Yes, one must suffer, even in vain, so as not to have lived in vain.

The aphorism proposes suffering as a kind of existential proof: even when pain yields no practical result (“in vain”), enduring it consciously may keep one’s life from being “in vain.” Porchia’s paradox suggests that meaning is not guaranteed by outcomes; it can arise from the depth of one’s engagement with reality, including its harshness. The repetition of “in vain” sharpens the contrast between external futility and inner significance, implying that a life insulated from suffering might be empty or unreal, while a life that has faced suffering—without consoling narratives of reward—has at least been fully lived. It is a stark ethic of authenticity rather than optimism.