Jennifer Alvarez

November 29, 2015

Philosophy 1000-007
Compare and Contrast

Buddha and Im not so sure who yet.

At the beginning of the semester I couldnt even define philosophy, let alone name a
philosopher. Now I can currently name more than five philosophers and I can at least tell what
philosophical stance they took or take. Although Ive had a hard time choosing only two
philosophers to compare and contrast because each philosopher either has something I really like
or I agree with his/her philosophy. But even though I have chosen to write about Buddha Ive
liked him before but before it was because of the little figure and honestly people say that hes
not as chubby as people think he might have been, and now that I have more knowledge on
Buddha Ive chosen to write about him and one other but I havent decided so lets just start and
see who I choose.
Siddhartha Guatama (c.560-480 B.C.E.)
Siddhartha Guatama who is known as The Buddha but is also known as many other
names such as Awakened or enlightened one (the original meaning of the Buddha in Sankirt)
and the compassionate Buddha. (Soccio P. 42). Siddhartha Guatama was born into wealth and
power as the son of a prince (Rajah) in what today is Nepal. (Soccio P.43) Buddha lived very
isolated his parents kept him away from all the ugliness of life. So in reality Buddhas had no
idea what it was to suffer or what it was like to be sick, since it seemed like his parents kept him
away from everything. Buddha was an only child. Although his parents kept him away from all
these things Buddha was still curious and had many questions. As many young people, curiosity
and rebelliousness led him away from home. During secret trips outside the palace to a nearby
city, he saw three of the now famous four signs that altered his life forever: a destitute and
homeless beggar, a dead man being prepared for cremation by weeping mourners, a diseased and
handicapped person. (Soccio p. 43)

All these things motivated him to seek truth and begin a journey. Buddha had no one to
talk to or even ask questions to he didnt have anyone who he can confide in, but he did have his
servant Channa, she was his hired companion and also a bodyguard, Buddha would ask Channa
questions and she would reply with Yes, master, there is no escape. Old age, sickness, deathsuch is the lot of all men. (Soccio p. 43)
Buddha was known for sitting under the fig tree that is where he got his name as Buddha,
he also believed in Karma but he also wanted to know why all women have children to not even
be able to know if they would be healthy or even what would happen. He was a perceptive
psychological observer who realized that even though we all must actively work for our own
enlightenment, most of us benefit from the support and guidance or regular, intimate association
of seekers on all levels of the path. (Soccio p.53) Ive learned that Buddhist handle things very
calmly and they do not react with violence. Buddha calls on us to adopt a way of life, rather than
a philosophy, Buddha insisted that to discover the truth, we must somehow set aside the kind of
analytic thinking. (Soccio p. 55)
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Nietzsche believed all varieties of suffering and failures to be welcomed by anyone who
is seeking happiness. We should regard them as tough challenges. Nietzsche became a professor
by the age of twenty-four. Unlike Buddha Nietzsche had very little money, he also lived a
lifetime of routine. Buddha was married and Nietzsches love life was a disaster. Nietzsche
understood that suffering was a part of life, he was not an only child he had brothers and sisters.
Nietzsche knew about suffering and death because his father passed away from a brain tumor. He
was against Christianity and believed that drinking alcohol was not a good reason to escape from
the problems life throws at you.

Nietzsche criticized Buddhism for many of the same faults he attributed to Christianity,
though he showed more respect for the former as being more realistic and opposed to revenge
(he believed Christianity was a manifestation of latent resentment). He praised Buddhism for
setting out to treat 'suffering as opposed to 'sin', but believed the treatment itself represented a
surrender of life, and ultimately a weaker response to the human condition than his own. In the
following passage from Beyond Good and Evil, he contrasts his interpretation of Buddhism
(along with Schopenhauer, a major contributor to this interpretation) with a general sketch of his
own ideal response:
'Whoever has endeavored with some enigmatic longing, as I have, to think pessimism
through to its depths and liberate it from the half-Christian, half-German narrowness and
simplicity in which it has finally presented itself to our century, namely, in the form of
Schopenhauer's philosophy; whoever has really, with an Asiatic and supra-Asiatic eye, looked
into, down into the most world-denying of all possible ways of thinking - beyond good and evil
and no longer, like the Buddha and Schopenhauer, under the spell and delusion of morality - may
just thereby, without really meaning to do so, have opened his eyes to the opposite ideal: the
ideal of the most high-spirited, alive, and world-affirming human being who has not only come
to terms and learned to get along with whatever was and is, but who wants to have what was and
is repeated into all eternity... (Moad)
Nietzsche was put in an asylum; he was a very sick person health wise. Also unlike Buddha he
knew what sickness was there was no straight path everyone overcomes hardship. Something
they both had in common I would like to think is both enjoyed and believed that landscaped
spoke to them. Nietzsche constantly criticized Buddha.

Although Friedrich Nietzsche believed he was the Buddha of Europe. (Panaioti) Both
believed that Nihilism itself is complicated neither believed life was meaningful. The reason I
like Nietzsche is because I agree that everyone has to suffer to reach their goals. This emptiness
is the human condition to which both Buddhism and Nietzsche respond. The subtleties and
complexities of this view in both philosophies run deep enough to write volumes about, and the
focus of this study is limited to the controversy over their respective responses; the answer to the
question of appropriate praxis in the face of such an existence. (Moad)
Friedrich Nietzsche was known as an outsider by many, he liked to be alone and far away.
Nietzche wrote to a friend, If I could give you an idea of my feeling of loneliness! I have
nobody among the living or among the dead, to whom I feel related. This is indescribably
horrible! (Soccio p. 460) He was known as one of the loneliest philosophers. Nietzche
The last years of Nietzches life were tragic. His health deteriorated even further, and he
became increasingly, bitterly isolated and lonely. (Soccio p.459)
Unlike Buddhas death he died from poisonous mushrooms or tainted pork. (Soccio p. 47)
One from Nepal, India the other from Europe both very great philosophers and interesting
ways they see life. One knew about suffering and the other never saw it until he went out to
search for it. Buddha was not happy with what he found and instead he decided that he wanted to
find happiness. Nietzsche knew what suffering was from the beginning of his childhood, he
knew what it was like to live in poverty and was not born into wealth. Buddhas followers were
called monks. Nietzsche did not have followers but he did influence many other philosophers.
The function of a sage is to engage us, to challenge us to ask the deepest questions: Who am I?
How am I live? And it is to Buddha the sage that we shall turn as we take our leaves of
Compassionate One. (Soccio p.55)

Honestly I really like both philosophers but the way Nietzsche saw life was a little more
realistic to me because in my life Ive struggled to get where I am. I dont take anything I have
for granted because I know that my hard work and dedication has got me where I need to be and
without struggling I wouldnt know how difficult it is to accomplish my goals. But I also do
agree with Buddha because Im a really peaceful person and I try not to hate or get mad. If the
world was more like Buddha there wouldnt be so much hate in this world and people would not
be committing crazy crimes. I dont even think Isis would exist. It would be hard to choose
between the two on who I think has a better philosophy of life because I cant decide I like both
and both are really interesting to me. Nietzsche does have a better philosophical system though
because he believes everyone must struggle to get where they want to be and in reality that is
true no one is just born famous because even if your parents are famous, they struggled to be
where they are and if that person wants to be famous they will also have to struggle a little bit to
get where they want to be since they do get an advantage depending on who their parents are.
This paper is one of the hardest papers Ive had to write because in the middle of my
paper I kept changing my mind about who to write and reasons why I liked that philosopher, I
felt like I had to be really interested in the philosopher. Overall this paper has made me look at
life differently just like every other philosopher I learned about does Paul Singer really think that
I should give away all my money after I use what I need to use. Now I am just filled with
questions and eventually I will know the answers but for now Im just going to learn as I go with
life.

Work Cited

Moad, Omar, Dukkha Inaction, and Nirvana: Suffering, Weariness, and Death? A
look at Nietzsches Criticisims of Buddhist Philosophy. Http: // www. Thephilosopher.co.uk/Buddhism. Htm. From The Philosopher, Volume LXXXXII No. 1,

n.d Web.
Panaioti, Antoine. Nietzxhe and Buddhist Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,

2013. Print
Philosophy Guide to Happiness-Friedrich Nietzsche
Soccio, Douglas J. Archetypes of Wisdom. Belmont C.A Wadsworth Pub., 2013. Print