\u201cIf you take a look at crankiness, it\u2019s pretty easy to see that it\u2019s made up of non-cranky elements.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Such wisdom is part of what makes up Aristotle\u2019s notion of the good man, a <\/span>eudaimon<\/span> (which literally means one with a \u201cgood spirit\u201d).<\/span> This term is often translated as \u201chappy\u201d \u2013 which is to be taken with a great deal of caution. The happiness here is a very deep-felt and cultivated one, certainly not a happiness based on ignorance or fleeting gains.<\/p>\nBut another path is the <\/span>compassion path<\/span>, that of selflessly giving to others in whatever way possible.<\/span> Neither path is better, and neither is truly complete in and of itself. The Buddha taught that these were the two \u201cwings of awakening\u201d and, like a bird, we need both to reach our destination.<\/p>\nBut, more importantly, I wonder about this idea that such a person \u201ccannot be miserable.\u201d It\u2019s a common Western view that it\u2019s somehow our right to be miserable every once in a while.<\/span> Or that being miserable adds flavor to life, perhaps making the good days all that much better (the common image that one who clings neither to gain or loss, pleasure or pain\u2026 must be some kind of zombie). And the corollary is, of course, that if I am miserable, even if only from time to time, I must not be a \u201cgood person.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nHmm\u2026<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/1.bp.blogspot.com\/_fyeYpxfdjuI\/S4cMWSz21II\/AAAAAAAAA3I\/7qFI_Qf8-e0\/s1600-h\/aristotle.jpg\")
<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n