XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   Ned Ludd wrote:   
      
   >   
   > "Tang Huyen"  wrote in message   
   > news:561E697A.3090505@gmail.com...   
   >> On 10/12/2015 4:14 PM, brian mitchell wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> The link between nonduality and compassion feels solid, but   
   >>> I don't know how active and constructive that compassion   
   >>> has to be. As with most things, there's probably a range,   
   >>> from the purely apperceptive to getting involved with bricks   
   >>> and mortar.   
   >>   
   >> <> to feel with another or others. In your simple Tat Vam Asi   
   >> modality, is there any element of feeling? I'm not speaking   
   >> about emotions here, but something that goes deeper than   
   >> just seeing or cognising; something that penetrates the   
   >> existential skin?>>   
   >>   
   >> The following is only my opinion, and nothing more.   
   >> The Spinozan intellectual love of the world entails   
   >> no compassion, just a Stoic feeling of the harmony   
   >> of the universe, in the abstract. The idea of the   
   >> individual awakening and not bothering about others   
      
   That sounds like a really good idea, the more I think about it the more   
   I like it; I wonder if I'm capable of it.   
      
   >> is accepted in Buddhism and Jainism, and probably is   
   >> a concept/word that precedes both of them in India   
   >> (pacceka-buddha). Awakening would then belong purely   
   >> to seeing or cognising, and not something that   
   >> penetrates the existential skin. (Even then, it could   
   >> be argued that others, who contribute to the survival   
   >> of such people, for example by offering food, as in   
   >> India, would benefit from such contact, merely from   
   >> the good feeling, however generated, as in learning   
   >> by examples.)   
   >>   
   >> Tang Huyen   
   >>   
   >   
   > Does any species of any kind, except humans, preserve   
   > their elderly?  In the social and hierarchical species it   
   > seems that when the alpha of any specific group gets   
   > weak he is taken out by one of the contending subordinates.   
      
   I think other species never get a chance to preserve their elders, they   
   are subject to predation and the old and weak are the preferred meals of   
   every predator I'm aware of because they can be taken with less risk and   
   less effort.  Until a species rises above predation by other species it   
   is *incapable* of preserving the elderly, and only humans are in that   
   category (if one ignores the predators within humanity).  The only way a   
   species that is subject to predation can "preserve the elderly" is for a   
   vital member of the herd to sacrifice itself.  Even most humans would   
   not willingly die for their forebears.   
      
   > Of course this happens in humans, but it is a special case   
   > of group leadership.  In the vast majority of humanity, the   
   > frail elderly are preserved.  Is this entirely the result of   
   > language?  Or to back up, (1) Is it genetic?, and (2) Is it   
   > the result of language and the group-preserving value of   
   > lore and accumulated wisdom?   
   >   
   > It seems we preserve all our elderly, even those with no   
   > capacity to help the group, indicating that is it genetic.   
   > But language appears to be a recent evolutionary adaptation,   
   > implying that there has not been time for this to be genetically   
   > selected.   
   >   
   >  Ned   
      
   Maybe we're afraid Mommy will spank us if we just let her rot, or more   
   likely we feel some paybacks are owed for the diapers changed, illnesses   
   nursed, and so forth.   
      
   --   
   noname.1234567.abcdef@gmail.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)