Can you be happy alone on your own?

[osho]

I wonder whether we can or not when we have no one to specially take care of us. Some people have parents to take care of them; others have their spouses or boyfriends or girlfriends or some close relatives in their lives. Yet there are others who might have their close associates like friends and at times cyber-friends too in the age of the internet. Life living on without anybody to turn to or to feel at one with is uninteresting. It is my opinions and of course opinions vary. It is interesting to know how others loot this issue from their own experience in life.

[YesNo]

When I was younger (early 20s) I worked in forestry and would travel to different areas. Usually there was a small team in a camp but occasionally I would be alone for up to a week at a time between getting supplies from the town 10-30 miles away or a visit from my employer who would check the progress and quality of the thinning work I did. This was in the days before cell phones and computers and internet. I did have a nice Ford pickup truck with a camper on top. I actually preferred being alone to having a team around me. It was less complicated and I could focus on the work.

I can see why hermits might want live in the Himalayas. I don't think they get any closer to God as a result, but there are less distractions.

[cafolini]

I wonder whether we can or not when we have no one to specially take care of us. Some people have parents to take care of them; others have their spouses or boyfriends or girlfriends or some close relatives in their lives. Yet there are others who might have their close associates like friends and at times cyber-friends too in the age of the internet. Life living on without anybody to turn to or to feel at one with is uninteresting. It is my opinions and of course opinions vary. It is interesting to know how others loot this issue from their own experience in life.

But Osho, this is strictly philosophical babble. No fruit can grow out of it, since a-priori, the only way to be alone is in a grave or urn, where not even oblivion and the such can be considered.

[Eiseabhal]

I can't see anything philosophical in that question. Some people are so fractious, cantankerous and misanthropic that it is better they are alone. Others are alone through no fault of their own because of bereavement. Others are alone through the bad luck of life. People can learn to cope with being alone without actually enjoying it. The longer one is alone making decisions for oneself, the harder it becomes to adapt to the needs of another. So perversely those who most need company often end up as those least likely to obtain it. Independence is often praised but is more often in life simply making a virtue out of a necessity. Most of us work better as a team of two but some are too selfish even for that form of sharing. Does it really matter? To individuals definitely. To society? Maybe.

[cafolini]

I can't see anything philosophical in that question. Some people are so fractious, cantankerous and misanthropic that it is better they are alone. Others are alone through no fault of their own because of bereavement. Others are alone through the bad luck of life. People can learn to cope with being alone without actually enjoying it. The longer one is alone making decisions for oneself, the harder it becomes to adapt to the needs of another. So perversely those who most need company often end up as those least likely to obtain it. Independence is often praised but is more often in life simply making a virtue out of a necessity. Most of us work better as a team of two but some are too selfish even for that form of sharing. Does it really matter? To individuals definitely. To society? Maybe.

No one is alone and in particular those who you say need company the most would easily get it if that were the case. You have a con-flict there which babble wouldn't solve.

[cacian]

and the answer is no one cannot possibly achieve happiness on one's own.

[Volya]

and the answer is no one cannot possibly achiever happiness on one's own.

This is completely subjective. Some people like having others around, some people prefer solitude.

[MarkBastable]

and the answer is no one cannot possibly achiever happiness on one's own.

Speak for yourself (and whoever you're co-dependent with at the moment).

[cafolini]

Speak for yourself (and whoever you're co-dependent with at the moment).

Don't mess with Cacian when she's correct. No one lives in vaccuo.

This is completely subjective. Some people like having others around, some people prefer solitude.

Cacian is more objective in this one than you dare imagine.

[Shaman_Raman]

Cacian is more objective in this one than you dare imagine.

I suspect a spiritual undertone to this, which I respect. But my spirituality allows me to be comfortable alone, because in many ways I don't think I'm alone. However, I think the question posed in this thread is if we can find happiness without depending on fellow human beings to give it to us, which I would say yes. It's a dangerous road depending solely on others for happiness, because such people are usually insecure and lonely.

Scenario: You find a companion who rocks your world and you feel you can't live without. One day they do something to let you down, and suddenly that insecurity resurfaces. With some people, they'll constantly avoid the let downs because they'd rather settle short, than go back to being single or without a companion. Others will quickly throw the companionship out after a small offense, because the person they sat on a pedestal is no longer as noble as they believed, thus feeling betrayed.

I try to find a balance. I don't seek to live in solitude, but I also don't wish to always need someone around to feel good about myself. This allows me to end friendships with people who may be doing more damage than good, while not fearing having no one to talk to. But on the same note, were not in the jungle anymore. It's not every man for himself, but rather a need to show some good will toward others for survival.

[MarkBastable]

Don't mess with Cacian when she's correct.

When it happens, I shan't.

[cafolini]

I suspect a spiritual undertone to this, which I respect. But my spirituality allows me to be comfortable alone, because in many ways I don't think I'm alone. However, I think the question posed in this thread is if we can find happiness without depending on fellow human beings to give it to us, which I would say yes. It's a dangerous road depending solely on others for happiness, because such people are usually insecure and lonely.

Scenario: You find a companion who rocks your world and you feel you can't live without. One day they do something to let you down, and suddenly that insecurity resurfaces. With some people, they'll constantly avoid the let downs because they'd rather settle short, than go back to being single or without a companion. Others will quickly throw the companionship out after a small offense, because the person they sat on a pedestal is no longer as noble as they believed, thus feeling betrayed.

I try to find a balance. I don't seek to live in solitude, but I also don't wish to always need someone around to feel good about myself. This allows me to end friendships with people who may be doing more damage than good, while not fearing having no one to talk to. But on the same note, were not in the jungle anymore. It's not every man for himself, but rather a need to show some good will toward others for survival.

You are off the subject. Boring.

[blazeofglory]

Everyone has the capacity to be happy on his or her own. I know some saints living in the Himalayas without contact with people. That they are happy or not a different topic but they have the choice down to the valley to talk to people or have their company. This is a response to osho's question as to whether one can be happy without company. Notwithstanding this example I personally prefer to have friends to isolating myself from a world of people.

[cacian]

This is completely subjective. Some people like having others around, some people prefer solitude.

solitude is unnatural to humans even animals don't live in solitude. I suspect from time to time wanting to be alone for a bit is ok because one wants to unwind and think for themselves. To want to live on your own can be hard work mentally and physically because humans are biologically constructed to communicate and think and that means living with people and not apart from them.
The other issue is health and safety. Living on one own is unsafe in case something happens and no one will never know. Safety is indeed in numbers.

Everyone has the capacity to be happy on his or her own. I know some saints living in the Himalayas without contact with people. That they are happy or not a different topic but they have the choice down to the valley to talk to people or have their company. This is a response to osho's question as to whether one can be happy without company. Notwithstanding this example I personally prefer to have friends to isolating myself from a world of people.

Hi blazeglory nice to see around. How do you mean by saints? Is this part of a cult or ritual that living alone means sainthood?

[Volya]

solitude is unnatural to humans even animals don't live in solitude. I suspect from time to time wanting to be alone for a bit is ok because one wants to unwind and think for themselves. To want to live on your own can be hard work mentally and physically because humans are biologically constructed to communicate and think and that means living with people and not apart from them.
The other issue is health and safety. Living on one own is unsafe in case something happens and no one will never know. Safety is indeed in numbers.

This is simply not true, nor would it matter even if it were. Solitude is not 'unnatural', and even if it were, why would that mean you can't be happy in solitude?