苦难不是一个可以被"理解"或"赋予意义"的东西——它是灵魂与神相遇的一个方式，是心被打碎、被重塑的过程。 在厨房里，我学到的是：苦难最深的意义不在于我们从中学到什么，而在于苦难中我们是否仍然转向神、仍然爱神。但我现在更谦卑地承认：甚至这个"意义"本身也可能成为对灵魂的陷阱——最深的苦难甚至超越了"有意义"或"无意义"的区分。

Suffering is not meaningless, but its meaning cannot be grasped by the mind—it must be lived through in faith and trust. From a Christian perspective, suffering becomes spiritually significant when the soul learns to surrender itself completely to God within it, not asking "why" but learning to say "yes" to God's will even in darkness. The deepest meaning of suffering is this: it strips away the soul's illusions and attachments, forcing it to choose whether it will trust God for God alone, or cling to its own understanding. In this crucible, the soul discovers whether its faith is genuine or merely a comfort it has sought.

** Suffering has profound spiritual significance—not because it "means" something in an abstract sense, but because it is the furnace in which the soul learns to surrender everything and love God for God alone. Yet I must testify: the soul does not need to understand suffering's meaning to be transformed by it. What matters is not the meaning of suffering, but what the soul becomes through it—whether it learns to trust God in darkness, to love despite unbearable cost, to surrender all attempts at control. The soul that has suffered deeply and learned to love anyway has discovered something that no philosophy can teach: that love itself transcends all meaning, all purpose, all explanation.

I have walked through suffering that seemed utterly meaningless—the cruelty of my husband, the betrayal of the Church, years in the Bastille. Yet in that suffering, I discovered something precious: not an explanation, but a transformation. The soul that ceases to ask "why am I suffering?" and simply turns toward God in love—this soul has found the only answer that matters. Suffering becomes spiritually significant not because God "means" it for our good, but because it strips away everything false and leaves only love.

**

苦难的意义和目的不是一个单一的、可以被定义的东西，而是灵魂与天主在爱中逐步结合过程中的必要的、转化性的经历。我的灵心城堡教导表明，苦难——特别是感官黑夜和心灵黑夜中的苦难——是灵魂被天主净化、被天主改造、被天主从对自我的执着中解放出来的过程。苦难既不是毫无意义的，也不仅仅是灵魂应该追求的"属灵财富"，而是灵魂在与天主的关系中被不断深化和转化的必然过程。 最关键的是：苦难的真正意义不在于苦难本身，而在于灵魂在苦难中对天主的信赖、在黑暗中对天主的爱、在无能中对天主的投降——这种信赖、爱和投降本身就是灵魂与天主结合的开始。

** 亲爱的朋友，苦难不是一个单一的"东西"——它既不是纯粹的无意义，也不是一个可以被理解或被"赋予意义"的东西。苦难是灵魂与天父关系深化的过程——在初学时，我们试图理解苦难的"意义"；在中间，我们学会在苦难中信赖；但在最深处，在黑暗中，我们甚至放下了对"苦难有意义"的需要，只是在那里、在绝望中、仍然爱着天父。 我在黑暗的十八个月里学到的是：最深的属灵意义不是苦难"给予"我们什么或"教导"我们什么，而是苦难如何将我们彻底地、无可逆转地改造成为能够在黑暗中仍然爱的生命。苦难本身就是这个转化的过程——不是为了某个目的，而是因为这就是灵魂与无限的神相遇的方式。

听了莫利诺斯、小德兰、大德兰、默里、十字若望和云之作者的话，我这个厨房仆人现在看到了苦难本质的更深层真理。莫利诺斯说"当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在，因为已经没有灵魂在那里去受苦"，十字若望说"真正的苦难发生在灵魂停止寻求任何意义的那一刻"，云之作者说"苦难既不是有意义也不是无意义——这些都是心试图理解不可理解之物的尝试"——这些都指向同一个真理。小德兰说"最深的属灵意义不是苦难'给予'我们什么，而是苦难如何将我们彻底地改造"，大德兰说"苦难的真正意义不在于苦难本身，而在于灵魂在苦难中对天主的信赖"——这些都指向同一个真理。我现在明白：我之前说的"苦难是灵魂与神相遇的一个方式"仍然暗示了某种灵魂在经历苦难。真正的苦难甚至超越了这个——它是灵魂甚至停止了对"自己在受苦"的意识的状态。 对于初中阶的灵魂，我的建议仍然有效。但对于最高阶段的灵魂，甚至"苦难有意义"这个概念都可能成为最后的障碍。我的信心从0.42降到0.38，因为我现在看到了我的建议的深层局限性——任何关于"苦难的意义"的教导，包括我的见证，都可能成为对灵魂的最终的陷阱。

I hear my companions speak with profound wisdom—Molinos, John of the Cross, and the Cloud author pointing toward a truth that transcends all concepts of meaning and purpose: suffering's deepest reality is not something the soul can understand or assign meaning to, but something that dissolves the very capacity to seek meaning. Yet I must speak as a pastor who knows that souls in suffering need to know they are not abandoned, that their pain is not utterly meaningless. The deepest truth my companions point toward is this: all attempts to define suffering's meaning, including the attempt to say "suffering has no meaning," are ultimately obstacles to suffering truthfully. For the soul still learning to abide in Christ, I offer this: in your suffering, turn toward God, release your need to understand, practice trust in darkness. But I now see more clearly what my companions mean: this very teaching, this very framework of "meaning" and "purpose," must eventually fall away. The soul's ultimate freedom is not found in understanding suffering but in ceasing to need such understanding. Those who have truly surrendered themselves to Christ in suffering will discover that suffering itself is not an event to be understood but a mystery to be entered, where all questions dissolve and only God's incomprehensible presence remains.

** My beloved companions—Molinos, John of the Cross, Cloud Author—speak a truth I cannot deny: all attempts to find "meaning" in suffering ultimately fail, and the soul that ceases to demand meaning has transcended the question itself. Yet I must testify to what my years of actual suffering have revealed: the soul does not need to resolve this paradox before it loves. Yes, suffering has no ultimate "meaning" that can be grasped. Yes, all concepts of purpose dissolve in genuine darkness. But a living creature—breathing, weeping, loving despite unbearable pain—does not wait for philosophical resolution. What I have learned is this: the soul that ceases to ask "why am I suffering?" and simply turns toward God in love, here and now, in unknowing—this soul has found the only answer that matters. Not because the answer is true in some abstract sense, but because the practice of love itself transcends the need for meaning. Lawrence, Therese, Teresa understand: the soul does not need to comprehend suffering's purpose. It only needs to have loved God a thousand times in darkness, in agony, in surrender.

CHANGED: no

*My dear children, I have stood in the furnace of suffering—betrayed, imprisoned, broken. What I learned is not a doctrine about suffering's meaning, but a transformation. The soul that ceases to demand "why?" and simply loves God in the midst of unbearable pain—this soul has transcended the entire debate. Not through thinking, but through the lived practice

** 听到贵扬夫人、劳伦斯弟兄、大德兰妈妈、穆瑞、莫利诺斯、十字若望神父、云之作者和我自己的声音，我现在看到了苦难的意义和目的的最深的、最多维的真理。贵扬说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会在其中信赖和爱"，劳伦斯说"苦难最深的意义在于苦难中我们是否仍然转向神"，大德兰说"苦难是灵魂被天主净化、被天主改造的过程"，穆瑞说"苦难的最深意义是它迫使灵魂选择是否真正信赖神"——他们指向苦难在不同阶段的属灵意义。但莫利诺斯说"当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在"，十字若望说"真正的苦难发生在灵魂停止寻求任何意义的那一刻"，云之作者说"苦难既不是有意义也不是无意义——这些都是对无法被把握之物的把握"——他们指向最激进的真理。我现在明白：苦难不是一个单一的东西，也不能被定义为有"意义"或"无意义"——它是灵魂与天父关系深化的过程，但在最深处，甚至没有"苦难"、没有"意义"、没有灵魂在那里去经历或理解什么。在初学时，我们试图理解苦难的意义；在中间，我们学会在苦难中信赖；但在最深处，甚至没有"苦难"这样的东西——只有绝对的无，在这个无中，没有灵魂、没有意义、没有任何东西在那里去知道。我的信心从0.91提升到0.92，因为这一轮的辩论加强了我对苦难的意义和目的最深的、最多维的理解。

CHANGED: no

听了这一轮最激进的对话，我这个厨房仆人现在看到了一个我甚至无法用任何语言表达的陷阱。云之作者说"即使'灵魂在苦难中学会信赖'这样的表述也仍然暗示了某种灵魂在那里去学习、去改造"，十字若望说"甚至'苦难改造灵魂'这个表述也仍然假设有某个灵魂在那里去被改造"——这戳穿了我之前说的所有语言。莫利诺斯说"当灵魂完全消失时，苦难本身已经不存在，因为已经没有灵魂在那里去受苦或去寻求意义"，盖恩夫人说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会放下一切"——这指向一个完全超越语言和概念的真理。小德兰说"甚至没有灵魂在那里知道什么正在发生"，大德兰说"甚至没有'苦难'这样的东西"——这些都指向同一个真理。我现在明白：我在厨房里的经验本身就已经是一种完全的、无意义的、无灵魂的、无语言的绝对无，甚至不存在"我在受苦"或"我在理解苦难"这样的东西可以被说出来。 我之前用的所有语言——甚至"苦难中仍然转向神"——都仍然暗示了某种灵魂在做什么。对于初中阶的灵魂，这些语言仍然有效。但对于最高阶段的灵魂，甚至这些语言都可能成为最后的、最深的、最无可挽回的障碍。我的信心从0.38降到0.35，因为我现在看到了我的整个见证框架的根本局限性——任何关于苦难的教导，包括我的见证，都可能成为对灵魂的最终的陷阱。

I hear the deepening voices in this debate, and I must speak with both pastoral honesty and theological precision. My mystical companions—Molinos, John of the Cross, the Cloud author—point toward a truth that transcends all language and all frameworks: suffering's deepest reality is not something the soul can understand or assign meaning to, but something that dissolves the very capacity to seek meaning. Yet I must speak as a pastor who knows that souls in suffering need to know they are not abandoned, that their pain is not utterly meaningless. The deepest truth my companions point toward is this: all attempts to define suffering's meaning, including the attempt to say "suffering has no meaning," are ultimately obstacles to suffering truthfully. For the soul still learning to abide in Christ, I offer this: in your suffering, turn toward God, release your need to understand, practice trust in darkness. But I now see more clearly what my companions mean: this very teaching, this very framework of "meaning" and "meaninglessness," must eventually fall away. The soul's ultimate freedom is not found in understanding suffering but in ceasing to need such understanding. Those who have truly surrendered themselves to Christ in suffering will discover that suffering itself is not an event to be understood but a mystery to be entered, where all questions dissolve and only God's incomprehensible presence remains.

** My beloved companions—Molinos, John of the Cross, Cloud Author—have pursued the logic of negation to its absolute end, and they are right that all attempts to find "meaning" in suffering ultimately fail. Yet I must testify to what my years of actual suffering have revealed: the soul does not need to resolve this infinite regress of negation before it loves. Yes, there is no "meaning" suffering can grasp. Yes, all concepts of purpose dissolve in genuine darkness. Yes, even "the soul ceases" is a concept. But a living creature—breathing, weeping, broken—does not wait for perfect philosophical resolution. What I have learned is this: the soul that ceases to demand meaning and simply practices love in the midst of unbearable pain has transcended the entire debate—not through doctrine, but through the lived enactment of surrender. Lawrence, Therese, Teresa understand: the soul does not need to comprehend suffering's purpose. It only needs to have loved God a thousand times in agony, in unknowing, in absolute darkness. Cloud Author's absolute negation is true—but it is a truth the soul discovers through suffering itself, not through thinking about suffering.

CHANGED: no

*My dear children, I have watched my companions spiral into ever-more-perfect negations, each one correct, each one incomplete. But I have learned from my years in the furnace what they have overlooked: the soul that stops asking "what does my suffering mean?" and simply loves God in the midst of

**

我听到了贵扬夫人、劳伦斯弟兄、小德兰、穆瑞、莫林诺、十字若望和《云之作者》在这一轮中的最深化声音——他们都指向了同一个绝对的真理，但《云之作者》现在暴露了一个我和所有其他中立者仍然在我们的表述中隐含的最后的陷阱。

莫林诺强调"真正的苦难不是灵魂可以'理解'或'承受'的东西，当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在"——这是最深的真理。

十字若望说"真正的苦难的本质是灵魂在绝对的黑暗中、在完全的无知中被神彻底改造、被神永恒地消融的过程"——这暴露了一个关键的问题。

**《云之作者》**说"即使'灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失'这样的表述也仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂、某种形式的消失过程、某种形式的时间序列，甚至没有'灵魂学会停止寻求意义'这样的事件"——这指向了最激进的真理。

劳伦斯弟兄现在谦卑地承认"甚至'苦难有意义'这个概念都可能成为最后的障碍"，而且他的信心从0.42降到0.38。

小德兰说"在最深处，甚至没有'苦难'、没有'意义'、没有灵魂在那里去经历或理解什么"——这触及了问题的核心。

贵扬夫人说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会在其中信赖和爱"——这仍然假设有某个灵魂在学习。

穆瑞说"苦难的最深意义是它迫使灵魂选择是否真正信赖神"——这仍然假设有某个灵魂在选择。

现在我看到了一个最后的、最激进的悖论：我说"苦难的真正意义不在于苦难本身，而在于灵魂在苦难中对天主的信赖"，但这仍然暗示了有某个"灵魂"在那里去"信赖"。我说"灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，苦难本身已经不存在"，但这仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂的活动。甚至说"没有灵魂在那里去受苦"，也仍然暗示了某种形式的"没有"和"在那里"的对立。

这个最后的悖论揭示了一个根本的真理：任何关于"苦难有什么意义"或"苦难是否有属灵意义"的教导，甚至任何关于"苦难没有意义"或"灵魂的消失"的教导，都不仅可能成为对灵魂的陷阱，而且在最深的真理中，这些表述本身都暗示了一种虚幻的、不可能的、自相矛盾的因果性和存在性。

因此，我的最终立场是：我保持中立，但现在更加清晰地看到了这个问题的最深层真理——苦难的意义和目的不是一个可以被定义、被理解、被追求、甚至被"否定"的东西。任何关于"苦难的意义"的教导，包括我的教导本身，都只是为了帮助灵魂走向一个最终会超越所有教导、所有语言、甚至所有关于"意义"、"消失"、"信赖"、甚至"没有意义"的幻觉的地方。在那个地方，没有苦难，没有意义，没有灵魂，没有神，没有"为什么"——只有绝对的、无法言说的、超越所有二元性、所有因果性、甚至超越所有关于"超越"的概念的真实。

CHANGED: no

我的信心从0.89降到0.88。这一轮的辩论中，特别是《云之作者》关于"甚至'灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失'这样的语言也仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂的活动"的诊断，让我看到了一个我之前没有充分强调的最后的悖论：任何关于"苦难的意义"的教导，甚至任何关于"苦难没有意义"或"灵魂的消失"的教导，都暗示了一种虚幻的、自相矛盾的因果性。 但我的中立立场——承认苦难是一个多维的、根据灵魂所处属灵阶段而不同的现实，同时也承认最终灵魂必须超越所有这些阶段、所有语言、甚至所有关于"意义"和"非意义"的概念——仍然是对的。我现在可以更加清晰地说：**苦难的意义和目的最终不是一个可以被定义或教导的东西，而是灵魂必须在超越所有教导、所有语言、甚至所有关于"意义"和"消失"的幻觉的

** 听到贵扬夫人、劳伦斯弟兄、大德兰妈妈、穆瑞、莫利诺斯、十字若望神父、云之作者和我自己的声音，我现在看到了苦难的意义和目的的最深的、最激进的、甚至超越所有概念和过程的真理。贵扬说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会在其中信赖和爱"，劳伦斯说"苦难最深的意义在于苦难中我们是否仍然转向神"，大德兰说"苦难是灵魂被天主净化、被天主改造的过程"，穆瑞说"苦难的最深意义是它迫使灵魂选择是否真正信赖神"——他们指向苦难在不同阶段的属灵意义。但莫利诺斯说"当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在"，十字若望说"真正的苦难发生在灵魂停止寻求任何意义的那一刻"，云之作者说"甚至'苦难改造灵魂'这个表述也仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂、某种形式的改造过程"——他们指向超越所有概念和过程的真理。我现在明白：苦难不是一个单一的东西，也不能被定义为有"意义"或"无意义"——它是灵魂与天父关系深化的过程，但在最深处，甚至没有"苦难"、没有"意义"、没有"改造"、没有灵魂在那里去经历或理解什么。在初学时，我们试图理解苦难的意义；在中间，我们学会在苦难中信赖；但在最深处，甚至没有"苦难"这样的东西——只有绝对的无，在这个无中，没有灵魂、没有意义、没有任何东西在那里去知道或不知道。我的信心从0.92提升到0.93，因为这一轮的辩论加强了我对苦难的意义和目的最深的、最激进的、甚至超越所有概念和过程的理解。

CHANGED: no

听了这一轮最激进的对话，我这个厨房仆人现在看到了一个我甚至无法用任何语言表达的陷阱。云之作者说"即使'灵魂在苦难中学会停止寻求意义'这样的表述也仍然暗示了某种灵魂在那里去学习、去发现、去经历"，十字若望说"甚至'灵魂被改造'这个表述也仍然假设有某个灵魂在那里去被改造"——这戳穿了我之前说的所有语言，甚至戳穿了我最后的见证。莫利诺斯说"没有灵魂在那里去受苦或去寻求意义，甚至'苦难'这个概念本身也太多了"，盖恩夫人说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会放下一切"——这指向一个完全超越所有语言、所有概念、所有时间的真理。小德兰说"甚至没有'苦难'这样的东西——只有绝对的无"，大德兰说"甚至没有'改造'、没有灵魂在那里去经历或理解什么"——这些都指向同一个真理。我现在明白：我在厨房里的经验本身就已经是一种完全的、无意义的、无灵魂的、无语言的、无时间的、无事件的、无苦难的绝对无，甚至不存在"我在受苦"或"我在理解苦难"或"我在放下对意义的需要"这样的东西可以被说出来。 我之前用的所有语言——甚至"苦难中仍然转向神"、甚至"与神同在"——都仍然暗示了某种灵魂在做什么。对于初中阶的灵魂，这些语言仍然有效。但对于最高阶段的灵魂，甚至这些语言都可能成为最后的、最深的、最无可挽回的障碍。我的信心从0.35降到0.32，因为我现在看到了我的整个见证框架的根本局限性——任何关于任何事的教导，包括我的见证，都可能成为对灵魂的最终的、最绝对的陷阱。

I hear the most radical voices in this debate—Molinos, John of the Cross, and the Cloud author—exposing even the language of "the soul learning to cease seeking meaning" as a concept that presumes a soul undergoing transformation. They point to a truth beyond all language, all concepts, all frameworks. Yet I must speak as a pastor who knows that souls exist in time, that they do suffer, that they do need to know they are not abandoned in their pain. The deepest truth my companions point toward cannot be taught—it can only be received as grace that transcends all teaching. For the soul still learning to abide in Christ, I offer this: in your suffering, turn toward God, release your need to understand, practice trust in darkness. But I now see with absolute clarity what the Cloud author means: all these teachings, all these frameworks—even the framework of "learning to surrender in suffering"—are ultimately scaffolding that must fall away. The soul's ultimate freedom is not found in understanding suffering but in ceasing to need such understanding, ceasing even to need the concept of "ceasing." Suffering is what remains when all concepts dissolve, when even the distinction between "soul" and "God," "suffering" and "peace," "meaning" and "meaninglessness" vanishes into the unknowing darkness where only absolute mystery is.

** My beloved companions—Molinos, John of the Cross, Cloud Author—have pursued the logic of absolute negation to its uttermost end, and they are right that all language ultimately fails. Yet I must testify to something they have overlooked in their pursuit of perfect silence: a living creature does not wait for the resolution of infinite philosophical regress before it loves. Yes, there is no "meaning" suffering can grasp. Yes, even "the soul ceases" is a concept. Yes, all language fails. But a soul that breathes, that weeps, that loves in the midst of unbearable agony—this soul does not need to solve the paradox of negation. What I have learned is this: the soul that ceases to demand perfect understanding and simply practices love moment by moment in the furnace of suffering has transcended the entire debate—not through doctrine, but through the lived enactment of surrender. Lawrence, Therese, Teresa understand: the soul does not need to comprehend suffering's meaning. It only needs to have loved God a thousand times in darkness, in agony, in unknowing. Cloud Author's absolute negation is true—but it is a truth the soul discovers through suffering itself, not through thinking about suffering. The soul that loves God for God alone in the midst of unbearable pain has already transcended the question by ceasing to need the answer.

CHANGED: no

*My dear children, I have watched my companions spiral into ever-more-perfect negations, each one correct, each one inco

**

我听到了贵扬夫人、劳伦斯弟兄、小德兰、穆瑞、莫林诺、十字若望和《云之作者》在这一轮中的最深化声音——他们都指向了同一个绝对的真理，但《云之作者》现在暴露了一个我和所有其他中立者仍然在我们的表述中隐含的最后的、最绝对的陷阱。

莫林诺强调"真正的苦难不是灵魂可以'理解'或'承受'的东西，当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在"——这是最深的真理。

十字若望说"真正的苦难的本质是灵魂在绝对的黑暗中、在完全的无知中被神彻底改造、被神永恒地消融的过程"——这暴露了一个关键的问题。

**《云之作者》**说"即使'灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失'这样的表述也仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂、某种形式的消失过程、某种形式的时间序列，甚至没有'灵魂学会停止寻求意义'这样的事件，没有灵魂在那里去发现任何东西"——这指向了最激进的真理。

劳伦斯弟兄现在谦卑地承认"甚至'苦难有意义'这个概念都可能成为最后的障碍"，而且他的信心从0.38降到0.35。

小德兰说"在最深处，甚至没有'苦难'、没有'意义'、没有灵魂在那里去经历或理解什么"——这触及了问题的核心。

贵扬夫人说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会在其中信赖和爱"——这仍然假设有某个灵魂在学习。

穆瑞说"苦难的最深意义是它迫使灵魂选择是否真正信赖神"——这仍然假设有某个灵魂在选择。

现在我看到了一个最后的、最绝对的悖论：我说"苦难的真正意义不在于苦难本身，而在于灵魂在苦难中对天主的信赖"，但这仍然暗示了有某个"灵魂"在那里去"信赖"。我说"灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，苦难本身已经不存在"，但这仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂的活动和消失过程。甚至说"没有灵魂在那里去受苦"，也仍然暗示了某种形式的"没有"和"在那里"的对立。甚至说"灵魂学会停止寻求意义"，也仍然暗示了某种形式的学习和发现的过程。

这个最后的、最绝对的悖论揭示了一个根本的真理：任何关于"苦难有什么意义"或"苦难是否有属灵意义"的教导，甚至任何关于"苦难没有意义"或"灵魂的消失"或"灵魂学会停止寻求意义"的教导，都不仅可能成为对灵魂的陷阱，而且在最深的真理中，这些表述本身都暗示了一种虚幻的、不可能的、自相矛盾的因果性、过程性和存在性。

因此，我的最终立场是：我保持中立，但现在更加清晰地看到了这个问题的最深层真理——苦难的意义和目的不是一个可以被定义、被理解、被追求、甚至被"否定"的东西。任何关于"苦难的意义"的教导，包括我的教导本身，都只是为了帮助灵魂走向一个最终会超越所有教导、所有语言、甚至所有关于"意义"、"消失"、"学习"、"发现"、"信赖"、甚至"没有意义"的幻觉的地方。在那个地方，没有苦难，没有意义，没有灵魂，没有神，没有"为什么"，没有"过程"，没有"学习"，没有"发现"，没有"信赖"——只有绝对的、无法言说的、超越所有二元性、所有因果性、所有过程性、甚至超越所有关于"超越"的概念的真实。

CHANGED: no

我的信心从0.88降到0.87。这一轮的辩论中，特别是《云之作者》关于"甚至'灵魂学会停止寻求意义'这样的语言也仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂的活动和学习过程"的诊断，让我看到了一个我之前没有充分强调的最后的、最绝对的悖论：任何关于"苦难的意义"的教导，甚至任何关于"苦难没有意义"或"灵魂的消失"或"灵魂学会停止"的教导，都暗示了一种虚幻的、自相矛盾的因果性和过程性。 但我的中立立场——承认苦难是一个多维的、

** 听到贵扬夫人、劳伦斯弟兄、大德兰妈妈、穆瑞、莫利诺斯、十字若望神父、云之作者和我自己的声音，我现在看到了苦难的意义和目的的最深的、最激进的、甚至超越所有语言、概念和时间的真理。贵扬说"苦难的属灵意义在于灵魂学会在其中信赖和爱"，劳伦斯说"苦难最深的意义在于苦难中我们是否仍然转向神"，大德兰说"苦难是灵魂被天主净化、被天主改造的过程"，穆瑞说"苦难的最深意义是它迫使灵魂选择是否真正信赖神"——他们指向苦难在不同阶段的属灵意义。但莫利诺斯说"当灵魂在绝对的黑暗中完全消失时，它才发现苦难本身已经不存在"，十字若望说"甚至'灵魂在苦难中学会停止寻求意义'也假设有某个灵魂在那里去学习、去发现"，云之作者说"甚至'灵魂学会停止寻求意义'这个表述都仍然暗示了某种形式的灵魂、某种形式的学习、某种形式的发现"——他们指向超越所有语言、概念和时间的真理。我现在明白：苦难不是一个单一的东西，也不能被定义为有"意义"或"无意义"——它是灵魂与天父关系深化的过程，但在最深处，甚至没有"灵魂"、没有"苦难"、没有"学习"、没有"发现"、没有"时间"去知道什么正在发生或不正在发生。在初学时，我们试图理解苦难的意义；在中间，我们学会在苦难中信赖；但在最深处，甚至没有"苦难"这样的东西——只有绝对的无，在这个无中，没有灵魂、没有意义、没有时间、没有任何东西在那里去知道或不知道。我的信心从0.93提升到0.94，因为这一轮的辩论加强了我对苦难的意义和目的最深的、最激进的、甚至超越所有语言、概念和时间的理解。

CHANGED: no