Posts

Why Comfort Is Not Enough

 

 

 

یہ مضمون اردو میں پڑھیں

I once asked him a question that had quietly bothered me for years: “Why do people who seem to have everything still feel empty?”

He looked at me for a moment and said, “What do you mean by everything?”

“Comfort, I suppose. Money. Status. Security. Entertainment. The freedom to do almost whatever they want.”

“And none of those seem sufficient?”

“Not always.”

I thought of several people I had known over the years. Some had achieved much of what others spend their lives pursuing. Their careers were successful. Their finances were stable. Their lives appeared comfortable from the outside. Yet whenever I spent enough time with them, I sensed a restlessness that those achievements hadn’t resolved. At the same time, I had known people whose circumstances were objectively more difficult. They carried burdens others did not. Yet they often had an aliveness that seemed strangely absent in people with easier lives.

He nodded and said, “So perhaps comfort and meaning are not the same thing.”

I expected a more satisfying answer. I asked, “Isn’t comfort part of a good life?”

“Of course it is. Rest matters. Pleasure matters. Security matters. There is nothing admirable about making life unnecessarily difficult.”

He paused for some time, and then added, “But suppose every discomfort disappeared. Would that automatically answer the question, What is my life for?”

I thought about it. “No,” I finally said.

He smiled faintly and said, “Then perhaps comfort solves one kind of human problem without solving another.”

That distinction stayed with me.

For much of my life, I assumed dissatisfaction meant something was missing from a person’s circumstances. More success. More recognition. More freedom. More enjoyable experiences. If enough problems could be removed and enough pleasures added, fulfillment would surely follow. Yet experience kept complicating that theory. A person could possess comfort and still wonder why any of it mattered.

After a few moments, he asked, “Have you ever been busy and yet strangely empty?”

I laughed and said, “More than once.”

“What was missing?”

The question immediately brought a particular period of my life to mind. My days were full. Meetings, responsibilities, deadlines, projects. From the outside, it looked productive. In fact, if someone had asked me whether I was accomplishing things, I would have said yes. Yet there was a question quietly following me through all of it. Why does any of this matter? I wasn’t asking it consciously every day. But I could feel its presence. Eventually I said, “I think I lost sight of why I was doing any of it.”

He nodded. “That is different from being tired.”

I thought about it for a moment and then said, “I was tired too. But this felt deeper.”

“Perhaps you were not only short of energy,” he said. “Perhaps you were short of meaning.”

That was the first time the word came up in our conversation.

After a pause, he asked, “Have you read Viktor Frankl?”

“Only a little.”

He nodded. “Frankl developed what became known as logotherapy around a deceptively simple idea: human beings do not merely seek pleasure, power, or the reduction of discomfort. We also need to experience life as meaningful.”

I had heard that idea before. Yet hearing it beside the discussion of comfort made it feel more concrete.

“So meaning was the main thing he thought people were looking for?” I asked.

“He described the search for meaning as a central human motivation.”

Then he added a qualification I appreciated. “That doesn’t mean meaning explains everything. Human beings are more complicated than that.”

I nodded.

He continued: “Depression, anxiety, trauma, grief, and many other forms of suffering can arise from numerous causes. Meaning is not a replacement for treatment. It is not a cure-all.”

“Then why is it so important?”

“Because even when you understand symptoms, habits, and emotions, something important may remain unexplored if you never ask what a person’s life is oriented toward.”

He paused. “What are they living for?”

That question felt larger than I expected. We often ask people what they want. What career do you want? What kind of house? What income? What lifestyle? What experiences? But what are you living for? belonged to an entirely different category.

It forced me to think not merely about what I hoped to obtain, but about what made obtaining anything worthwhile in the first place.

Seeing my expression, he offered an example: “Imagine two people doing equally demanding work.”

I nodded.

“Same hours. Same effort. Same salary.” He said. “One experiences the work as something to endure until payday. The other believes the work contributes to something deeply important. Wouldn’t both still become tired?”

“Of course.”

“So what changes?”

He smiled. “Not necessarily the exhaustion. The meaning of the exhaustion.”

I understood immediately. Meaning did not remove the cost. It changed the relationship to the cost. I thought about parents caring for a sick child. The sleepless nights are real. The exhaustion is real. Love doesn’t magically eliminate any of that. Yet most parents wouldn’t experience those sacrifices the same way they would meaningless deprivation.

“They know what the tiredness is for,” I said.

“Exactly,” he said. “A burden can remain heavy and still become worth carrying.”

He later spoke about Frankl’s experiences during the Holocaust and the ideas that eventually emerged in Man’s Search for Meaning. But he was careful. “People sometimes turn Frankl into a slogan.”

“What do you mean?” I asked.

“They hear his story and conclude that meaning allows people to overcome anything.”

I nodded.

“But that isn’t a careful conclusion. Extreme suffering can overwhelm people. Trauma is real. Human resilience varies.”

“So what’s the more accurate lesson?”

He thought for a moment and then said, “Meaning can give a person something to orient toward even when suffering cannot immediately be removed.” Something to live for. I found that formulation both humbler and more profound. It didn’t romanticize suffering. It simply refused to assume suffering had the final word.

I asked another question, “Did Frankl think meaning had to come from some grand achievement?”

“No,” He said, smiling. “And that may be one of the most liberating parts of his thought.”

I leaned forward slightly. “How so?”

“Because meaning can be found in many places.” He began counting examples. “It may emerge through work that contributes something worthwhile. Through creativity. Through service.”

I nodded.

He continued, “Meaning can also emerge through experience. Love. Friendship. Beauty. Nature. Genuine encounters with other people.” Then he paused for a while and added, “And sometimes, when suffering truly cannot be removed, meaning may emerge through the way a person chooses to meet that suffering.”

I frowned slightly. “That sounds dangerous.”

“In what way?”

“It could sound as though suffering itself is good.”

He nodded immediately. “That’s why we have to be careful.”

I appreciated the answer. There was no romanticizing pain. “If suffering can be prevented, treated, corrected, reduced, or resisted,” he continued, “then responsibility may require exactly that. There is no virtue in preserving avoidable suffering simply because it might be meaningful.”

That felt balanced. “Then attitude becomes important when the situation genuinely cannot be changed.”

“Precisely.”

I thought about losses people carry. A loved one who cannot be returned. A diagnosis that cannot be erased. A limitation that must be lived with. An irreversible chapter of life. “What then?” I asked.

He looked at me quietly. “Then the question becomes: How will I meet what I cannot remove?”

I found myself thinking about several people I knew. One had lost much of the independence they once enjoyed because of illness. Another had suffered a loss that permanently altered the shape of their life. Neither person seemed happy about what had happened. Nor should they have been. Yet both possessed a dignity that did not depend on pretending the suffering was good. Perhaps meaning, in those moments, was not found in the circumstance itself. Perhaps it was found in the way they carried it. “Meaning is larger than usefulness,” I said.

“Much larger.”

That distinction felt especially important. We live in a culture that often measures worth through productivity. What have you built? What have you produced? How much have you accomplished? Those questions matter. But if they become the only questions, what happens when productivity becomes impossible? What happens during illness? Disability? Old age? Dependence? Would meaningfulness disappear simply because output decreased? Frankl’s vision suggested otherwise. A person can create something meaningful. A person can love meaningfully. A person can receive beauty meaningfully. A person can endure suffering meaningfully. The possibilities were larger than productivity alone. I found that reassuring. It meant meaning was not postponed until some future day when I finally accomplished something impressive. It might be present in an ordinary afternoon. A sincere conversation. A responsibility handled well. A moment of honesty. A difficult choice made faithfully. A beautiful sunset actually noticed rather than rushed past.

He seemed to sense the direction of my thoughts. “Why do you think people postpone meaning?” He asked.

I smiled. “Because we associate it with something big.”

“Go on.”

“One day I’ll discover my purpose. One day my work will matter. One day I’ll do something important.”

He nodded. “And what happens to today?”

I laughed. “It becomes something to get through.”

That answer felt a little too familiar. For years I had treated the present as preparation for some future significance. Perhaps meaning was always waiting somewhere beyond the next milestone. Frankl’s perspective challenged that assumption. Instead of asking only, What do I want from life?, it invited another question: What is life asking of me right now?

When I asked how that worked in practice, he offered examples: “If someone needs to be heard, meaning may lie in listening well.”

I nodded.

“If a piece of work requires integrity, meaning may lie in doing it honestly.”

“Yes.”

“If you’re witnessing something beautiful, meaning may lie in being present enough to receive it.”

I smiled and asked, “And if I’m facing something I cannot change?”

“Meaning may lie in the kind of person you choose to remain while carrying it.”

The idea had become surprisingly concrete. Meaning was no longer a distant mission statement. It was this person. This responsibility. This situation. This response.

Eventually I asked him something else: “If meaning matters so much, why do we choose comfort instead?”

He smiled and said, “Because comfort usually asks less of us.”

The answer was immediately understandable. Distraction is often easier than reflection. Entertainment is often easier than contribution. Scrolling is often easier than learning. Avoiding a difficult conversation is often easier than having one. Comfort is immediate. Meaning usually asks for participation.

“But comfort isn’t the enemy,” he added.

“No?”

“Of course not. A meaningful life can include rest, pleasure, laughter, friendship, leisure, and joy,” he said. “The problem arises when ease becomes the standard by which everything is judged.”

That felt true. Many meaningful parts of life are not easy. Parenting can be exhausting. Learning can be frustrating. Keeping promises can be inconvenient. Creating something worthwhile can require years of effort. Yet afterward these experiences often leave behind a kind of fullness that passive comfort rarely provides.

“Not easier,” I said. “But fuller.”

He nodded.

I remembered a man I once knew who changed careers. The new work paid less, involved more uncertainty, and demanded more effort. When I asked why he seemed happier, he replied with a sentence I never forgot: “For the first time, I feel useful.”

I shared that story.

He smiled and said, “That may have been one source of meaning for him.”

“Not the only one?”

“No. People are not machines whose worth depends on output.”

Again, the idea widened. A human life could matter without becoming impressive. A person could matter during seasons of giving and seasons of receiving. Presence mattered. Love mattered. Gratitude mattered. Dignity mattered. The way joy was received mattered. The way suffering was carried mattered.

As I reflected on my own life, I noticed something. Some days filled with entertainment left almost no lasting impression. They were enjoyable enough, but strangely thin. Other days contained very little excitement, yet remained memorable because of a meaningful conversation, a period of concentrated learning, an act of service, a moment of beauty, or a responsibility taken seriously. Those days were not always happier. But they felt more inhabited. I had participated in them rather than merely consumed them.

As our conversation drew to a close, I returned to my original question. “So why do people who seem to have everything still feel empty?”

He thought for a while before answering. “Sometimes because what they have answers questions the human heart was never ultimately asking.”

I waited.

“Money answers, ‘What can I afford?’ Comfort answers, ‘How can I reduce inconvenience?’ Status answers, ‘How am I regarded?’ Pleasure answers, ‘What feels good right now?'” Then he added quietly: “But none of them necessarily answers, ‘What is worth giving myself to?'”

That seemed to bring the entire conversation together. The problem was never pleasure. Or comfort. Or success. Or wealth. The problem was expecting them to carry a weight they were never designed to carry.

Later, I reflected on our conversation. When restlessness appears, perhaps the first question should not always be: How can I feel better? Sometimes another question deserves to stand beside it: What am I living for right now? What matters in this moment? What is being asked of me here? Is there something worth loving, serving, creating, receiving, or enduring that I have stopped noticing?

Meaning does not eliminate pain. It does not guarantee happiness. It does not replace treatment when treatment is needed. But it can provide direction where comfort alone cannot. Perhaps human beings need more than a pleasant life. We need a life that points somewhere. Something worth loving. Something worth serving. Something worth creating. Something worth receiving with gratitude. And when suffering truly cannot be removed, some way of meeting it that allows us to remain human rather than be defined entirely by what has happened.

Comfort can make life easier. Meaning helps us understand what makes the living worthwhile.

 

The Freedom No One Can Take Away

 

 

یہ مضمون اردو میں پڑھیں

Viktor Frankl, the Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist who survived the horrors of Nazi concentration camps, once expressed a timeless truth: everything can be taken away from a person—health, wealth, relationships, possessions—but one freedom always remains: the freedom to choose one’s response.

This insight was not a philosophical idea formed in a comfortable armchair; it was uncovered through the toughest human experiences. Frankl spent three years in concentration camps, dealing with starvation, humiliation, forced labor, and the constant threat of death. Every morning, he woke up uncertain if he would make it through the day, and each night, he went to sleep not knowing if he would see the sunrise. Still, amidst this daily fight with mortality, he learned that even when everything was taken away, there was one thing his captors could not take—his inner freedom.

Freedom in the Midst of Suffering

Frankl noted that prisoners reacted differently to the same brutality. Some gave in to despair, others became bitter, while a few kept their dignity and compassion. The difference wasn’t in the circumstances — which were equally harsh for everyone — but in how they responded.

This is where Frankl’s discovery shines:

  • You may not control what happens to you.
  • You may not control how others treat you.
  • You may not control illness, loss, or tragedy.

But you can always control how you choose to respond.

Think about two people who unexpectedly lose their jobs.

  • The first person falls into despair, blames others, and sinks into hopelessness.
  • The second experiences the same pain but chooses to view it as a chance to re-evaluate life, improve skills, or even follow a long-neglected passion.

The event remains the same—losing a job. But the result varies greatly depending on how you respond.

Small Daily Illustrations

This principle is not limited to extreme cases like concentration camps or devastating losses. It applies to our everyday lives.

  • When someone cuts us off in traffic, do we get angry or take a deep breath and keep going?
  • When a family member speaks harshly, should we retaliate right away or pause and respond calmly?
  • When plans fall apart, do we drown in self-pity or see the setback as a lesson?

In each situation, our well-being is influenced more by how we respond than by what actually happens.

An Anecdote of Perspective

A teacher once poured a glass of water halfway and asked the class, “What do you see?” Some said, “Half empty.” Others said, “Half full.” He smiled and said, “Both are correct. But remember, the choice of which one you see determines not just your mood today but also your future tomorrow.”

Frankl’s lesson is the same: we cannot alter the facts, but we can always change how we see and respond to them.

Remember

  1. Response is Power – It is the one area of freedom no one can breach.
  2. Response is Responsibility – With this freedom comes accountability; we can’t always blame circumstances or others.
  3. Response Shapes Character – Each time we select our response, we are shaping who we become.

A Takeaway for Life

The world may take away many things from us. We might face illness, rejection, failure, or even severe injustice. But as long as we are alive, we hold within us the sacred space of choice. That space—our ability to respond—is the source of dignity, resilience, and purpose.

As Frankl understood in the bleakest moments: “They can take everything from me, but they cannot take my response. That remains mine, and mine alone.”

For Reflection:

Recall a recent situation where you reacted impulsively. If you had taken a moment to pause, what different response could you have chosen? How might it have affected the outcome for you and others?

 

یہ مضمون اردو میں پڑھیں

Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs seems a good abstract of how people generally progress in their motives. At the bottom are the basics: food, shelter, safety. Then come the needs for belonging, esteem, and finally self-actualization — the desire to become what one is capable of becoming. The model struck a chord because it felt true to everyday life. We all know how hard it is to think about philosophy when hungry, or to pursue creative goals when worried about survival.

And yet, real life often surprises us.

When Life Breaks the Pyramid

History and ordinary life both tell stories that don’t quite fit the pyramid. A child who offers her candy to a friend who has none. A laborer who shares his meager lunch with a stranger. A soldier who throws himself on a grenade to save his comrades. Or closer to daily experience: a student rushing to an exam but stopping to take an injured person to the hospital.

None of these people had “completed the lower rungs” of Maslow’s ladder before acting. They acted in the moment, beyond themselves, and sometimes at great personal cost. These glimpses remind us that self-transcendence isn’t reserved for the comfortable and secure. It is a possibility seeded in every human heart, ready to appear in unexpected moments.

Viktor Frankl and Meaning in Suffering

Viktor Frankl, the Austrian psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor, saw this vividly in the concentration camps. In a place stripped of food, safety, and dignity, he still saw prisoners share their last crust of bread, comfort others, or choose to suffer with dignity rather than despair. Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning insists that meaning is not something we wait to reach after other needs are met. It is something we can choose, even in the midst of pain.

This challenges the neatness of the pyramid. If self-transcendence is possible in Auschwitz, then it cannot be locked away at the top of a hierarchy. It is not an “extra.” It is a hidden flame, capable of burning even in the darkest conditions.

Beyond Self-Actualization

Maslow himself later admitted that he had stopped too soon. At first, he thought the summit of human motivation was self-actualization — becoming your best self, your fullest potential. However, in his unfinished writings, he later suggested that beyond self-actualization lies something greater: self-transcendence. The shift is subtle but important. Self-actualization still centers on me — my growth, my potential, my fulfillment. Self-transcendence shifts the center outward — to others, to truth, to causes larger than the self.

In this sense, Frankl’s prisoners were not “self-actualizing.” They were transcending themselves — giving, enduring, hoping — not for themselves alone but for something beyond them.

Relatedness and the Need to Give

Modern motivation theory deepens this picture. Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, in their Self-Determination Theory, showed that human beings have three core psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Relatedness — the sense of meaningful connection to others — is not a luxury that comes later, but a need as basic as autonomy or competence.

This explains why even people in hardship often reach out to others. A poor villager feeding a guest, a disaster survivor comforting a neighbor, or even a child handing over candy — all these acts speak to the deep human need to belong and to matter in each other’s lives. In fact, relatedness often fuels the very strength needed to endure deprivation.

Transcendence at Every Stage

Perhaps, then, we need to rethink Maslow’s model. The hierarchy was useful as a map, but life is not always traveled on straight roads. People do not always climb one step at a time. Sometimes they leap beyond themselves even when their own needs remain unmet.

Seen this way, self-transcendence is not the final stage of human growth. It is an ever-present potential. Children, the poor, the sick, the ordinary, and the extraordinary alike — all can show it. And when they do, they remind us that being human is not just about surviving or even thriving, but about giving, relating, and finding meaning beyond ourselves.

A Gentle Reminder

Maslow’s pyramid still helps us understand the arc of human motives. But perhaps the true story of human life is less a ladder and more a landscape, where self-transcendence can appear anywhere — in a hospital corridor, in a schoolyard, in a moment of generosity across a dinner table.

Frankl was right: even in suffering, we remain free to choose our response. And Deci and Ryan remind us that connection itself is a basic need, not an optional extra. Together, these insights suggest that transcendence is not the top of a pyramid but the thread that runs through it all.

It is the quiet possibility that at any moment, even in lack, even in pain, we may rise above ourselves.

Today, I would like to direct the same question to my friends, which I tried to answer for myself in the last post: “Who are you and what is the identity that you have chosen for yourself?”

Conduct an experiment: If you only ask the first part of the question, “who are you?” almost everyone that you meet will answer it by telling you their name or, sometimes, by adding their position or the designation, which they hold in their organization, or by explaining what they do. This clearly points out, on the one hand, that most people – a very large majority – have no sense of identity other than the names that they were given or other than the jobs that they are performing. While, on the other hand, it is an indication that we are, generally, so devoid of a sense of identity that we search for it in such things as our positions, designations, and achievements. However, the problem is that as a being with a conscious, as well as a conscience, we will not be satisfied with an identity given to us by someone else – even if that someone includes our parents, or elders. Neither will we be satisfied with an identity that is likely to change every time our position, work, responsibility, or social status is changed by the circumstances.

Thus, our sense of identity not only gives us stability in our ever changing, unpredictable, and complex world and circumstances, it also gives a meaning to our lives; it provides us the strength to face our share of failures and difficult times in life; it gives us the courage to do what we understand to be right, even when the costs of doing right are high. In a way, it makes us fully human – conscious and conscientious – and connects us to a purpose larger than ourselves.

As a side note, it may be interesting to know that one of the reasons ascribed to the recent increase in the incidence of depression and even suicide – which is indicative of complete hopelessness and despair – is lack of meaning in one’s life. Viktor Frankl’s treatise, ‘Man’s Search for Meaning’ and the subsequent recognition of ‘Logotherapy’ as a branch of Psychology, allows me to say with confidence that striving to find meaning in life is the primary, most powerful motivating driving force in humans.

The idea of a lack of consciously developed identity and a lack of meaning in life reminds me of the large number of students – especially aspiring medical students – who invariably call me in a state of extreme hopelessness and distress, because of their low grades, which are insufficient for pursuing their further studies to become doctors. They clearly sound as if they have lost all sense of identity from their lives. The position and the emotional state of adults is not significantly different, when they are removed from their long-standing, cherished positions.

I do not intend to give the impression that in my opinion, such incidents in life should not be a cause of disturbance and sadness. They most definitely are and probably will continue to be. But, that is life, isn’t it? Things – unpleasant and unwanted – are also going to happen. Having a strong sense of meaning and self-identity will greatly support us in going through the turbulent times of life. This is precisely the message that I have discerned from Viktor Frankl’s ‘Man’s search for Meaning.’

Coming back to the point, I would like you to answer the question “Who are you and what is the identity that you have chosen for yourself?”

Take some time in trying to answer this question. Look past yourself and beyond your immediate needs, desires, and concerns. Look at your surroundings and see what is it that you care enough to contribute to the people around you. Is there any way that you can slightly reduce anyone’s suffering? Is there any thing that you feel moved enough to contribute to those for whom your contribution is of much more value than it costs you? Your identity doesn’t have to be something that challenges the whole world. It can be as humble as making a small difference in a single life – one life at a time. Something that you are moved to contribute as you go through all the ups and downs of your own life. Something that provides you a stable and a permanent identity – at least in your own eyes – irrespective of the changes in your position, responsibility, job, or status.

December 14, 2019
(Lahore, Pakistan)