Eudaemonia or Nirvana

The discourse on the different approaches to life's most momentous issues is illustrated by Socrates and the Buddha. According to Socrates eudaemonia is  an inclusive ultimate end of living well or having a good life, and the moral virtues are understood as constitutive means to the achievement of that end. The Buddha described Nirvana as the ultimate goal.  Nirvana literally means extinguishing or unbinding. The implication is that it is freedom from what ever binds you, from the burning passion of desire, jealousy, and ignorance.

Socrates asked: "What is happiness and how can I achieve it?" The Buddha, on the other hand, posed the questions: "What is suffering and how can I avoid it?" At first glance (or on initial hearing) these would appear to be two routes to the same destination.

The subtle differences between the two would be more ably - and, doubtless, more lengthily and comprehensively - defined by a scholar who has immersed himself in the subject for a number of years, but an immediately-formed personal view was that the old Greek's attitude holds more potential for selfishness, and even brutality.

Many who have identified what they believe would bring happiness and gone off in pursuit of their objective have tended to do so without regard to others, bulldozing their way past all obstacles and, as often as not, leaving misery in their wake.

Recognising what constitutes suffering and simply giving it a body-swerve, however, appeals as a more solitary, less offensive method by which to arrive at what the Buddha called Nirvana.