Virtue sans compassion?

There is a reason why philosophers are discarded in favor of meme-creators. More so in these days, really. I mean, it is a digital age and we prefer to have a 'Push this button, this happens' sort of solution. And philosophers...well, philosophers are the original wafflers who will tell you to acquire a bunch of character attributes without even indicating where on Amazon or Flipkart you can readily purchase them...on a sale, if possible. I mean, where is the 'Say please and thank you and people will like you' sort of easy instruction manual in any philosophy? (In religion? Please...do you want to get me lynched?)

So, yea, our man Tiru has this to say:

Therulaadhaan meipporul kandatraal thaerin arulaadhaan seyyum aram - Tirukkural

The virtues of a man lacking compassion is akin to the comprehension of a man lacking discernment - Loose Translation

You know, it is a tough job today to really say anything the way these ancient philosophers said it. They just scattered their adjectives and nouns with gay abandon - 'Fool', 'brainless people' etc. - and you have to think whether you need to say 'intellectually challenged' or some such AND also worry about being accused of privilege.

So, Tiru says that a man without discernment reading a book would make a mess of understanding the true sense of it; in like manner, a man doing charity, but lacking true compassion, will still remain lacking in virtue.

So, yeah, you can get away legally by DOING things in the name of Corporate Social Responsibility. But when it comes to personal virtue, you need to first feel the compassion for those whom you seek to help. Else, it is merely another thing you are crossing off on your to-do list but has no more meaning than that.

See, what I mean? 'Give charity, go to Heaven' is not the way it works according to Tiru. Ah, no, you need to go and change your character as well.

Alas, when will I find a philosopher who will teach me to just push a series of buttons and become a saint?

Raining Help?

There is this peculiarity about yesteryear philosophers that runs totally counter to modern culture. Whatever they suggest seems to be an indictment of current practices so much so that you could almost accuse them of being trolls. Except that it is tough to categorize them as such without also explaining how they could have had the prescience to KNOW modern practices.

Tiru, all said and done, IS a yesteryear philosopher. So, how could he be any different? Take this one for example.

Kaimmaaru vendaa kadappaadu maarimaattu enAtraankollo ulagu - Tirukkural

True benevolence seeks no recompense; what can you give the clouds in return for the life-giving rain? - Loose Translation

So, there you go. In Tiru's view, a benevolent person helps others because it is his nature to do so much like it is the nature of clouds to rain. The thought that there should be ANYTHING can be expected in return for the benevolence does not even cross the mind of such a person.

I know, I know, the cynical generally say that the benevolent person does his thing because it makes him happy to do so, therefore he is also selfish and, thus, no different from anyone else pursuing his own ideas of happiness. That's an interesting but singularly idiotic concept. I mean, yeah, the sadist gets his kicks from causing others suffering and, thus, is no different from the altruist who gets his kicks from helping others? Really?

AND are all decisions bereft of choices? I mean, like I have some money, are there not multiple things that make me happy on which I can spend it? The CHOICE of helping someone else with it is but one of them and my making THAT choice leaves me the same as the other guy who blows it up on Cocaine? What do these guys smoke really?

So, yeah, true benevolence IS laudable and seeks not to make much of its own acts. AND why is it that I say that this is against today's cultural norms?

I mean, come on, Tiru wants you to be as altruistic as rain clouds. When is the last time you saw a rain cloud posting a selfie about how it was going to rain down and save the parched land?

Exactly!

Troll Strength

There is a quote that I vaguely remember from the mists of my past. 'Never argue with fools; they drag you down to their level and beat you by experience." After all they have spent all their lives at their level whereas you are a total amateur there. (It is quite a different affair that ANYONE who has fought an inconclusive or losing argument tends to feel that HE has been dragged 'down'!)

Tiru probably had to deal with his share of trolls too. AND, just to clarify, a troll is not anyone who opposes you but someone who opposes you without bothering to (OR being unable to) understand your point of view. Opposing for the sake of opposing, so to speak, knowing only WHO they are opposing, if that, and not WHAT.

So, Tiru has this to say...

Inmaiul inmai virundhoraal vanmaiyul vanmai madavaar porai - Tirukkural

The worst poverty is inability to extend hospitality to a guest; the best of strengths is to bear the gibes of foolish men - Loose Translation

One does get a sidelight about what hospitality meant to ancient Indian culture. To not be able to feed a guest is seen as worse than to not be able to feed your family. THAT is the priority of hospitality!

But, in this case, it is just a comparator. It is used to say something like 'Just as THAT is the worst of poverty THIS is the best of strength'. THIS, in the instant case, being the ability to handle the gibes of the foolish with equanimity.

Quite the right advice for today. You start getting all heated up under the collar about a troll and reacting to him in like measure and, soon, people find it tough to differentiate between the two of you. THAT is the problem with descending into an argument with a fool - you end up getting taken for one as well.

IF, on the other hand, you have the strength to be trolled without letting it affect you, you will be able to react with grace. You may not rise to the heights of being cool enough to hear, "You will either die of syphilis or be hanged" and reply, "THAT depends on whether I embrace your mistress or your principles". No, you may not rise to those heights but even silence is a far more graceful reply to a troll than mudslinging.

But, then, Tiru does not think it is an easy thing to do. Which is why he says it is the 'best of strengths'.