Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Distinguishing between Buddhism and stoicism
mynameisuntz
Explorer
Where is the line drawn? What are the specific distinctions between the two? For example, if a loved one passes, what is the goal reaction? Stoics (according to traditional stoicism) would basically deny anything bad happened, and would not allow feelings of remorse. Buddhists, I'm assuming, would acknowledge suffering and loss, and work to heal.
Is that correct? Stoics would not acknowledge anything bad happened, Buddhists would acknowledge, meditate, introspect, and heal?
Is that correct? Stoics would not acknowledge anything bad happened, Buddhists would acknowledge, meditate, introspect, and heal?
0
Comments
Do Buddhists mourn for a loved one who passes, for instance?
I didn't really mourn when my grandfather died, but maybe that's because his death helped me understand Anicca more intimately. After that, things always seemed more clear, and change always seemed the most relevant fact of life.
Buddhists don't say "nothing wrong happened" when someone died, I have no idea about Stoicism. In Buddhism, that's the way of life, and we suffer if we can't find an understanding within us that recognizes this fact.
A "Buddha", free of worldly attachment, would live in the world without clinging. They would act for the benefit of themselves and others, but they would have no one to mourn, not even themselves. That's an end goal for many, but it's not a negative thing... it's the end of creating suffering, complete liberation of the mind to flow with the change and be truly at peace no matter the circumstances.
Our clinging love depends on the other person, and most often also on them returning the feelings. We suffer if we lose them or if they stop caring for us. There's a greater love that is only about the benefit of the other person, where it doesn't pain us if they don't return the feelings and we only want what's best for them. The same love can be applied without suffering if we also fully accept that birth is death.
Saints often express this kind of love, an unattached love for the good of everyone. Sometimes they're even Buddhas.
It's just tough for me to fathom the idea that mourning is...I don't want to say "not acceptable" or "discouraged," but perhaps "not supported"? Correct me if that's wrong, though.
It seems most logical for me to believe this: when someone dies, mourn them and feel sorrow, but meditate and accept. Do these things simultaneously.
What we do and what we feel depend on our understanding of the world, and our attachment to it. It's okay to be attached, but if you suffer and seek an end to suffering then it's good to understand how that attachment is the reason... the cause. This is up to each person to decide, and up to their effort to pull off.
I guess I just feel like opening yourself up to unconditional and true love implies making yourself emotionally vulnerable to things like death. If a parent has to watch his/her child die, for example, it's tough to agree with any philosophy that doesn't see that as being worthy of sorrow or grief. Stoicism would say as long as it's outside of your control, then you should not feel sorrow. To me, that's just too extreme.
Thinking it's not natural, that we shouldn't die, we cling to life. We stop looking at how things are and start living in our mind-wrought world, doing anything to keep from looking at the truth. And yet the truth brings the greatest peace... ignorance is what stands in the way, and fear that comes with it. When we have the courage to look, it's just like this.
Understanding is a bit at a time, just like anything else. That's what the forum is here for, to help. We hope you'll always feel free to ask questions here!
Maybe a Stoic would lift an eyebrow and say something like “crying is not logical” like he is a Vulcan; like he is Mr.Spock.
The Buddhist way of liberation is something else.
We allow everything. We don’t fight it. At the other hand we don’t make any particular thought or emotion our home. We are not identified by them.
This is the process of meditation - at least I think it is the fundamental par of it.
We acknowledge and embrace whatever happens in our mind, we don’t judge it.
There are no unbuddhist feelings.
When we stop adding judgment; when we stop adding words, concepts and preferences, this whole building in our minds - our self-delusion - falls apart. Bit by bit.
I don’t think Stoicism has such a powerful tool. It is something in the head; it is just ideas.
For some people Buddhism is just like that unfortunately. I think they miss the point.
And I suppose it is difficult in a sense. We are conditioned to add words, concepts and preferences. We are conditioned to pile delusion upon delusion. And so Buddhism becomes just another layer of that. We become “Buddhists” and all that it means is that we put another complicated layer of delusion on our already immense structure of delusional self.
Imho.
Anything that doesn't make us better or worse as human beings is considered by the Stoics to be indifferent. In that category are such things as fame, fortune, and health. These are things we often have little control over. Death, a natural and necessary process that affects all living things, also falls into this category. As Marcus Aurelius says of death, "is not this according to nature? But nothing that is according to nature can be evil."
The Stoics cultivate equanimity by concerning themselves only with what lies in their control (opinions, goals, etc.) and fostering an attitude of indifference towards whatever doesn't lie in their control. Therefore, the ideal Stoic response to death is indifference. Does this mean that Stoics don't grieve?
The Greek Stoic Stilbo, whose village was burned to the ground by raiders and whose wife and children were carried off, stated in response to a question about his loss that he had lost nothing, that all his treasures were carried within. Epictetus, in his Manual, suggests the following:
"When you see a man shedding tears in sorrow for a child abroad or dead, or for loss of property, beware that you are not carried away by the impression that it is outward ills that make him miserable. Keep this thought by you: 'What distresses him is not the event, for that does not distress another, but his judgement on the event.' Therefore do not hesitate to sympathize with him so far as words go, and if it so chance, even to groan with him; but take heed that you do not also groan in your inner being."
Seneca suggest that it is okay to grieve, but grieving should be moderate and not unseemly. Or as he puts it, "we may weep, but we must not wail."
Alan
I don't know much about Stoicism. I know about Buddhism that it's not just recognizing the truth, but also becoming free from our clinging that causes suffering. What would Stoicism be "in a nutshell"?
Try reading Epictetus.
Here is a short list of Stoic ethical ideas from Dr. Jan Garrett:
1. The key to successful living (sometimes called happiness) is freedom from the violent feelings.
2. The key to freedom from the violent feelings is living in accordance with virtue.
3. The key to virtue is living consistently in agreement with nature.
4. The things called good by most people, such as life, health, possessions, good reputation, and the like, are often in accord with our nature.
5. But they are not consistently in accord with our nature, as they are sometimes purchased or preserved at the expense of a person's integrity.
6. Virtue and successful living are not inborn but result from deliberate choice and continuous attention to what is in our power and what is not.
I'll try to clarify some of this. The Stoics were pantheists. They basically saw Nature, God, and the Universe as equivalent to each other. They also equated God to the Greek Logos, often translated as "Universal Reason."
The reason within us they saw as a part of Universal Reason. Therefore, calm reason, free from the turmoil of violent emotions, allows us to be in harmony with Universal Reason/God/Nature. This harmony with Nature allows us to live a harmonious flow of life.
Freedom from suffering is not explicitly mentioned in Stoicism, but a harmonious flow of life would certainly be a life free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Just as the avoidance of mental defilements and the cultivation of positive mental states, such as the Brahma-Viharas, are encouraged in Buddhism in order to avoid suffering, the avoidance of vice and the cultivation of virtue is of primary importance to the Stoics.
Points 4 and 5 refer to the Stoic belief that things such as life, health, possessions, etc. are considered morally indifferent and should not be pursued at the expense of one's personal integrity.
There are many parallels between Stoic and Buddhist teachings. Regarding clinging and non-attachment, here is a quote from Epictetus:
"Remember that desire contains in it the profession (hope) of obtaining that which you desire; and the profession (hope) in aversion (turning from a thing) is that you will not fall into that which you attempt to avoid: and he who fails in his desire is unfortunate; and he who falls into that which he would avoid, is unhappy. If then you attempt to avoid only the things contrary to nature which are within your power, you will not be involved in any of the things which you would avoid. But if you attempt to avoid disease or death or poverty, you will be unhappy. Take away then aversion from all things which are not in our power, and transfer it to the things contrary to nature which are in our power. But destroy desire completely for the present. For if you desire anything which is not in our power, you must be unfortunate: but of the things in our power, and which it would be good to desire, nothing yet is before you. But employ only the power of moving toward an object and retiring from it; and these powers indeed only slightly and with exceptions and with remission."
Although there is much in Stoicism that is also found in Buddhism, Stoicism, with its emphasis on harmony with Nature, can probably be more closely related to Taoism (IMO).