2022 Epicurus vs Buddhism Compare and Contrast Thread

    Quote from Cassius

    does life have a goal or highest good in Buddhism, and if so what is it ?

    There could be several goals:

    1) the goal is Buddhist practice/meditation of "letting go" and realizing "aimlessness, signlessness, and emptiness" as the path to "nirvana"

    2) to become a "bodhisattva of compassion" to help others (a Buddhist teacher)

    Buddhists when feeling a sense of "unsatisfactoriness" in oneself might cultivate indifference toward it.

    Where as Epicureans when feeling "unsatisfactoriness" might put more effort into cultivating friendship and sharing pleasant and pleasureable experiences with others.

    Which has me wondering...how often were festivals, celebrations, shared meal gatherings, etc. part of an ancient Epicurean lifestyle?

    EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHYTHERAVĀDA BUDDHISMMAHĀYĀNA BUDDHISM
    FounderEpicurusSiddhārtha GautamaSiddhārtha Gautama, Nāgārjuna
    HistoryEpicurus (341–270 BCE) founded this anti-Platonic ethical philosophy of non-deterministic atomism with the support of his disciples Metrodorus, Hermarchus, and Polyaenus. The 1st-century BCE Roman poets Lucretius (author of De Rerum Natura, "On the Nature of Things") and Philodemus made notable contributions to spread the philosophy. The 2nd-century CE Diogenes of Oinoanda is known for funding a large, Epicurean stonework project.Siddhārtha Gautama (c. 563-483 BCE), the "Awakened One" proposed a "Middle Way" between the "Eternalism" of the Brahmin religion (that proposes the existence of an eternal atman or "soul"), versus the "Annihilationism" of Ajita Kesakambalī's hedonistic school of Chārvāka. Buddha rejected all metaphysical propositions and described the true nature of one's being as anattā, the "non-self", lacking permanancy.Nāgārjuna (c. 150-250 CE) developed the highly influential Madhyamaka school of Buddhism (possibly influenced by Pyrrhonism through the works of Sextus Empiricus; Pyrrhonism, itself, was inspired by Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta, the founder of Ajñāna, a competitor of early Buddhism). Many other influential Buddhists helped spread the religion, suc as Bodhidharma to China and Padmasambhāva to the Tibetan Plateau.
    EpistemologyAll knowledge begins with [1] sensation (aisthesis) caused by the interaction of external particles with our sensory organs. We detect pleasurable or painful [2] feelings (pathē) associated with the various sensations. Through repeated stimulation, we form [3] anticipations (prolepsis) about the patterns of nature.All knowledge is validated by two paramana or "proofs", [1] pratyakṣa or "perception" and [2] anumāna or "inference". Perception and inference are due to the six āyatana or "sense objects" of sight, sound, odor, taste, touch, and thought. The āyatana are not organs, but rather, appearances.


    		The only meaningful thing to know is that all objects lack independent existences. Things only meaningfully exist within the continuum of the mind. Physical phenomena is dismissed as māyā meaning "magic" or "illusions", and the appearance of the natural world is dismissed as a dream.
    MetaphysicsReality exists independent of the mind. The universe is made of bodies and void. Bodies are either particles that can neither be created nor destroyed, or compounds that are composed of particles. All compound objects are subject to the forces of dissolution. Both empty space and the particles that move through it are infinite in number and eternal in time. The mind is a compound structure associated with a living animal, and can be located within the body.Reality is a changing, experiential aggregate, composed of [1] the elemental forms (rūpa) - solid earth, cohesive water, mobile gas, warm fire, and empty space, [2] sensuous feeling (vedanā), [3] mental cognition (saṃjñā), [4] willful determination (saṅkhāra), and [5] consciousness (vijñāna). Natural patterns are observed, but propositions about them are are dismissed as meaningless speculations.Reality is sūnyatā or "emptiness". All things lack a svabhava or "independent nature" (as was used by the atheistic Chārvāka to refer to the physical nature of reality). The only "real" existence is consciousness. The energetic activities of nature are simply objects that exist within the mind, including the "body" and the "self", which are also just temporary illusions within the continuous citta-santāna or "mindstream".
    CosmologyThe Earth, Sun, Moon, planets, and other linked celestial objects comprise a kosmos in a spatially-infinite universe with infinite kosmoi. All kosmoi are made of atoms. The seeds of life are everywhere.Beings migrate through numerous planes of existence (ascending to heavens and descending to hells). One's directionality at death reflects their kamma or "moral causality".A variety of mythic beings inhabit the various realms, from gods to hungry ghosts. Heavens are idealized as Pure Lands, each of which is inhabited and ruled by its respective Bodhisattva.
    TheologyThe gods are perfect, material beings, unconcerned with humanity, imagined as either as [1] indestructible, extra-terrestrial animals, or [2] thought-forms we dream due to our natural preconception of "blessedness". Epicurus is romanticized as having been god-like.Divine entities are called Devas, blissful beings who inhabit emotional "planes of existence". As they refine their kamma or "moral causality", they get closer to the goal of Nibbāna. Each realm is defined by the disposition of its inhabitant.Buddha is treated as a deity, and other Buddhas are acknowledged to exist besides Shakyamuni (Gautama Buddha). Buddhahood is available to everyone and the achievements of Siddhārtha are not as emphasized as is the Buddha-nature, itself.
    Ethics:Calculate the advantages of every situation based on their possibility to provide stable, long-term pleasure. Actions are judged according to their consequences. There are no eternal ethical rules. There are, however, "Masterful Opinions" attributed to Epicurus that should be studied in order to minimize pain and maximize the pleasure of the good life.Follow the Noble Eightfold Path according to the dhamma or "law" taught by Buddha to achieve Nibbāna, the "extinguishment" of suffering: [1] Right Resolve, [2] Right Speech, [3] Right Conduct, [4] Right Livelihood, [5] Right Effort [6] Right Mindfulness, [7] Right Meditation, and [8] Right view that death is not the end.The path of the Mahāyāna bodhisattva involves going beyond the Eightfold Path of the arhat to devote themselves toward practicing Buddhism for the benefit of all beings before finally achieving a state of Nirvāṇa. This continuous mission is thought to extend beyond an individual's life into their future lives.
    Goal of Life:A godlike state of pure pleasure, a disposition of imperturbable joy, free from physical pain and mental anguish. The practice of prudence will lead the wise person to the good life.Nibbāna, the end of dukkha or "suffering" and release from saṃsāra, the cycle of rebirths caused due to one's avidyā or "ignorance" of anicca or "impermanence".To achieve Nirvāṇa, one must pursue the altruistic path of the bodhisattva, who works for the benefit of all beings by helping others achieve bodhi or "enlightenment".
    Quote from Kalosyni

    Which has me wondering...how often were festivals, celebrations, shared meal gatherings, etc. part of an ancient Epicurean lifestyle?

    According to Philodemus's On Piety, Epicurus regularly took part in the rites inherent to the city of Athens. And it seems the ancient Greeks had some kind of religious observance or festival on a regular basis.

    Eikadistes ...thank you for the amazing chart you made comparing Epicureanism,
    Theravada, and Mahayana!!!

    Also, it is interesting to read your Epicurean goal, and appears you are synthesising several of the Principal Doctrines...

    Quote from Nate

    A godlike state of pure pleasure, a disposition of imperturbable joy, free from physical pain and mental anguish. The practice of prudence will lead the wise person to the good life.

    "A godlike state of pure pleasure, a disposition of imperturbable joy, free from physical pain and mental anguish. The practice of prudence will lead the wise person to the good life."

    I largely agree with that statement too and think it's a good highlevel summary. At what point however does it need however to have a caveat that since there is no fate, and not every person can become wise (see Diogenes Laertius) that "the practice of prudunce the best course most likely to lead the wide person to a good life" (which hints at the truth that this result is not guaranteed due to factors that sometimes occur that are out of our control.

    Or is that something to explain later after the first statement?

    An interesting article about various cultures view of death and the self, with surprising results: Death and the self. Nichols et al.


    Quote

    Compared with other groups, monastic Tibetans gave particularly strong denials of the continuity of self, across several measures. We predicted that the denial of self would be associated with a lower fear of death and greater generosity toward others. To our surprise, we found the opposite. Monastic Tibetan Buddhists showed significantly greater fear of death than any other group. The monastics were also less generous than any other group about the prospect of giving up a slightly longer life in order to extend the life of another.


    Just one observation of mine on the topic of Buddhism. In the west where people are increasingly finding it difficult to believe in a theistic view of the universe, Buddhism seems to have become popular as several Buddhist teachers have popularised it as a rational and non-dogmatic way of life, rather than a religion per se. However this presentation of Buddhism is not entirely accurate. Though Buddhism doesn’t have a creator entity Buddhist cosmology is full of supernatural beings. My own initial attraction to Buddhism was because I just couldn’t rationally accept the teachings of Hinduism and the abrahamic faiths. The Buddha’s exhortation to not accept things on faith and his encouragement of critical thinking really struck a chord with me. However as I dived deeper into it I found the same issues with Buddhism as with other faiths. For instance the concept of Jambudvipa and Mount Mandara go entirely against any modern scientific view. Also many sects of Buddhism do worship Buddhas for the sake of emancipation from this world…so even though a buddha isn’t a creator deity we still have a system of faith and submission via prayer similar to other religions.

    Incidentally since we are comparing vs. Buddhism I’m just wondering has anyone looked at other non-dualistic teachings like Advaitha? It would be very interesting to compare I think, especially since Epicureanism stresses reliance on the senses, but radical Advaitha dismisses the entire concept of an external reality altogether :).

    Quote from Sid

    The Buddha’s exhortation to not accept things on faith and his encouragement of critical thinking really struck a chord with me. However as I dived deeper into it I found the same issues with Buddhism as with other faiths.

    Although I wasn't a serious Buddhist (getting bestowed a refuge name being evidence to the contrary I suppose :/ ) I found I eventually had some of the same initial attractions and then objections/misgivings as you in trying to reconcile myself with that philosophy/religion. Epicurus filled a void (no pun intended... Well, maybe unintentionally intended) in providing a completely material non-supernatural perspective.

    Welcome aboard the forum!

    Quote from Sid

    Incidentally since we are comparing vs. Buddhism I’m just wondering has anyone looked at other non-dualistic teachings like Advaitha? It would be very interesting to compare I think, especially since Epicureanism stresses reliance on the senses, but radical Advaitha dismisses the entire concept of an external reality altogether :).

    All forms of Vedanta are at odds with Epicurean philosophy and inhabit opposite sides of the philosophical spectrum. Every historical iteration of Vedanta rejects other schools of ancient Indian philosophy that make similar claims to Epicureanism, such as Vaisheshika, which proposes a form of atomism, and the heterodox tradition of Charvaka, which proposes an atheistic form of hedonism. Incidentally, there are a number of similarities between Vedanta (especially Advaita Vedanta) and Platonism. Indeed, it is widely supposed that the neo-Platonists (such as Plotinus and his student Porphyry) had direct, historical influences from Indian philosophers that informed their Neo-Platonic positions.

    One other noteworthy point to mention Sid is that there is (a proposed) historical link between Advaita Vedanta and Mahāyāna Buddhism. The 6th-century Hindu philosopher Gauḍapāda (an early inspiration of Adi Shankara) was supposedly influenced by the teachings of the Mādhyamaka tradition of the Buddhist monk Nāgārjuna. While Mahāyāna Buddhism differs in many ways from Advaita Vedanta, they are much more closely related to each other than either of them are related to Epicureanism (or, for that matter, other materialist schools of ancient Indian thought).

    Thanks Eikadistes I agree, while Epicurus clearly states reliance on the senses as the only way we can know the world, Advaitha classifies the world as ‘maya’ or illusion (as in what we sense is only illusory and not real in the ultimate sense). The neo-Advaitha tradition (esp. Tony Parsons et al) take this to ridiculous lengths asserting that there is only ‘nothing and everything’. As such this philosophy doesn’t seem to offer anything at all of any value, yet curiously many people seem to flock to it…To paraphrase a famous philosopher there is no use of philosophy unless it makes a tangible difference to our lives.

    On the point of Mahayana Buddhism, or Buddhism in general is that the ethical doctrines seem more compatible with Stoicism the emphasis being on virtue or accumulation merit, though of course this is more pronounced in Mahayana given the whole Bodhisattva ideal.

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura 5

      • Kalosyni
      • November 21, 2024 at 4:13 PM
    3. Replies
      5
      Views
      413
      5

    4. Pacatus

      November 21, 2024 at 4:13 PM

    2. Evidence of Survivors of Pompeii and Herculaneum 1

      • kochiekoch
      • November 20, 2024 at 8:17 PM
    3. Replies
      1
      Views
      205
      1

    4. Don

      November 20, 2024 at 8:17 PM

    2. “Better to lose the money because of me than to lose me because of the money.” 3

      • TauPhi
      • November 19, 2024 at 9:30 PM
    3. Replies
      3
      Views
      322
      3

    4. Don

      November 19, 2024 at 9:30 PM

    2. An Anti-Epicurean Article - "The Meaning of Life Is Not Happiness" (For Future Reference) 12

      • Cassius
      • November 19, 2024 at 12:17 PM
    3. Replies
      12
      Views
      988
      12

    4. Pacatus

      November 19, 2024 at 12:17 PM

    2. Was De Rerum Natura intended as satire? A lecture by THM Gellar-Goad. 14

      • Julia
      • November 11, 2024 at 4:09 PM
    3. Replies
      14
      Views
      1.2k
      14

    4. Julia

      November 11, 2024 at 4:09 PM