I chose the examples and the wording very carefully. Read it again, and you’ll see that it was pointed out that the suffering and anguish were *very real* to the subjects at the time of its occurrence, and thus, not exactly trivial. Losing one’s favorite toy as a child may appear trivial to an adult, but it is quite possibly the worst thing the child in question has ever experienced. And even if the adult knows that it is indeed a trivial thing, only a total asshole would treat it as such in the presence of said child.

My point is rather that after you are a few million years old (in earth time), and dealing with issues you face at that point, you will wistfully remember all the “problems” you had back on Earth and, similar to an adult pondering the child’s loss of their toy, will wind up thinking “they don’t know how good they have it”. Perhaps not so obvious is that I’m not saying that the so-called afterlife is bad….just that the issues you will face there will be on an entirely different level in their importance.

Also not so obvious is my belief here is that those who have gone through what we currently think is extreme suffering will prove to be better equipped to handle the issues arising in the “afterlife”; the ones who have been sheltered and lived a life of little suffering will be at a distinct disadvantage. Again bringing to mind the idea of a child who never had his favorite toy stolen finding it harder to deal with adult life as we know it than one who has attended the “school of hard knocks” a few times.

Heck, I’m a rather privileged person, in both where and when I live, but based on what I have experienced and heard from others, I can still acknowledge the non-triviality of extreme suffering. Now I can’t help but wonder… how sheltered can someone get? Would you really say that sort of thing to a cancer patient’s face, and if not, why not? Because that might make them feel worse (which of course still wouldn’t “matter”)? Sheeeesh.