When Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) studied Indian or Hindu philosophy, he didn’t restrict himself to the foundational texts. He read the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita but those lack the subtle interpretations made by Hindu thinkers across the centuries.
Schopenhauer adopted early in his career some Hindu tenets and conveyed them, in his own words, in his book “The world as will and representation” first published in 1818.
For instance, Schopenhauer wrote that the pursuit of short- term pleasure leads to disillusionment, because the hunger for additional pleasures cannot be stilled. It’s going to lead to more cravings, desires, and frustration.
This Hindu insight matches perfectly Schopenhauer’s theory of the will (“life force”); unless you adopt countermeasures for minimizing the negative influence of the will, you are going to be driven into self-destruction.
Schopenhauer and enlightenment in Indian philosophy
From classical Hindu wisdom, Schopenhauer subscribed to the need of enlightenment. To people who want to escape or at least minimize the painful influence of the will, Schopenhauer recommended the cultivation of self-awareness.
The first step towards solving problems or surmounting any obstacles is to acknowledge its existence. Enlightenment is not automatic, neither in Hindu philosophy nor in Schopenhauer. It is going to require in all cases a full reassessment of events, constraints, and worldly attachments.
All students of the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita grow to find self-reliance in the stillness of their minds. The process is arduous and demanding, but one’s peace of mind depends on philosophical enlightenment.
Schopenhauer deepened himself in the process by studying the works of Adi Shankara, a Hindu philosopher who lived in the eighth and ninth centuries of our era. Shankara wrote very extensive commentaries to the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita, and came up with subtle interpretations.
Schopenhauer and the individual soul (“Atman”)
For Shankara, the individual soul or “Atman” constitutes a higher reality that each person must build for himself. People who fail to build their “Atman” are going to fall prey to stress, anxiety and discouragement when confronted with the world’s chaos.
Schopenhauer adopted Shankara’s emphasis on self-growth, that is, on the cultivation of a personal “Atman.” If you fail to do that, the will is going to control your life and prompt you to make harmful decisions, argued Schopenhauer.
Nonetheless, there is a crucial difference between Shankara and Schopenhauer. The former was driven by religious thought and his emphasis on the “Atman” led him to view the external world as delusion.
Schopenhauer aimed at philosophical accuracy and viewed the “Atman” as a complement to perception, not as an enemy. I am against using words such as “delusion” or “mirage” when translating Schopenhauer’s definition of the external world. It’s far more accurate to employ the word “distorted.”
The external world in Schopenhauer and Hinduism
While Shankara viewed the “Atman” and the external world as opposites, Schopenhauer regarded them as complements. In the absence of self-awareness, people can perceive only badly distorted events, but this does not mean that those don’t exist.
The cultivation of the “Atman” or personal soul doesn’t aim at replacing the external world. Schopenhauer was adamantly clear in this respect. Self-awareness enables people to become self-confident, make better decisions, increase their happiness, and lead better lives, but does not replace external reality.
Shankara taught that enlightenment can be acquired in three different ways, namely, hearing, thinking, and meditation. The problem with this statement is that Shankara did not go into the details.
Although Shankara repeated often that students should seek enlightenment in the shrine of their hearts, Schopenhauer was not satisfied with such vague recommendation. As of 1830, his writings are focused on giving specific instructions to readers about how to grow self-aware and improve one’s decisions.
You can find detailed advice in Schopenhauer’s later books. I am referring mainly to “Two fundamental problems in ethics” published in 1843 and “Parerga and Paripomena” in the edition from 1851.
The role of meditation in Schopenhauer and Shankara
Schopenhauer’s study of Shankara didn’t lead to additions to the theory of the will, only to conceptual fine-tuning. Shankara was of the opinion that enlightenment should prompt students to desire nothing and engage in meditation. Schopenhauer was more inclined to giving hands-on advice.
In “Parerga and Paripomena,” readers find examples aiming at rendering them more self-reliant, self-confident, happier and more effective. I’m afraid though that you might seek in vain for practical advice in the commentaries written by Shankara.
Schopenhauer theory of the will agrees with Shankara’s idea of the world as a chaotic jungle fraught with lethal danger. Yet, Schopenhauer made the effort to devise countermeasures every person can adopt.
If you cultivate prudence and foresight, you are going to do well despite the negative influence of the will. If you secure an adequate margin of safety, your projects are going to come to a good conclusion. Instead of Shankara’s resignation, I prefer the resilience enabled by Schopenhauer.
Another difference between Shankara and Schopenhauer is that the former focused on action, and the latter focused on real benefits. Shankara recommended to let go of expectations and focus on the action alone. Schopenhauer disagreed totally with this statement.
For Schopenhauer, countermeasures aren’t symbolic pyrrhic gestures. They are well-thought strategies to help readers raise their effectiveness, success and happiness; the fact that death is awaiting us shouldn’t prevent us from making the best of every day.
Schopenhauer and devotion in Indian philosophy
Schopenhauer also had the opportunity to study the work of Ramanuja, a Hindu thinker from the eleventh century AD. The central point of Ramanuja’s teachings is that individual souls or “Atman” are indissolubly connected to the cosmos (divinities), and that devotional rituals are required for enlightenment.
For instance, Ramanuja stated that devotion to divinities is the only means to attain enlightenment and peace of mind. He’s asking his follows to surrender themselves to divine forces and believe that those forces are going to take care of everything.
Schopenhauer profoundly disagreed with Ramanuja’s ideas about enlightenment. In his books, Schopenhauer is providing practical advice; he wants readers to grow self-aware and make better decisions. He rejected Ramanuja’s belief that devotion to divinities is the highest form of knowledge.
You aren’t going to find in Schopenhauer’s books any advice that resembles Ramanuja’s call to serve humanity as a form of worship. For the same reason, Schopenhauer rejected the ideas spread by Ramanuja, characterizing the world as manifestation of divine forces.
Schopenhauer’s preference for classical Indian philosophy
I can summarize the differences between Schopenhauer and Indian philosophy in two sentences. Despite a close similarity in problem perception (chaos, stress, anxiety), the solutions are not aligned.
Where Hindu religion calls for meditation, Schopenhauer called for self-awareness, self-reliance, prudence, foresight and adequate margins of safety.
In the fifteenth century, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu emphasized a mystical interpretation of Hinduism that proved unacceptable to Schopenhauer. That’s why he only cared for the teachings of original Hinduism, not for later interpretations.
Chaitanya called for practising yoga, chanting Hare Krishna and other mantras. He claimed that those can help people attain enlightenment. Schopenhauer disregarded this approach, which he considered unsuitable for the Western mind. I tend to agree with Schopenhauer in this point. For most of us, the teachings of thinkers like Chaitanya seem hard to grasp.
I fully agree with Schopenhauer in regarding happiness as an individual enterprise built on good decisions. The higher the quality of your decisions, the higher your enjoyment of life. In the study of Schopenhauer’s theory of the will, one should keep the goal in mind.
If you are interested in rational philosophy and how to put it into practice, I recommend you my book titled “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”
Related articles
Differences between Schopenhauer and Buddhism
Schopenhauer’s teachings drawn from Buddhism
Schopenhauer and Indian philosophy
Schopenhauer’s views on religion