PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORK OF HUMAN WELL-BEING: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ARISTOTLE AND BUDDHIST THOUGHT

Aristotle and Gautama Buddha both place strong emphasis on the attainment of ultimate well-being or happiness in human life, yet their perspectives reveal significant differences. In Aristotle’s philosophy, this ideal is expressed through the concept of eudaimonia, which signifies a flourishing life achieved through the cultivation of moral virtues. In contrast, Buddhism defines true happiness as the attainment of nirvana or enlightenment, a state of liberation from suffering and the cycle of rebirth.In his work Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that eudaimonia is the highest goal of human existence. It is realized through the excellence of the soul in accordance with virtue. This form of happiness is not dependent on mere sensory pleasure or external goods; rather, it is grounded in ethical development, rational activity, and responsible participation in social life.On the other hand, Buddhist philosophy maintains that happiness is not rooted in physical pleasure or material acquisition but in inner peace, contentment, and the cessation of suffering. Through practices such as meditation, ethical conduct, and wisdom, an individual can attain enlightenment, thereby overcoming suffering and achieving true well-being.Therefore, while both Aristotle and Buddhism aim at the ultimate good of human life, Aristotle emphasizes rational virtue and moral excellence within worldly life, whereas Buddhism focuses on transcendence, inner awakening, and liberation from suffering. The primary objective of this research is to present a comparative analysis of Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia and the Buddhist notion of nirvana in relation to the attainment of human well-being.