Comparison of Schopenhauer and Mawlānā’s approach to salvation from suffering

In his central work entitled "The world as will and redemption" Arthur Schopenhauer the German philosopher of the 19th century argues the whole world is an expression of will that is fraught with suffering. He believes that life is all evil. Because man is always dealing with endless desires. He proposes two solutions for escape from suffering: the temporary and short-term solution, which is known as Aesthetic contemplation and the long-term solution that is known as Asceticism. He believes that one must deny their will to escape from suffering. He got to know about the East and Buddhist teachings at some point in his life and was really impressed by them. On the other hand, Mawlānā, the great Sufi Mystic of the 7th century AD believes that man will keep complaining of the pain and suffering that is inflicted on him due of being departed from the source (God) as well as the hardships and sufferings that are brought about by man himself. He believes that one can resort to Sama for temporary salvation from suffering, or to Fana for long-term escape from pain and suffering. In the present paper, we first discuss the concept of suffering and its causes from the perspective of Schopenhauer and Mawlānā and then investigate the solutions proposed by them for salvation from suffering. Finally, the similarities and differences between their approaches to salvation from suffering are specified. The present study is a descriptive-comparative study and the required data are collected through library study.