Is there an inherent paradox between "non attachment" and basic human survival?

Question

"Non attachment" is often viewed as a higher state of being. However, in some cases being non attached to life events could be in contradiction with basic human survival. For example in the case of serious illness.

What are your thoughts on this?

Answer 1

I'm thinking that non-attatchment is not the same as non-participation. Attachment is having no "control" or freedom over emotions, desires or experience of reality, etc., thus causing suffering and "static". Many reactions become essentially knee-jerk as imposed by society, instinct, ego, etc.

Being free from attachment enables one to be ready to experience anything, react with clarity, and just make the most of it I guess (according to what you truly think is best of course). I find that the more unattached I am, the deeper I can delve into things (relationships, emotions, etc.) without the fear of suffering holding me back.

Sorry for being lengthy. I'm kind of an idiot and can't simplify.

Answer 2

Humanity desires non-attachment because of how difficult life is. In fact most belief system seek non-attachment but is a structure that keeps them interactive in some way with human living.

The fear of the unknown is ultimately the source of the survuval instinct because few truly believe any one has reached a state of other existence and has been able to return if they did not like it.