Final answer:
Nietzsche's morality, associated with the 'will to power' and dominance, stands in stark contrast to Buddha's teachings that promote compassion and ending suffering through detachment from desires. Nietzsche champions traits that traditional ethics might consider harsh, while Buddhism seeks a balanced, compassionate path to alleviate suffering.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question examines the nature of morality in the philosophies of Nietzsche and Buddha, specifically inquiring whether Nietzsche's concept of the 'will to power' was more compassionate than the teachings of the Buddha. According to Nietzsche, morality centers around the will to power, the noble spirit's ability to thrive amidst struggle, often at the expense of others, which contrasts with the compassionate aspects of traditional moral virtues. In contrast, the Buddha's teaching emphasizes the Four Noble Truths and the pursuit of the 'middle way' as a path to morality, focusing on personal responsibility and the cessation of desire to end suffering.
Nietzsche's noble soul, or master, valorizes traits such as pride and power, equating growth and superior moral standing with the ability to dominate. This understanding aligns with Darwinist views of the survival of the fittest, appeals to a certain aristocratic ethos, and rejects traditionally admired ethical traits like sympathy, generosity, and equality. On the other hand, Buddha's teachings encourage a moral life through accepting suffering as part of existence, letting go of attachments, and finding a balanced path that includes compassion and acceptance of others. The master's strength and dominion that Nietzsche admires is strikingly different from the serene, detached, and compassionate lifestyle espoused by Buddha, which seeks to avoid causing suffering to oneself and others.