Stoicism vs. Buddhism

Posted on November 25, 2003 in Attitudes Myths & Mysticism

Imagine Seneca and the Dalai Lama sitting together in the same room. Someone brings in a box of chocolates.

Seneca cries out “Away with that! Rich food is unhealthy for you!”

The Dalai Lama takes just one and says “Thank you.”

Stoicism: Don’t eat too much.

Mindfulness: Eat enough.

---

Another scenario: Seneca and the Dalai Lama go out for a walk along the Venice Boardwalk. Seneca can’t take it. All these people are affecting his composure.

Everyone else reports that the Dalai Lama’s happy mood is affecting their mood for the better.

Stoicism: Avoid overload of pleasure.

Mindfulness: Be happy.

---

Stoicism strikes me as an attempt by intellectuals to codify a nonrational world view. This is why it fails to comfort me. I have to say “It’s all very nice to have all the rules worked out, but what are you going to do when your routine is interrupted and your world upset? What are you going to say in the face of the cyclone or the earthquake or the wildfire?”

Related to this is the question that I often pose to those who are certain that there is a God and base their good behavior on that belief: “Suppose it could be proved to you that there was no God: would you continue to be a good person?” What good is an ideology or a core belief if you cannot be trusted without it?

---

A fan of stoicism told me that he didn’t “get” the metaphor of the lilies of the field. He wanted to know where the “moral compass” was. I’ve been thinking about it. There isn’t one. It’s about Being uncomplicated by directives. In this spiritual state, there is no need for them.