberate process behind the distribution of a resource there is no basis for considering fairness or unfairness.
When you suspect unfairness, wether you consider yourself either the recipient or the cause of it, think about the definitions of fairness. For unfairness to be founded in reason you need evidence of a violated contract or evidence of deliberately misallocated resources. Lacking such evidence the sense of unfairness is driven is unreasonable, or rationally unfounded.
Cultivating gratitude for your good fortune is a worthwhile practice that can be strengthened by paying attention to the suffering of others; it should not be limited by misplaced, or irrational, guilt.
On to the dignity part of the practice: When thinking about the suffering of others it is important to avoid pity. Pity, which is worthless, can mimic, and therefore be confused with, compassion, which is precious. The main difference between these two states of mind is that the pitying mind sees itself as radically different from the recipient of the pity. The compassionate mind is rooted in our sameness.
For example, if the sight of a crippled pan-handler makes you think something along the line of “I couldn’t handle it if his was my lot in life” your mind treats the beggar as radically different from you and you are experiencing pity. Your mind buys into the illusion of separateness, invariably mistake, typically out of ignorance. In reality you are the same; your circumstances are different.
Mindfulness is based on the law of sameness, on an unwavering realization that we are all the same. When the law of sameness is held clearly in mind the automatic response to witnessing the suffering of others is “if and when my time comes to encounter this level of suffering I will meet it with the same dignity that other, ordinary people have, because we are the same”.
When contemplating the suffering of others it is very important to observe that ordinary people meet their suffering, even extreme suffering, with dignity. Therein lies the glory of the ordinary: The glory of the ordinary is displayed when ordinary human beings maintain dignity in the face of extraordinary suffering.
It is critical to maintain awareness of our sameness and of the fact that the ordinary people encounter suffering with great dignity. The logical conclusion that follows supports confident in our ability — as ordinary humans, to meet the suffering that awaits us with that glorious, ordinary human dignity. Moreover, it provides rational grounds for each of us to demand no less from ourselves.
If you suspect a moral flaw in generating positive attributes, i.e. gratitude and self-confidence, by reflecting on the suffering of others – don’t. Gratitude and confidence in your ability to maintain dignity can not contribute to suffering. If anything, a practice that promotes gratitude and dignity has a potential positive value. Reinforcing a mind with gratitude and with a commitment to act with dignity can only increase the likelihood that this mind’s influence on the world around it will be positive. Perhaps immeasurable, but positive.
And lastly — the mental practice presented here is the first step of actualizing personal responsibility in the face of others’ suffering. In no way do I suggest it is the extent of it. If there is anything you can actually do that might alleviate suffering, from a charitable donation to community activism, by all means, you should do it. And, do it with gratitude and with dignity.