Kelly Taylor

Philosophy of Religion HACU 227

Assignment 3 - Question #5

December 3, 2001

Nietzsche on Buddhism as Compared to Christianity

In The Antichrist Nietzsche presents Buddhism as the complete antithesis of Christianity, despite the fact that he sees both as nihilistic religions of decadence. Beyond this fundamental similarity, the contrasts with Christianity are multitudinous, and Nietzsche presents many of them in his discussion of Buddhism as an acceptable form of a nihilistic religion.

One main difference between them is that Buddhism is more realistic than Christianity, and attempts to overcome the problems of this world through will to life versus the Christian hope for a better life after this one, and hence a will to death.[1] Nietzsche also sees Buddhism as a positive religion, in that it doesn't acknowledge or attempt to deal with sin, nor does it attempt to adhere to moral concepts the way Christianity does, but is instead focused on the more realistic human "struggle with pain."[2] The focus on pain is a result of the religion's foundation on two physiological factors: 1) excessive irritability of feeling and 2) super-spiritualization.[3] These factors induce a state of depression which the Buddha's teachings create a lifestyle to combat.[4] Buddhism therefore requires the ability to face problems objectively and dispassionately, an ability manifested as a result of hundreds of years of actively philosophically thinking about religion.[5]

Nietzsche states that Buddhism believes goodness is achieved through promoting health, and the best ways to fight the depression and pain of life are: hygiene, life in the open, life of travel, moderation and careful choice in food, caution in regard to all intoxicating liquor, and all the passions which heat the blood.[6] This view advocates that one should "not care too much about oneself or others" and should focus only on ideas that bring peace or good cheer.[7] He is also impressed with the fact that Buddhism "invents means whereby the habit of contrary ideas may be lost" so that there is no possibility of strife or pain.

Buddhism is "beyond Good and Evil." It contains no prayer or asceticism, Categorical Imperative or any discipline, even in monasteries, which one can leave at any time, as all of these things only increase one's natural irritability, which it is designed to avoid.[8] It does not wage war on any who disagree because revenge, aversion & resentment are to be avoided, because the teaching says "not through hostility doth hostility end" for all of these feelings are unhealthy.[9] Buddhism seeks to combat mental fatigue, excessive objectivity, and loss of personal interest and egoism by focusing spiritual interests on the individual, even so far as to say that "egoism is a duty."[10]

According to Nietzsche there are certain prerequisites for Buddhism. These include a mild climate, very gentle and liberal people, and no militarism. He claims Buddhism must originate with high and learned classes, as opposed to Christianity, wherein the lowest classes seek their salvation.[11] Perfection is not just something that one aspires to in Buddhism, but is the norm.

The realized aspirations of Buddhism are cheerfulness, peace, and the absence of desire, which are in complete opposition to Christianity, which elevates the virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity.[12] Buddhism is "too full of aged wisdom, too positivistic" to be taken in by these Christian "precautionary measures."[13]

Nietzsche frequently compares Buddhism to Christianity in these sections of The Antichrist. Buddhism is presented as a religion of high ideals of purity and happiness, and indeed perfection, despite its existence as an effort to move away from pain.[14] Christianity is contrasted as a religion comprised of the "instincts of the subjugated and oppressed," obsessed with the negativism of "sin, self-criticism and conscience inquisition." Happiness, which can only be realized as ecstasy induced by communion with god, is only maintained by constant prayer.[15] In Christianity one finds only darkness and concealment, not openness. The body and physical health and sensuality, including cleanliness are considered evil.[16] Cruelty is the norm, and there is much persecution and violence done to those who do not share the Christian belief system and views.

Nietzsche further describes the desired state of being in Christianity as "epileptic," their diet "morbid" and ascribes to Christians the "mortal hatred" of political rulers.[17] Christianity is obsessed with sin, seeks the ecstasy of being in the presence and grace of God through prayer, lacks in plain dealing, denies cleanliness, advocates cruelty towards the self and others, hates and persecutes all who do not share the views of Christianity. Overall, Christianity is defined by the hatred of all things that Buddhism aspires to, including "the intellect," "pride," "courage," "freedom," and intellectual freedom, even of "the senses, the joys of the senses, of joy in general."[18]

The reason for these things, or perhaps only part of the cause, is that Christianity was formed from the lowest of people, and as it spread across the globe from its place of origin, it absorbed and converted only the lowest of the barbaric people it encountered.[19] The converted were "savage and self-lacerating" not those who had experienced the difficulties of civilization, and had grown weary of that life, which Nietzsche claims Buddhism is best suited to.

Thus, the dissatisfaction with life and suffering is not expressed through hypersensitivity, but through violence, infliction of pain and hostility on others. From these barbaric societies, Christianity gained barbaric moralities and rituals, including "sacrifice of the first-born, the drinking of blood at communion, the contempt of the intellect and culture; torture in all its forms, sensual and non-sensual; the great pomp of the cult."[20] These things are all because of Christianity's basic composition as a religion designed to tame beasts by making them too sickly to protest, to impose its own version of civilization on them when there is none, all done through violence.[21] Barbarians do not find suffering acceptable, and without an explanation or justification they will deny the suffering or endure in silence. Buddhism, by contrast, does not need to justify or try to incorporate pain and suffering, but merely accepts them as part of life and tries to move on.[22]

Nietzsche sees only one other similarity between Buddhism and Christianity besides nihilism, which is the indifference to actual truth, as opposed to something believed to be true - for example, one only needs to believe they have sinned, they do not need to have actually sinned. In Christianity, however, the quest for absolute truth is made forbidden by the necessity of faith.[23] If faith is the only requirement, "reason knowledge and scientific research" must be thought of as evil.[24] For Christians, hope of another world is the only thing that sustains them through this one, and this hope is stronger than any joy.[25] Christianity also possesses the concept of love, which requires the value of chastity, as well as the personification of deities. This love is what makes life in Christianity bearable.[26]

As opposed to barbaric and bestial Christianity, Buddhism is for those cultures that have become "kind, gentle, and over-spiritual, and which feel pain too easily" in order to attain peace and cheerfulness, intellectual and physical hardness and regimentation.[27] Buddhism is colder, more truthful, more objective, and does not need to justify pain and suffering by blaming it them on sin, in turn caused by forces of an evil enemy.[28]

Perhaps he has an idealized notion of what Buddhism is, but from his description, it is a very appealing religion, designed to elevate oneself from the banalities of every day life. Nietzsche makes brief reference to the fact that there are no deities in Buddhism, but it would have been interesting if Nietzsche had further discussed how the lack or existence of a god influences the differences between Christianity and Buddhism. Further analysis of the fundamental principles and any texts or cannonical writings of Buddhism might have been more useful in this comparison, as well as more information about the formation and foundation of Buddhism. The life of the Buddha, as founder of the religion, as compared to the life of Jesus could provide key information that would further convince the reader of the greater validity of Buddhism as a modern religion and would have provided additional evidence to support his claims. Additionally, discussion of the practices and beliefs of the modern Buddhist would have held great interest and further understanding the differences between Buddhism and Christianity, and the superiority of one over the other. These would have been especially relevant had he been attempting to convert or persuade the reader to convert or at the very least abandon Christianity, but as this was not specifically his intent, his analysis is sufficient for briefly contrasting the two religions in the context of discussing Christianity.

[1] Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Antichrist. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1911; 23

[6] Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Antichrist. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1911; 24

[12] Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Antichrist. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1911; 25, 29