Edgar,
True compassion does not pick and choose.
(Or let's just say "compassion". Anything but true compassion is, well, bogus).
If something is directed somewhere, it's through deliberation and legislation.
That is not our topic.
--Joe
> Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl,
>
> I agree that nature is not what I'd call compassionate. In fact it is just
> the opposite. The basic principle of most life is to feed on other life and
> since most life is imbued with an instinctual pain reflex to motivate it to
> preserve itself that inevitably leads to suffering. Thus the basic dynamic
> cycle of life, the redistribution of protein and nutrients among individual
> life forms, is fundamentally based on suffering.
>
> If we define compassion as action towards the alleviation of suffering where
> does this leave us? It seems to say that compassion is in opposition to the
> fundamental design of nature.
>
> But this is not quite true because there is plenty of suffering that is not
> necessary to the basic life processes which sustain the biosphere. It is THAT
> suffering to which compassion should be directed..
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
