XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: cuddly@mindless.com   
      
   On 10/15/2015 6:32 PM, x wrote:   
   > On 10/15/15 23:56, liaM wrote:   
   >> On 10/15/2015 8:13 AM, x wrote:   
   >>> On 10/15/15 07:40, liaM wrote:   
   >>>> On 10/15/2015 12:53 AM, x wrote:   
   >>>>> On 10/15/15 03:33, liaM wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 10/14/2015 4:40 PM, Tang Huyen wrote:   
   >>>>>>> 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   
   >>>>>>> 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   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If I may return to my earlier post about human awareness   
   >>>>>> being a mutation level different from the awareness observed   
   >>>>>> in animals.  The best of us are aware of our own awareness   
   >>>>>> (some aren't, or have not developed the faculty), and some   
   >>>>>> of us make quite a sport of it.  We observe, judge, converse   
   >>>>>> between awareness-es.  The Buddhist practice of mindfulness   
   >>>>>> seems designed to enhance this mental phenomenon.  When hungry,   
   >>>>>> be aware of being hungry. Be aware when angry, mentally   
   >>>>>> stressed, enslaved by whatever mental preoccupation.   
   >>>>>> In so doing... in being thus self aware, a human awareness   
   >>>>>> leads inevitably (imho) to awareness of the mental states of   
   >>>>>> other humans.  This is compassion.  We who aren't ruffians   
   >>>>>> commiserate with the fate of others.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> cruel bitches have awareness, emotional sensitivity towards others,   
   >>>>> but   
   >>>>> they use that to cut where they know it will hurt most. so   
   >>>>> different to   
   >>>>> compassion yet both originating from the same ultra sensitive   
   >>>>> awareness.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So what do you think is going on ?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> personal differences?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> ignorance and insensitivity   
   >>   
   >   
   > u mad?   
      
      
   as it is, awareness of threats and/or points to be scored, of maiming,   
     killing, etc. belongs to the lower realms (in the Tibetan cosmogony)   
   i.e. hell fiends or animals.  It's not exactly the awareness of one's   
   awareness that leads to compassion.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)