Two-Sided Compassion

August 5, 2019 Empathy - Compassion No Comments

To relieve suffering and to attain human growth: these two sides form ‘Compassion,’ which one may see as the main aim of humanity.

Compassion (with big C) is not something like ‘pity’.

To keep the distinction clear, I write Compassion in this text with capital C.

A total person (no mere ego) is the modality in which Compassion can exist and thrive. Moreover, this total person should be healthy, healed, whole. Not in a state of dissociation [see: “Cause of All Suffering: Dissociation”].

These two conditions show that one can fruitfully think about Compassion from two different angles.

Two-sided Compassion

Namely:

  • to relieve suffering, as much as possible, not only ‘here and now’ but ‘always and everywhere.’
  • to attain human growth, as much as possible, likewise.

These two sides can be thought of separately. That’s interesting to do in order to attain a better view of each. However, it’s artificial since true Compassion always has these two sides, simultaneously, necessarily.

One side without the other isn’t sustainable.

Relief of suffering without growth as aim can be superficial and temporary. It doesn’t lead to – in Aurelian parlance – ‘Inner Strength.’ Thus, it may even lead to weakness and decay over time. Thus: more suffering.

Striving for growth without any view upon suffering is, well, not empathic, not ethical. In the course of time, it may cause much suffering either in oneself or in others. This will also prevent further growth.

Both are needed. They blend in the concept of Compassion.

Ultimately one

‘Growth’ is about striving towards a healed state, an innerly congruent person. Suffering – not pain by itself, for instance, but the suffering from chronic pain – is hurtful because of the lack of wholeness.

Poetically, it’s the ‘tear in the soul’ that is the suffering itself. The yearning towards wholeness is what is felt as ‘suffering.’ You see? The ‘yearning’ and the ‘suffering’ are one and the same feeling. One doesn’t cause the other.

The yearning should be ‘cherished’

because of Compassion.

By killing the suffering just like that – if possible at all – one forsakes its aim as a call for a very different action. It may ‘work’ but then: ‘what’ works and ‘towards what’?

Listening to the suffering – either that of oneself or others – is different. One can find Listening [see: “Deep Listening”] deep into the culture of East and West. Deep there, it’s about reception as well as action.

That’s because Compassion is deeply human.

Maybe even deeply universal.

[see also: “Compassionate A.I.”]

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Solipsism vs. Compassion

Solipsism and Compassion may seem like opposites, yet they both grow from the same root: the sense that self and world are not as separate as they appear. One turns this into a prison of isolation, the other into a garden of connectedness. This blog explores how the two almost touch, why they diverge so Read the full article…

Emptiness and Compassion

There is an underneath to Compassion, and that underneath is Emptiness. This Emptiness is not a void, but rather a fertile ground where true Compassion can take root and flourish. This is why I consistently use a capital in Compassion. It’s more than pity and more than compassion. Much more This might seem esoteric, and Read the full article…

Compassion = Morality

Compassion is not one virtue among others. It is the very rhythm by which morality breathes. When Compassion unfolds authentically, rules become guidance rather than control, and intelligence – whether human or artificial – finds its safest alignment. This blog explores how Compassion becomes morality itself: the connective tissue between coherence, freedom, and truth. As Read the full article…

Translate »