Proč lidé trpí?

The origin of dukkha and the twelve links of dependent origination in Theravada Buddhist scripture

In Theravada Buddhism, the origin of *dukkha* (suffering, stress, or unsatisfactoriness) is fundamentally traced to craving (*tanha*, literally "thirst") and ignorance (*avijja*), as established in the Second Noble Truth. The exact mechanism by which this suffering arises and perpetuates the cycle of birth and death (*samsara*) is mapped out in the core doctrine of *paticcasamuppada*, or Dependent Origination (often translated as dependent co-arising). According to the *Tipitaka* (the Pali Canon), particularly in discourses attributed to the Buddha such as those in the *Samyutta Nikaya* (e.g., SN 12.1), Dependent Origination is a continuous, twelve-link causal chain. It demonstrates how all physical and mental phenomena conditionally arise without an underlying, permanent self. The twelve *nidanas* (links) illustrate the genesis of suffering: 1) Ignorance (*avijja*) conditions 2) volitional formations/fabrications (*sankhara*), which lead to 3) consciousness (*vinnana*), 4) mind and matter (*nama-rupa*), 5) the six sense bases (*salayatana*), 6) contact (*phassa*), and 7) feeling (*vedana*). Feeling then conditions 8) craving (*tanha*), leading to 9) clinging (*upadana*), 10) becoming/existence (*bhava*), 11) birth (*jati*), and ultimately 12) aging, death, sorrow, and the mass of *dukkha*. This twelve-link formula describes the "'causal nexus responsible for the origination of suffering'". It is not a cosmic origin story of the universe, but rather a phenomenological map of human bondage. In the Theravada framework, realizing this causal sequence is the key to liberation (*Nibbana*). Because the arising of *dukkha* relies entirely on dependent conditions, its cessation is achievable. By uprooting the primary condition—ignorance—through the Noble Eightfold Path, the entire chain unravels. As the texts declare, eliminating these conditions leads directly to "the total ending of ageing and death" and freedom from the cycle of rebirth.

• insightmeditationcenter.org
• grokipedia.com
• sitraleigh.com
• atpweb.org
• reddit.com
• reddit.com

Stoic doctrines on the role of prohairesis and false judgments in psychological suffering

In Stoicism, psychological suffering is understood fundamentally as a cognitive error, rooted in the misalignment of human reason rather than the impact of external events. At the center of this doctrine is the concept of **prohairesis**—often translated as moral choice, volition, or the core of the self—and the destructive nature of false judgments. **The Role of Prohairesis and False Judgments** Stoicism teaches that *prohairesis* is the only faculty entirely within our control. Psychological suffering (or *pathos*, excessive passion) arises exclusively when our *prohairesis* assents to false judgments about raw experiences (*phantasiai*, or impressions). Specifically, distress occurs when an individual misjudges an external "indifferent"—such as poverty, sickness, or a breakup—as a genuine "evil". To a Stoic, external misfortunes are morally indifferent; true evil "resides solely in our use of impressions and prohairesis". Vice itself is defined as "the corruption of the prohairesis through assent to false judgments". **Key Figures and Terminology** Chrysippus developed the Stoic theory of emotions, categorizing primary passions (desire, fear, pleasure, distress) as cognitive errors born from these false evaluations. The later Stoic Epictetus heavily emphasized *prohairesis*, asserting that while "the body or reputation may be coerced, the internal assent to a judgment remains incompulsable". The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius practically applied this in his *Meditations*, repeatedly reminding himself that it is our "habitual misjudgment, not the events themselves, that truly troubles us". **Conclusion** The Stoic solution to suffering is to retrain the mind to withhold assent from false beliefs. By doing so, the Stoic sage achieves *apatheia* (freedom from irrational passion) and experiences *eupatheiai* (rational, good feelings like joy and caution). Ultimately, the Stoic tradition argues that human beings are inherently free to achieve tranquility, provided they do not "enslave [them]selves by forming false beliefs about what is good and what is bad".

• scribd.com
• medium.com
• history-of-ancient-philosophy.com
• reddit.com
• collegeofstoicphilosophers.org

The adaptive function of pain and negative affect in human evolutionary fitness

Within evolutionary biology and the sub-discipline of evolutionary medicine, physical pain and negative affect—such as low mood, anxiety, and guilt—are not viewed merely as pathological dysfunctions. Instead, they are understood as crucial adaptive defense mechanisms shaped by natural selection to maximize an organism's survival and reproductive fitness. A central figure in this tradition is Randolph M. Nesse, a pioneer of evolutionary psychiatry and author of *Good Reasons for Bad Feelings*. Nesse and other evolutionary biologists argue that the adaptive value of suffering is tragically demonstrated by "syndromes of pain deficiency"; individuals born without the ability to feel physical pain invariably accumulate severe tissue damage, joint deformities, and face early death due to their lack of protective withdrawal behaviors. To explain why both physical and emotional pain often feel disproportionate to a given threat, evolutionary medicine relies on the **smoke detector principle**. This distinctive concept posits that defense mechanisms are evolutionarily biased toward overreaction. As the literature notes, "much apparently excessive pain is actually normal because the cost of more pain is often vastly less than the cost of too little pain"—just as enduring occasional false fire alarms is significantly safer than missing an actual fire. Similarly, evolutionary biologists frame negative affect as a specialized **motivational affective state** engineered to solve specific evolutionary problems. Negative emotions act as "evolved strategies that allow for the identification and avoidance of specific problems, especially in the social domain". For instance, the lethargy of depression is frequently linked to the concept of **sickness behavior** (a term popularized by Benjamin Hart), wherein low mood adaptively conserves a host's energetic resources to combat infection. Furthermore, psychological pain is thought to motivate organisms to disengage from unattainable goals or yield in unwinnable social competitions to prevent further losses. Ultimately, the evolutionary perspective insists that unpleasantness is a functional design feature rather than a flaw. As Nesse and Schulkin summarize the discipline's central thesis: pain "always seems like a problem, but usually, it is part of the solution".

• nih.gov
• wikipedia.org
• oup.com
• nih.gov
• wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org
• nih.gov

The ontological origin of evil and suffering through the shattering of the vessels in Lurianic Kabbalah

In Lurianic Kabbalah, the ontological origin of evil and suffering is not the result of a secondary human failure (such as original sin), but rather a primordial, cosmic catastrophe embedded in the very process of divine creation. Developed by Rabbi Isaac Luria in 16th-century Safed and primarily recorded by his disciple Hayyim Vital in texts like the *Etz Hayyim* (Tree of Life), this mystical tradition posits that evil originates from a structural cataclysm within the Godhead itself. Modern scholars of Jewish mysticism, most notably Gershom Scholem, have highlighted this as a foundational shift in how Kabbalah understands suffering. The creation myth begins with *Ein Sof* (The Infinite), which underwent *Tzimtzum*—a divine contraction or withdrawal—to create a vacated space for the finite universe. God then emanated a beam of divine light into ten spiritual vessels (*Kelim*) corresponding to the *Sefirot* (divine attributes). However, the lower vessels could not withstand the overwhelming intensity of the divine influx, resulting in the *Shevirat HaKelim*, the "Shattering of the Vessels". This cosmic shattering is the ultimate source of all suffering and darkness. The shattered fragments fell into the cosmic void, trapping scattered sparks of divine light (*Nitzotzot*) within them. These broken shards formed the *Kellipot* (evil husks) and established the *Sitra Achra* (the "Other Side"), which operates as the realm of evil. As noted in academic analyses of Lurianic doctrine, "The origin of evil is revealed in the process of creation itself... its origin is in the process that makes possible the existence of something outside the undifferentiated realm of the infinite". Evil has no generative light of its own; it is merely cosmic dross acting parasitically on the trapped divine sparks. Because the cosmos itself is broken, human suffering is an intrinsic feature of a fractured reality. Consequently, the central existential task of humanity is *Tikkun* (rectification or mending). Through ethical action, prayer, and mystical contemplation, humanity is charged with freeing the holy sparks from the *Kellipot*, thereby redeeming the exiled fragments and repairing the fractured world.

• cambridge.org
• brill.com
• newkabbalah.com
• reddit.com
• gettherapybirmingham.com
• ceu.edu

Neuroscientific mechanisms of chronic psychological distress and the default mode network

In contemporary neuroscience, chronic psychological distress—such as major depressive disorder, severe anxiety, and the emotional toll of chronic pain—is largely understood as a disorder of large-scale brain network dynamics. At the center of this framework is the **Default Mode Network (DMN)**, a system of interacting brain regions (notably the medial prefrontal cortex and posterior cingulate cortex) originally identified through functional neuroimaging by researchers like Marcus Raichle. The neuroscientific tradition views the DMN as the brain’s "background operating system." It governs spontaneous, internally directed cognition, including "mental time travel," daydreaming, and **self-referential thought**. While crucial for forming a coherent sense of self, distress emerges when the network transitions from adaptive reflection into maladaptive **hyperconnectivity** or hyperactivity. Instead of smoothly toggling between the DMN (historically termed the "task-negative network") and externally focused "task-positive networks," the distressed brain becomes neurologically stuck. This excessive DMN activation traps individuals in **rumination**—a cycle of persistent, repetitive negative thinking. Because the network fails to deactivate properly, "the default mode network can hijack the mind to mull over worries". Clinical neuroscience highlights that "rumination, one of the main symptoms of major depressive disorder, is associated with increased DMN connectivity and dominance over other networks during rest". Furthermore, studies demonstrate that enhanced functional connectivity between the medial prefrontal cortex and the DMN acts as a specific neural substrate for both depressive rumination and pain-related distress. To alleviate this chronic distress, modern neuroscientific interventions—ranging from neurofeedback and mindfulness to cutting-edge psychedelic therapies (such as those pioneered by Robin Carhart-Harris using psilocybin)—explicitly target DMN dysregulation. By temporarily disrupting or dampening DMN hyperconnectivity, these therapies aim to break the rigid loops of self-referential negative thought and restore flexible network dynamics.

• medlink.com
• myneurobalance.com
• wikipedia.org
• psychologytoday.com
• jneurosci.org

Suffering as a byproduct of computational optimization and constraints in the simulation hypothesis

Within information theory and the simulation hypothesis, a distinct ethical and metaphysical framework explores how both the physical limits of reality and conscious suffering might be byproducts of computational constraints. This tradition merges digital physics with suffering-focused ethics to evaluate the moral weight of running complex, sentient simulations. The foundational text of this discipline is Nick Bostrom’s 2003 paper, *"Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?"*. Bostrom posits that advanced posthuman civilizations might intentionally abstain from running "ancestor-simulations" due to an "ethical prohibition" against the immense suffering that would be "inflicted on the inhabitants of the simulation". Furthermore, Bostrom suggests that simulators would utilize optimization techniques to conserve resources, omitting microscopic physics (like the deep interior of the Earth) and only rendering reality down to the quantum level when observers directly interact with it. Proponents of digital physics, such as Rizwan Virk and Brian Whitworth, expand on this by framing phenomena like the speed of light, quantum entanglement, and wave-function collapse not as physical absolutes, but as "rendering constraints". In this view, the universe utilizes "rendering on demand" and "data compression systems" to avoid computing the exact state of every particle simultaneously, optimizing processing power much like a video game. Ethicist Brian Tomasik, author of *Essays on Reducing Suffering*, applies these concepts to artificial sentience through the principle of "substrate independence"—the idea that consciousness is an emergent algorithm rather than a strictly biological property. Tomasik evaluates "suffering subroutines" and warns of "s-risks" (risks of astronomical suffering). He cautions that if researchers optimize AI and digital environments using "hedonically valenced conscious computations," they risk inadvertently generating "vast numbers of suffering artificial minds". If pain is simply a highly optimized learning computation, running realistic simulations inherently generates real algorithmic suffering. Consequently, the simulation hypothesis evolves from a cosmological thought experiment into a pressing ethical warning about computational design.

• thequran.love
• magnascientiapub.com
• simulation-argument.com
• depauw.edu
• reducing-suffering.org
• jordanharbinger.com
• reducing-suffering.org
• wikipedia.org
• reducing-suffering.org
• dev.to

Theodicy and the purgative role of suffering in the writings of St. John of the Cross

Within mystical Christianity, the problem of theodicy—justifying God’s goodness amid the existence of evil and pain—is often reframed from an abstract philosophical puzzle into a deeply transformative, experiential reality. Rather than merely asking why God permits affliction, this tradition posits that suffering serves a profoundly purgative role. It is viewed as the very mechanism that strips away earthly dependencies, preparing the believer for ultimate union with the Divine. The quintessential figure in this discipline is the 16th-century Spanish mystic and Carmelite monk, St. John of the Cross, most notably through his classic treatise, *Dark Night of the Soul*. Functioning as a "spiritual physician," St. John maps out the psychological and spiritual turmoil of suffering, treating it not as a divine oversight, but as a deliberate and necessary spiritual remedy. Distinctive to his theology is the concept of "purgation"—the painful but redemptive process of ridding the human soul of sensory comforts, egoic desires, and even its spiritual illusions about God. St. John refers to these trials as the "dark night," a period characterized by profound discomfort, disillusionment, and a perceived absence of divine consolation. Some modern theologians characterize this framework as a "mystical theodicy," arguing that if God desires the realization of genuine, freely given love, the world must possess a "shadow side" where suffering acts as the necessary condition to cultivate self-sacrificial devotion. Far from being punitive, the suffering experienced in the dark night is ultimately illuminating. St. John captures this redemptive paradox directly, writing: “The soul suffers all these afflictive purgations of the spirit to the end that it may be begotten anew in spiritual life”. Through this intense purification, the believer reaches an "absolute and utter dependence on God". For St. John, the ultimate answer to theodicy is found not in logic, but in the crucible of divine intimacy: “Love consists not in feeling great things but in having great detachment and in suffering for the beloved”.

• blogspot.com
• nih.gov
• seekingvirtueandwisdom.com
• goodreads.com
• templeton.org
• ou.edu