Academic Editor: Daniel M. Stuart

Received: 9 October 2025

Revised: 3 November 2025

Accepted: 7 November 2025

Published: 12 November 2025

Citation: Kempton, Heather, and

Kamla Waila. 2025. Mindful Solitude

as an Antidote and Antonym to

Loneliness: A Historic and

Therapeutic Buddhist Perspective.

Religions 16: 1439. https://doi.org/

10.3390/rel16111439

Copyright: © 2025 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

This article is an open access article

distributed under the terms and

conditions of the Creative Commons

Attribution (CC BY) license

(https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by/4.0/).

Article

Mindful Solitude as an Antidote and Antonym to Loneliness:
A Historic and Therapeutic Buddhist Perspective
Heather Kempton 1,* and Kamla Waila 2

1 School of Psychology, Massey University, Auckland 0632, New Zealand
2 School of Psychology, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand; k.waila@massey.ac.nz
* Correspondence: h.kempton@massey.ac.nz

Abstract

This article explores the concept of mindful solitude as both an antidote and antonym
to loneliness, integrating Buddhist doctrinal insights with contemporary psychological
research. While solitude is often conflated with isolation or loneliness, we argue that
when chosen intentionally and cultivated mindfully, it becomes a space of healing, in-
sight, and relational depth. Drawing from classical Buddhist texts, historical exemplars
such as Shakyamuni and Milarepa, and modern scholarship, we trace the evolution of
solitude within Buddhist traditions, highlighting its role in ethical transformation and
meditative insight. We contrast this with secular mindfulness programs, noting their ther-
apeutic benefits while acknowledging their divergence from traditional Buddhist ethics
and soteriology. Through interdisciplinary analysis, we propose a framework in which
mindfulness mediates the experience of solitude, fostering autonomy, inner-directedness,
and meaningful solitary activities. This reframing positions solitude not as absence but
as presence: an intentional engagement with the self that enhances emotional regulation
and social connectedness. In an age marked by hyperconnectivity and rising loneliness,
mindful solitude offers a counter-narrative: a spiritually and psychologically enriching
state that supports wellbeing and compassionate re-engagement. By bridging Buddhist
contemplative traditions with empirical psychological findings, this article affirms solitude
as a vital condition for both personal and collective healing.

Keywords: solitude; mindfulness; Buddhism; wellbeing

1. Introduction
To a Western audience, the mention of the Buddha often evokes stereotypical imagery:

a jovial, rotund figure smiling serenely, or a solitary sage perched high on a mountaintop,
legs folded in lotus posture, hands arranged in a symbolic mudra, immersed in deep
meditative absorption. Similarly, the concept of meditation is frequently romanticized
as a timeless, universal practice of inner peace and transcendence. These images, while
culturally pervasive, obscure the complex historical and doctrinal realities of Buddhist
meditation and its evolving role across traditions and centuries.

In contemporary discourse, particularly within secular mindfulness movements and
therapeutic contexts, meditation is often presented as a panacea for modern ailments such
as stress, anxiety, and loneliness. Yet, to understand the potential of mindful solitude as
both an antidote and antonym to loneliness, it is essential to situate meditation within its
historical Buddhist framework. Before proceeding, it is important to clarify key terms. In
this article, “mindful solitude” refers to a chosen and intentional state of aloneness that

Religions 2025, 16, 1439 https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16111439

https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16111439
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16111439
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions
https://www.mdpi.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2175-2757
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3815-9766
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16111439
https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/rel16111439?type=check_update&version=1


Religions 2025, 16, 1439 2 of 19

fosters inner connection, ethical awareness, and contemplative insight. This is distinct from
“isolation,” which implies unwanted separation or disconnection, and from “loneliness,” a
distressing emotional experience arising from perceived social absence. Mindful solitude,
as conceptualized here, is not a symptom of loneliness but its antidote: an enriching
state that supports psychological and spiritual wellbeing. This requires moving beyond
idealized representations and engaging with critical scholarship that interrogates the
origins, functions, and transformations of meditative practice.

Scholars such as Robert Sharf and Johannes Bronkhorst have significantly contributed
to this recontextualization. Sharf, in his critique of Buddhist modernism, argues that
the contemporary emphasis on meditation, particularly mindfulness, is a relatively re-
cent development, shaped by 19th- and 20th-century reform movements and Western
reinterpretations of Asian traditions. He contends that meditation was not historically
central to Buddhist lay life and that its modern prominence often comes at the expense
of ritual, ethical conduct, and communal engagement (Sharf 1995; Sharf 2014). Sharf also
challenges the redefinition of sati (Pali for “memory”) into “bare awareness,” a shift pop-
ularized by figures such as Mahasi Sayadaw and later adopted by secular mindfulness
programs. This transformation, he warns, risks detaching mindfulness from its ethical and
soteriological roots.

Bronkhorst, approaching the subject from a philological and historical perspective,
traces the development of meditation across Indian religious traditions. He identifies two
distinct strands: one emphasizing yogic absorption and altered states of consciousness,
and another, more characteristic of early Buddhism, focused on insight (vipassanā) and
ethical transformation. Bronkhorst argues that Buddhist meditation did not emerge in
isolation but was shaped by interactions with Brahmanical and Jain practices (Bronkhorst
1993, 2009). He also highlights the evolution of meditation techniques over time, noting
that later Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna traditions introduced new methods and goals, often
diverging significantly from early canonical models. While solitude is not a primary focus,
his analysis of meditative contexts often involves withdrawal from society, which suggests
that solitude was a functional condition for certain types of practice, particularly those
aligned with insight (vipassanā).

Together, Sharf and Bronkhorst offer a corrective to simplistic narratives that equate
Buddhism with meditation and meditation with mindfulness. Their work underscores
the importance of historical context, doctrinal nuance, and cultural specificity in under-
standing how solitude and contemplative practice function within Buddhist traditions.
Nevertheless, with this acknowledged, western society is increasingly described as facing
“an epidemic of loneliness”, a term used by the U.S. Surgeon General to highlight the
widespread and growing public health impact of social disconnection (Murthy 2023, p. 1;
Roberts et al. 2021). Hence, there is a need to explore how mindful solitude, distinct from
both isolation and escapism, can serve as a therapeutic and existential response to loneliness.
While secular mindfulness programs aligned with psychology (e.g., Mindfulness-Based
Stress Reduction and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy) offer therapeutic benefits,
this article acknowledges their divergence from traditional Buddhist ethics and goals. In
seeking to alleviate suffering both share a common goal and rather than dismissing one or
the other, we consider them complementary yet distinct. Drawing from Buddhist scriptures,
historical exemplars, and contemporary psychological research, we argue that solitude,
when grounded in mindfulness and ethical awareness, becomes a space not of absence
but of presence, not of disconnection but of deep relationality. Hence, mindful solitude as
conceptualized here acts as both an antidote to loneliness (protecting from the negative ex-
perience and outcomes of loneliness) through effectively cultivating an opposition through
relational aloneness.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 3 of 19

This article adopts an interdisciplinary and integrative methodology, drawing from
classical Buddhist texts, historical exemplars, and contemporary psychological literature
to explore the concept of mindful solitude. Primary Buddhist sources (including the Pāli
Canon, Mahāyāna sutras, and accounts of figures such as Shakyamuni, Milarepa, and
Hui-neng) were selected based on their explicit engagement with solitude as a condition for
insight and liberation. These texts were chosen for their doctrinal relevance and historical
influence across Buddhist traditions. Critical scholarship (e.g., Sharf, Bronkhorst) was
included to contextualize meditation and solitude within broader doctrinal, cultural, and
historical frameworks, and to interrogate modern reinterpretations of Buddhist practice.
Contemporary psychological studies were selected through thematic analysis of recent
literature on solitude, loneliness, and mindfulness, with particular attention to empirical
studies addressing autonomy, affect regulation, and therapeutic outcomes. This integrative
approach allows for a nuanced understanding of solitude that bridges spiritual and psy-
chological domains, aligning with the article’s central thesis: that solitude, when cultivated
mindfully and ethically, serves as both an antidote and antonym to loneliness.

2. Introducing Solitude
The concept of solitude remains widely contested and ambiguously defined within

contemporary literature. McVarnock et al. (2023), in their review of operationalizations and
measurements of solitude since 2000, highlight a persistent lack of consensus regarding its
definition. Earlier work by Long et al. (2003) identified nine distinct types of solitude, which
they distilled into three overarching dimensions: two positive (inner-directed and outer-
directed solitude) and one negative (loneliness). Galanaki (2013) similarly underscores
the definitional ambiguity, noting that the interchangeable use of terms such as solitude,
loneliness, and aloneness has further complicated efforts to establish conceptual clarity.

Recent scholarship continues to grapple with this ambiguity, often proposing context-
specific definitions. Weinstein et al. (2023a), for instance, conceptualize solitude as a state
in which the internal relationship with oneself becomes dominant, facilitated by physical
separation from external stimuli such as noise and social distractions. Nguyen et al. (2023)
offer a complementary perspective, defining solitude as a subjective state marked by
detachment from immediate societal demands. These contemporary understandings echo
Long et al. (2003) findings, which associated inner-directed solitude with experiences of
inner peace, uncertainty, and self-discovery among undergraduate students.

A growing body of literature also distinguishes positive and negative solitude. Positive
solitude refers to experiences that yield psychological benefits, including creativity, self-
discovery (Long et al. 2003), fulfillment (Weinstein et al. 2023a), and affective regulation
(Nguyen et al. 2018). In contrast, negative solitude is associated with adverse outcomes
such as loneliness (Galanaki 2013), reduced enjoyment (Buttrick et al. 2019), and diminished
positive affect (Birditt et al. 2019; Nguyen et al. 2022). Galanaki (2013) asserts that solitude
can be experienced as either positive or negative, a view echoed by other scholars (e.g.,
Long et al. 2003; Coplan et al. 2019), suggesting that individual and situational factors play
a critical role in shaping the experience.

Despite definitional challenges, certain themes recur in narratives of solitude, par-
ticularly when its beneficial aspects are explored. Themes include autonomy, inner-
directedness, and engagement in meaningful solitary activities. These elements will be
examined in relation to Buddhist meditative traditions and contemporary mindfulness
practices, where solitary activities such as walking, or journaling can serve as accessible
entry points to deeper contemplative solitude. While they differ from formal meditation,
they align with Buddhist values when practiced with mindfulness and intention. We
conclude with an integrative framework of mindfulness as a pathway to positive solitude.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 4 of 19

Having begun to establish the psychological dimensions of solitude (which we will
later return to), we now turn to its historical and doctrinal significance within Buddhist
traditions. This section explores how solitude has been embodied by key figures and texts
across Buddhist lineages.

3. Buddhist Solitude—Historic Figures
The centrality of solitude in the Buddhist path to awakening is exemplified in the

life of the historical Buddha, Shakyamuni, who lived during the 6th century B.C.E. Born
into royal privilege, Shakyamuni renounced his luxurious life upon encountering the
existential realities of illness, aging, and death. This renunciation marked the beginning of
his monastic journey. After six years of intense ascetic practice, he withdrew into solitude
beneath the Bodhi tree in Bodh Gaya. It was during 49 days of uninterrupted meditation in
this secluded setting that he attained enlightenment. Notably, he remained at the site for an
additional week following his awakening, underscoring the enduring role of solitude in his
transformative experience.

Across the diverse traditions of Buddhism, solitude emerges as a recurring theme in
the lives of realized masters. Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Chan Buddhism, spent ap-
proximately fifteen years in obscurity following his transmission of the Dharma, engaging
in what may be considered an informal retreat. His hidden practice laid the foundation for
the development of the Southern School of Chan, which emphasized direct insight over
ritual and scholasticism.

In the Tibetan tradition, Milarepa stands as a paradigmatic figure of solitary yogic
practice. Although a lineage holder of the Karma Kagyu school, he is revered by all
main schools of Tibetan Buddhism where his life story and spontaneous songs (dohas)
were maintained via oral tradition before formal written records (Tiso 1989, 1996). While
these accounts portray Milarepa’s ascetism as unusual and unlikely to be imitated by
ordinary followers, what we see in the Hundred Songs of Milarepa are inspirational stories
and songs that show interactions between Milarepa and people from all walks of life. Of
the 61 chapters of Chang’s translation (Chang 1999), two-thirds involve lay people ranging
from young to old, rich to poor, male to female, and various occupations (from butchers to
kings). Hence, while imitation of Milarepa may not be possible, the lessons he shared with
his disciples and patrons remain relevant and obtainable and perform a similar function to
the varying backgrounds that provide a model for inspiration and emulation in the lives of
the mahāsiddhas (Dowman and Beer 2014). Renowned for his extended retreats in remote
mountain caves, Milarepa composed dohas for his disciples that extolled the virtues of
solitude. As he sang:

“Solitude with no commotion and disturbance

Is the guide protecting meditation.” (Chang 1999, p. 80)

And elsewhere:

“Solitude, merits, and good companions

Are three staffs for a yogi:

A Dharma-practitioner should ever use them!” (Chang 1999, p. 459)

These verses suggest that while solitude is essential, it is not sufficient in isolation.
This point is illustrated in the story of Acinta, one of the eighty-four mahāsiddhas, also



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 5 of 19

known as the “Avaricious Hermit.” Driven by a desire for wealth, Acinta retreated to the
forest to escape social distractions and indulge in fantasies of riches. When the siddha
Kambala encountered him, he observed that although Acinta had removed himself from
external distractions, his mind remained preoccupied. Upon admitting that his thoughts
of wealth continued to disturb his peace, Acinta received meditation instructions from
Kambala. Through dedicated practice, he eventually transformed into the “Thought-Free
Guru” (Dowman and Beer 2014).

This narrative underscores a critical insight: solitude becomes transformative only
when accompanied by mindful intention and meditative discipline. Beyond individual
exemplars, Buddhist scriptures offer a rich doctrinal foundation for understanding solitude.
The following section examines how solitude is conceptualized in Pali and Mahāyāna texts,
and how it functions as a condition for insight and liberation.

4. Historical and Scriptural Foundations of Mindful Solitude
The concept of solitude (viveka) occupies a central place in early Buddhist literature,

not as a form of isolation or withdrawal from life, but as a condition conducive to in-
sight, ethical clarity, and liberation. Traditionally, viveka is understood as discernment or
discrimination. However, in the Cūl.avedalla Sutta (MN 44; Ñān. amoli and Bodhi 2005),
the term is used to describe progressive solitude: kāyaviveka (physical seclusion), citta-
viveka (mental detachment), and Upādhi-viveka (liberation from attachments). This doctrinal
evolution reflects how discernment arises through solitude, linking the semantic shift to
experiential transformation.

These gradations suggest that solitude is not merely spatial but deeply psychological
and existential. It is a condition that allows the practitioner to confront and transform
the roots of suffering (dukkha), rather than escape them. For a detailed study of solitude
in relation to Pāli literature, see Weerasekera (2024), who examines solitude in Buddhist
meditation alongside themes of renunciation, independence, and self-reliance. These
solitary aspects complement communal teachings, sustaining monastic harmony and
supporting engagement with wider society.

The Dhammapada, one of the most widely cited texts in both monastic and lay contexts,
offers poetic reflections on solitude:

“He who sits alone, sleeps alone, and walks alone, who is strenuous and subdues
himself alone, will find delight in the solitude of the forest.” (Buddharakkhita
1985, verse 305)

This verse does not glorify loneliness but celebrates the self-sufficiency and inner joy
that arise from mindful solitude. The forest here is not a place of exile but a metaphor for
the inner landscape of clarity and peace.

In the Sutta Nipāta, particularly the Muni Sutta (Sn 207–221), the ideal sage (muni)
is described as one who has relinquished social entanglements and lives in solitude, not
out of aversion but out of wisdom. The muni is not led by others, not caught by crav-
ing, and not bound by views. This portrayal aligns solitude with freedom rather than
deprivation, suggesting that the absence of social interaction can be a fertile ground for
spiritual flourishing.

The Satipat.t.hāna Sutta (MN 10, Ñān. amoli and Bodhi 2005), foundational to modern
mindfulness movements, also prescribes solitude as the optimal condition for cultivating
the four foundations of mindfulness: body, feelings, mind, and mental objects. The refrain
“gone to the forest, to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut” appears repeatedly, emphasizing
that mindfulness practice is traditionally embedded in settings of quietude and withdrawal.
Importantly, this solitude is not passive; it is a space of active observation, ethical reflection,
and transformative insight.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 6 of 19

In early Indian traditions, the vānaprastha stage, retirement to the forest, was a socially
sanctioned phase of life that encouraged solitude for reflection and spiritual development.
This concept parallels Buddhist lay practices, where solitude is not limited to monastics
but is also embraced by householders seeking ethical and spiritual growth. As Lee (2022)
explains, the Upāsakaśı̄la Sūtra outlines a comprehensive moral framework for lay practi-
tioners, including the cultivation of solitude, mindfulness, and ethical conduct as part of
their spiritual path. The sutra emphasizes that lay followers can engage in meditative and
ethical practices that mirror monastic ideals, thereby affirming solitude as a transformative
condition for both renunciants and householders.

While a direct quote from the Upāsakaśı̄la Sūtra on solitude is elusive, secondary litera-
ture often paraphrases its principles. One such paraphrased passage states: “A lay follower
should dwell in solitude at times, reflecting on the Dharma, cultivating mindfulness, and
avoiding idle chatter, for such solitude nourishes wisdom and detachment” (Rotaru and
Sumant 2014, pp. 103–4). This reflects the sutra’s emphasis on ethical conduct, periodic
withdrawal, and inner cultivation for lay practitioners. The annotated translation of the
Kauśika-Sūtra by Rotaru and Sumant (2014) also discusses Atharvavedic domestic rites
and lay practices that align with the ethical and contemplative dimensions found in the
Upāsakaśı̄la Sūtra.

In Mahāyāna literature, solitude continues to be valued, though often reinterpreted
through the lens of compassion and non-duality (e.g., Boucher 2008). In Roberts (2022)
introduction to the highly influential Samādhirāja Sūtra, he comments on the promotion
of mendicancy and austere practices involving solitude. However, this sutra’s emphasis
on mendicancy offers less of an insight into lay solitude. In contrast, the less influential
Vimalakı̄rti Nirdeśa Sūtra presents the lay bodhisattva Vimalakı̄rti as dwelling in solitude
while remaining deeply engaged with the world. His solitude is not physical but mental:
free from conceptual proliferation and dualistic thinking. This suggests a more nuanced
view: one can be solitary in mind even amidst social activity, and conversely, one can be
lonely even in a crowd. The bodhisattva ideal illustrates that solitude is not an end in itself
but a means to cultivate wisdom and compassion, which are then brought back into the
world through service to others.

While neither Robert Sharf nor Johannes Bronkhorst explicitly foregrounds solitude
as a doctrinal category, their analyses offer important context for understanding its role
in Buddhist meditative traditions. Sharf’s critique of Buddhist modernism highlights
how contemporary representations of meditation, often centered on solitary mindfulness,
are shaped by modern reform movements and Western appropriations, rather than by
traditional Buddhist practice. He emphasizes that ritual, ethical conduct, and communal
life were historically more central to Buddhist lay experience than meditation in isolation.
Bronkhorst, meanwhile, situates early Buddhist meditation within a broader Indian reli-
gious milieu, showing that practices associated with solitude, such as withdrawal from
society and sustained meditative absorption, were shared across ascetic traditions. His
work suggests that solitude functioned more as a practical condition for certain medita-
tive aims than as a doctrinal ideal in itself. This argument is reinforced by Prabhu (2020)
who views the Buddhist tradition as long upholding solitude as a vital condition for in-
sight, healing, and liberation, which resonates with broader Indian spiritual frameworks.
Prabhu identifies solitude not merely as a psychological state but as a culturally and spir-
itually sanctioned practice, deeply embedded in the stages of life such as vānaprastha
(forest-dwelling retirement) and sam. nyāsa (renunciation). These stages reflect a purposeful
withdrawal from worldly engagements, paralleling the Buddhist monastic path where
solitude is cultivated as a means to deepen mindfulness and transcend suffering.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 7 of 19

Importantly, Prabhu challenges the notion of solitude as an end in itself, asking
whether spiritual withdrawal ultimately leads to a renewed sense of social responsibility.
This question aligns with the Buddhist ideal of the bodhisattva, who returns from solitary
practice not to escape the world but to serve it with compassion and clarity. Thus, solitude
is not antisocial, rather it is profoundly relational in its outcomes.

Prabhu’s analogy of the temple as a space conducive to divine experience underscores
the therapeutic dimension of solitude. Just as the temple offers a physical environment
that supports spiritual focus, Buddhist mindfulness practices emphasize the importance
of intentional, environmental solitude to foster mental clarity and emotional resilience.
This supports the argument that solitude, when practiced mindfully, is not a symptom of
loneliness but its antidote: a space of healing rather than alienation.

Moreover, Prabhu notes that society often venerates those who choose solitude for
spiritual growth. This cultural validation reinforces the Buddhist view that solitude is not
pathological but purposeful. In an age marked by hyperconnectivity and rising loneliness,
such perspectives offer a counter-narrative: solitude, when rooted in mindfulness and
ethical intention, becomes a source of strength, insight, and compassionate engagement.

Taken together Bronkhorst and Prahu’s research invites a more nuanced view of soli-
tude in Buddhism: not as an isolated goal, but as a historically contingent and contextually
embedded aspect of contemplative life.

Solitude in Buddhism is not merely the absence of others but a cultivated condition
that supports mindfulness, insight, and emotional healing. Chen et al. (2022) detail how
many sutras and teachings emphasize the importance of a suitable environment (solitary
place) for beginners to learn Buddhist meditation practices. Buddhist contemplative spaces
offer compelling evidence that solitude, when embedded in intentional environments,
becomes a transformative experience. Their research highlights how contemporary spaces
are designed to foster quietude, seclusion, and natural presence, all of which are conducive
to deep contemplative practice. Note here that these environments are in the broader
context of a spiritual community. Hence, there is a distinction between solitude and
isolation from society.

Chen et al. (2022) highlight how these spatial qualities echo the traditional Buddhist
emphasis on retreat and withdrawal as essential for spiritual development. Forest monas-
teries, mountain hermitages, and solitary meditation huts have long served as sanctuaries
where practitioners engage in solitude not to escape the world, but to understand it more
deeply. The solitude cultivated in these spaces is mindful, purposeful, and relational, offer-
ing practitioners a sense of connection to the Dharma and to the broader web of existence.

Importantly, Chen et al. (2022) study distinguishes between solitude and loneliness,
reinforcing the central thesis of this article. While loneliness is marked by emotional distress
and disconnection, solitude in Buddhist contemplative space is marked by presence, clarity,
and sacred intentionality. The architecture and atmosphere of such spaces actively support
the practitioner’s inward journey, transforming solitude into a therapeutic and spiritually
enriching state. Moreover, the presence of intangible elements, such as the symbolic
resonance of the Buddha, the teachings (Dharma), and the community (Sangha), imbues
solitude with meaning and relational depth. Even in physical aloneness, the practitioner
is held within a spiritual lineage and ethical framework, which prevents solitude from
devolving into isolation.

In this way, Chen et al. (2022) argue that Buddhist contemplative space exemplifies
how solitude can be architected and ritualized to support mindfulness and emotional
resilience. It affirms that solitude, when cultivated within a sacred context, is not a symptom
of loneliness but its antidote, a space of healing, insight, and compassionate re-engagement.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 8 of 19

5. Buddhist Wisdom and the Reframing of Loneliness
The COVID-19 pandemic intensified global experiences of isolation, prompting re-

newed interest in spiritual frameworks for coping with loneliness. In their comparative
study, Ding et al. (2022) explore how Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism offer distinct
approaches to this emotional challenge. The Buddhist perspective, in particular, aligns
closely with the central thesis of this article: that mindful solitude is not only an antidote to
loneliness but its conceptual opposite.

Buddhism reframes loneliness through the lens of the Four Noble Truths, recognizing
it as a form of suffering that arises from attachment and aversion. Rather than resisting
loneliness, Buddhist practice encourages mindful acceptance and spiritual realization,
transforming the experience into an opportunity for insight. This approach resonates with
the therapeutic value of solitude in Buddhist meditation, where practitioners cultivate
awareness of impermanence and interdependence.

Ding et al. (2022) emphasize mindfulness as a core Buddhist strategy for managing
pandemic-induced loneliness. Mindfulness enables individuals to observe their emotional
states without judgment, fostering equanimity and reducing the distress associated with
isolation. This supports the argument that solitude, when approached with intentionality
and awareness, becomes a space of healing rather than alienation. This is seen pragmati-
cally in Japan, where Zen retreats have been adopted by corporations to foster employee
wellbeing and productivity. These retreats emphasize silence, mindfulness, and simplic-
ity, principles drawn from Zen practice, to help workers cultivate focus and emotional
resilience in high-pressure environments (Suzuki 2019).

Moreover, Buddhist teachings distinguish between solitariness and loneliness, a
distinction echoed in both ancient texts and contemporary Buddhist commentary. The
Rhinoceros Sutra, for example, advises practitioners to “wander alone like a rhinoceros,”
celebrating solitude as a path to liberation (Thanissaro 1997, Snp 1.3). Yet, prolonged
isolation without spiritual grounding can devolve into existential loneliness, underscoring
the importance of spiritual connection and relational awareness.

This nuanced understanding reinforces the view that mindful solitude is not a with-
drawal from the world but a deep engagement with it. Through solitude, practitioners
reconnect with their inner life and, paradoxically, with the broader web of existence. This
offers a compelling framework for viewing loneliness not as a deficit, but as a doorway to
spiritual insight, emotional resilience, and compassionate re-engagement with the world.
However, Buddhist understandings of solitude need to be considered alongside contempo-
rary psychological scholarship in order to arrive at a framework of mindful solitude that
bridges both Buddhism and secular need.

Integrating Buddhist and psychological perspectives offers mutual enrichment: Bud-
dhist traditions contribute a depth of ethical, spiritual, and contemplative insight that
grounds solitude in a broader soteriological framework, while psychological research pro-
vides empirical validation and nuanced understanding of solitude’s affective and cognitive
dimensions. This dialogue allows for a more holistic approach to human suffering and
wellbeing: one that honors both the inner transformation sought in Buddhist practice and
the therapeutic outcomes valued in psychology. Rather than viewing these traditions as
competing paradigms, this article affirms their complementarity: psychology benefits from
Buddhism’s ethical intentionality and spiritual depth, while Buddhism gains contemporary
relevance and accessibility through psychological operationalization. Together, they offer a
robust framework for understanding mindful solitude as a transformative space of healing,
insight, and relational renewal.

To bridge traditional Buddhist insights with contemporary therapeutic needs, we now
return to psychological literature. Here we unpack how solitude is currently defined, mea-



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 9 of 19

sured, and experienced in psychological research, highlighting parallels and divergences
with Buddhist perspectives.

6. Contemporary Solitude: Definitions and Distinctions
6.1. Solitary Activities vs. Pure Solitude

Contemporary literature on solitude distinguishes between different types of solitary
experience, particularly between pure solitude and solitary activities. Pure solitude refers to
a state without external stimuli, activity, or social presence; an inwardly attentive condition
in which one simply sits and thinks (Nguyen et al. 2018; Wilson et al. 2014). Despite
its philosophical and meditative appeal, empirical studies suggest that few individuals
willingly engage in pure solitude, and many find it uncomfortable or aversive (Hatano et al.
2022; McVarnock et al. 2023).

In contrast, solitary activities (such as leisure, spiritual, or recreational pursuits)
are more commonly preferred and are associated with greater psychological benefits
(McVarnock et al. 2023; Ost Mor et al. 2021). These activities provide structure and engage-
ment, making solitude more accessible and enjoyable. For example, solitude in natural
environments has been shown to foster relaxation, reflection, and a sense of personal control
(Nguyen et al. 2023).

Hipson et al. (2021) further demonstrate the value of solitary activities in a study of
adolescents. They found that individuals who engaged in hobbies or passive activities
(such as watching television or browsing the internet) reported lower levels of loneliness
and higher positive affect compared to those in pure solitude. Interestingly, no significant
differences were found between engaged and passive solitary activities, suggesting that the
mere presence of activity, regardless of its nature, can buffer against the negative emotional
effects of being alone.

However, the definition of solitary activities remains contested. Lyons et al. (2014) cau-
tion that interactive technologies, while seemingly solitary, may introduce social demands
or obscure the experience of aloneness. This blurring of boundaries between solitude and
social engagement highlights the need for further research to clarify the psychological
mechanisms underlying different forms of solitary experience.

This distinction between pure solitude and solitary activities is particularly relevant
to Buddhist meditative traditions, where structured practices often serve as gateways
to deeper states of solitude and insight. In this context, solitary activities may act as
transitional tools, helping individuals cultivate the capacity for pure solitude over time.

6.2. Autonomous Solitude Versus Forced Solitude

Autonomy plays a central role in shaping how solitude is experienced. Weinstein et al.
(2023a), through semi-structured interviews with adults, found that individuals reported
greater psychological benefit from solitude when they were motivated to seek it, compared
to when solitude was imposed or entered without choice. This distinction highlights the
importance of intentionality in solitude experiences.

Averill and Sundararajan (2013) offer a useful conceptual differentiation between
authentic solitude and pseudo-solitude. Authentic solitude is described as a creative and
self-directed pursuit, chosen freely and often associated with personal growth. In contrast,
pseudo-solitude arises from an unwillingness to be alone and is frequently accompanied
by feelings of loneliness. Empirical research supports this distinction, showing that low
autonomy in solitude is linked to increased stress, reduced life satisfaction, and low-arousal
negative affect, including boredom and drowsiness (Nguyen et al. 2018).

Further expanding on this, Weinstein et al. (2023b) argue that autonomy not only
influences the quality of solitude but may also be fulfilled through it. Drawing on self-



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 10 of 19

determination theory (SDT), which identifies autonomy as one of three basic psychological
needs, they suggest that solitude can satisfy this need when it is entered voluntarily. In
such cases, solitude becomes a space for adaptive self-engagement, allowing individuals to
explore personal interests, emotions, and values without external interference. This freedom
to act and feel in self-directed ways contributes to psychological growth and wellbeing.

In the context of Buddhist meditation, this emphasis on autonomy resonates with the
tradition’s encouragement of intentional withdrawal from worldly distractions. Solitude,
when chosen mindfully, becomes not only a refuge but a transformative space for insight
and liberation.

6.3. Aloneness Versus Loneliness

A third key factor in understanding solitude involves the distinction between physical
aloneness and the subjective experience of loneliness. Although autonomy is key to positive
solitude, traditional Buddhist monastic settings often structure solitude within communal
norms. This suggests that autonomy can coexist with ritualized solitude when internalized
as a personal commitment.

Much of the ambiguity surrounding the definition of solitude stems from the tendency to
equate it with being physically alone, or the absence of social interaction (Nikitin et al. 2022;
Pauly et al. 2018; Tse et al. 2022). While such definitions capture the objective dimension
of solitude, they often overlook its subjective and psychological aspects. Weinstein et al.
(2023b) argue that solitude is better understood through its internal experience rather than
its external conditions.

Galanaki (2013) offers a useful differentiation between three related concepts. Alone-
ness refers to the physical state of being alone. Loneliness is a negative emotional experience
resulting from a perceived lack of intimacy, which can occur even in the presence of others
(Simard and Volicer 2020). Solitude, by contrast, is a state of aloneness that may be experi-
enced either positively or negatively. Importantly, Galanaki notes that physical separation
from others is not always necessary to achieve a solitary state.

What appears to be more central to the experience of solitude is a sense of inner-
directedness. Weinstein et al. (2023a), through qualitative interviews, found that solitude
is characterized by a dominant internal relationship with the self. This inward focus
involves tuning into one’s inner world and can lead to experiences of personal control,
relaxation, and growth (Nguyen et al. 2022; Weinstein et al. 2023b). While physical separa-
tion may support this inner-directed state, it is not essential. Solitude can be experienced
even in public or social settings, provided that the individual maintains an internal focus
(Nguyen et al. 2022).

Drawing from these insights, a working definition of positive solitude is proposed.
Positive solitude is a state of being marked by inner connectedness, in which the primary
relationship is with oneself (Weinstein et al. 2023b). This state may be facilitated by solitary
activities and can occur even in the presence of others, as long as the internal connection is
preserved. Positive solitude is most likely to be experienced when entered autonomously,
rather than imposed. In essence, solitude is the voluntary choice to engage in a state of
self-connection. This state may be active and is often supported by physical distance from
others to reduce external distractions, though it can also occur in shared spaces.

This understanding of solitude provides a foundation for exploring its therapeutic and
spiritual dimensions, particularly within Buddhist traditions that emphasize intentional
withdrawal and inner awareness.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 11 of 19

7. The Benefits of Solitude: A Buddhist Mindfulness Perspective
Solitude is often assumed to be a source of discomfort, associated with loneliness,

boredom, or even depression. Seminal studies by Wilson et al. (2014) and Buttrick et al.
(2019) illustrate this tendency, showing that individuals across cultures frequently prefer
external stimulation, even unpleasant experiences, over being alone with their thoughts.
These findings reflect a widespread aversion to unstructured solitude.

However, from a Buddhist perspective, solitude is not inherently negative. When
approached mindfully, solitude becomes a space for insight, emotional regulation, and
spiritual growth. Leavitt et al. (2021) suggest that intentional solitude, particularly when
practiced through mindfulness, allows individuals to slow down and observe their thoughts
and emotions with clarity and compassion. This aligns with Buddhist teachings, which
view mindfulness not merely as present-moment awareness but as a disciplined practice
that cultivates wisdom and reduces suffering.

Nguyen et al. (2018) found that even brief periods of solitude can regulate affective
states, reducing high-arousal emotions such as excitement and anger, and increasing
calmness and relaxation. Although some participants reported feelings of sadness and
loneliness, these effects were mitigated when solitude was framed positively and entered
autonomously. This finding resonates with Buddhist emphasis on volitional withdrawal
from worldly distractions as a path to inner peace.

Rodriguez et al. (2023) further demonstrated that reframing solitude as beneficial can
reduce its negative emotional impact. Participants who were primed with the benefits
of solitude before a solitary experience reported fewer negative feelings, suggesting that
intention and mindset play a crucial role, an idea central to Buddhist mindfulness, where
the quality of attention and intention shapes the experience.

Weinstein et al. (2021), in a large-scale study conducted during the COVID-19 pan-
demic, found that solitude was often described as peaceful, even without priming. This
suggests an inherent potential within solitude that aligns with Buddhist views of inner-
directed practice as a source of clarity and equanimity.

Petersen et al. (2021) explored solitude in nature, describing participants’ solo ex-
periences as deeply therapeutic. Rather than loneliness, individuals reported feelings of
compassion, gratitude, and connectedness to self and the world; experiences that mirror
Buddhist contemplative practices in natural settings, such as forest meditation and retreat.

While some individuals may be dispositionally inclined toward solitude, many schol-
ars now conceptualize solitude as a state that can be cultivated. The conditions that support
positive solitude (autonomy, inner-directedness, and meaningful solitary activities) are
also foundational to Buddhist mindfulness. Additional factors such as social support
(Pauly et al. 2018) and sustained mindfulness practice further enhance the experience,
transforming solitude into a space of healing and insight.

In sum, when solitude is approached through the lens of Buddhist mindfulness, it
becomes not a source of distress but a gateway to emotional regulation, spiritual clarity,
and wellbeing.

8. Mindfulness as a Mediator
Mindfulness entered Western clinical practice through the work of Jon Kabat-Zinn,

who in 1979 developed the Stress Reduction and Relaxation Program at the University
of Massachusetts Medical Center (Kabat-Zinn 2011). This eight-week intervention, later
known as Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), introduced mindfulness as a ther-
apeutic tool for managing stress, pain, and illness. Over time, MBSR expanded beyond
medical contexts into clinical, educational, and neuroscientific domains (Kabat-Zinn and
Williams 2013).



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 12 of 19

Despite its widespread adoption, the conceptualization of mindfulness has varied
across disciplines. Grossman (2011) cautions that Western psychological definitions often
reduce mindfulness to a measurable construct, focusing narrowly on present-moment
awareness. This approach risks detaching mindfulness from its Buddhist roots, where it
is understood as part of a broader ethical and spiritual path. Critics such as Purser (2019)
and Hyland (2017) argue that secular mindfulness has been commodified and stripped of
its ethical and communal dimensions, resulting in what Purser terms “McMindfulness.”
This critique highlights how mindfulness, when divorced from its soteriological context,
risks becoming a tool for individual productivity and stress management rather than
a path to liberation. Such concerns underscore the importance of reintegrating ethical
intention, relational awareness, and spiritual depth into mindfulness practice, elements that
are central to Buddhist contemplative traditions but often absent in clinical applications.
Traditional Buddhist perspectives view mindfulness not as an end in itself, but as a means
to cultivate insight, compassion, and liberation from suffering (Chiesa 2012).

Kabat-Zinn (2011) acknowledges that his intention was not to secularize mindfulness
but to present it in a way that would be accessible within Western healthcare settings, while
still preserving its dharmic essence. In this spirit, the current study adopts a definition of
mindfulness that honors its Buddhist origins: non-judgmental awareness of the present
moment, cultivated with intention and sustained through ongoing meditative practice.

Mindfulness is foundational to nearly all Buddhist meditative traditions across
Southeast Asia, including those practiced in Tibet, Thailand, China, Bhutan, and India
(Kabat-Zinn 2003). It involves an attentional stance rooted in meditation, characterized by
acceptance, non-reactivity, and purpose (Baer 2003; Kabat-Zinn 2011). This stance contrasts
with mindlessness, a default state of unawareness that pervades habitual experience. Mind-
fulness seeks to interrupt this default mode, bringing clarity and intentionality to one’s
thoughts, emotions, and actions.

Across both classical and contemporary literature, present-moment awareness consis-
tently emerges as a defining feature of mindfulness (Nilsson and Kazemi 2016; Murphy
2016; Somaraju et al. 2023). However, in Buddhist philosophy, mindfulness is embedded
within a larger ethical framework. The Four Noble Truths articulate the inevitability of
suffering, its origins in craving, the possibility of its cessation, and the path toward liber-
ation through the Eightfold Path (Bodhi 2010). Within this path, mindfulness functions
as a tool for cognitive clarity, helping practitioners let go of conditioned patterns and
cultivate wisdom.

Mindfulness, therefore, is not merely a psychological technique but a way of being. It
integrates ethical, cognitive, and spiritual dimensions, guiding individuals toward greater
insight and freedom. In the context of solitude, mindfulness offers a transformative lens
through which aloneness can be experienced not as isolation, but as a space for self-
connection, emotional regulation, and spiritual growth.

It is perhaps also important to consider the ways in which mindfulness has been
repackaged and encouraged as a tool to enhance wellbeing. Secular mindfulness practices
often emphasize mindfulness practice as being a way to alleviate suffering and improve
wellbeing. To the extent that Buddhism or Buddhist practices are ascribed as the way
to happiness or providing the path to a happy life (Sharf 2015). While we acknowledge
the potential within mindfulness and meditative practices in alleviating distress, such a
conceptualization seems to contradict a tool that has been traditionally used to contemplate
the nature of human existence and come to terms with the inevitability of suffering as part
of life. While a rigorous analysis on definitions of wellbeing and goals of mindfulness is
not the purpose of this article, it is important to consider that achieving ‘happiness’ was
not necessarily the foundation from which these meditative practices stem from.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 13 of 19

While secular mindfulness programs such as MBSR have demonstrated therapeutic
efficacy, their conceptual framing often omits the ethical and relational dimensions central
to Buddhist mindfulness. This divergence raises important questions about the scope and
depth of healing offered in clinical settings. By reducing mindfulness to a technique for
stress reduction or emotional regulation, secular models risk commodifying a practice that,
in its original context, was embedded within a path of ethical transformation and liberation
from suffering. Moreover, the absence of communal and soteriological frameworks may
limit the capacity of secular mindfulness to address existential loneliness or foster deep
relationality. A more integrative approach (one that reclaims mindfulness as both a thera-
peutic and spiritual practice) may offer a richer response to the epidemic of loneliness and
the human need for meaning.

9. The Relationship Between Mindfulness and Solitude
Solitude is a foundational yet often overlooked aspect of mindfulness, particularly

within Buddhist and other Eastern philosophical traditions. Bommarito (2020) reminds us
that meditation and mindfulness represent only part of the broader spectrum of Buddhist
practice, which also includes rituals, festivals, and pilgrimages. The challenges that mind-
fulness seeks to address, such as suffering, distraction, and emotional unrest, are deeply
rooted and require sustained attention and practice. In this context, solitude serves as a
vital condition for deepening mindfulness, offering a reprieve from the demands of daily
life and creating space for inner reflection.

Chen et al. (2022) identify three environmental conditions that support mindfulness:
quiet, solitude, and nature. These elements reflect the Buddhist emphasis on withdrawal
from sensory distractions to cultivate clarity and insight. Similarly, Prabhu (2020) notes
that in ancient Indian thought, solitude is considered essential for spiritual development
and wellbeing. Daoist philosophy also affirms the value of solitude, suggesting that
it can mitigate feelings of loneliness by fostering attunement to the Dao and a deeper
engagement with the world (Ding et al. 2022). Even within Christian monastic traditions,
eremitic practices highlight solitude as a path to spiritual intimacy and transformation
(Göttler 2018). Table 1 presents a comparison of how Confucianism, Daoism, Buddhism
(Ding et al. 2022), Hinduism (Munz 1956) and Eremitic Hermitism (Göttler 2018) interpret
and utilize solitude, particularly in the context of coping with loneliness.

Table 1. Comparative Perspectives on Solitude Across Spiritual Traditions (Ding et al. 2022; Munz
1956; Göttler 2018).

Tradition Core Concept View on Solitude Coping Strategy

Confucianism Ren (benevolence), Li
(rituals)

Solitude is meaningful when it prepares
one for ethical social engagement.

Engage in rituals and fulfill social roles to
foster belonging and moral growth.

Daoism Wu-wei (effortless
action), harmony

Solitude is liberation from societal
constraints and a return to natural

simplicity.

Withdraw from artificial constructs;
embrace spontaneity and harmony

with nature.

Buddhism Mindfulness, Dukkha
(suffering)

Solitude is a space for introspection and
spiritual awakening.

Practice meditation and mindfulness to
transform suffering into insight and peace.

Hinduism Ekānta, introspection,
equanimity

Solitude provides space to deepen
spiritual connection to Brahman
(ultimate universe or creator).

Intentional withdrawal from society with
emphasis on drawing inwards.

Eremitic
Hermitism

Asceticism, Prayer,
Union with God

Solitude is a sacred vocation for divine
communion and spiritual warfare.

Withdraw to the desert or cell; live in
silence, prayer, and self-denial to seek God.

Note. This table outlines how different spiritual traditions conceptualize solitude and the coping strategies they
promote. Italicized terms represent key philosophical or theological concepts within each tradition.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 14 of 19

While all five traditions affirm the value of solitude, Buddhism stands apart in its
framing of solitude not merely as preparatory (as in Confucianism) or as a return to natural
spontaneity (as in Daoism), but as a direct condition for insight into the nature of suffering
and the cultivation of liberation. The Buddhist view of solitude differs in its emphasis
on mindfulness as a mediating condition. Unlike Hinduism, where solitude often serves
to deepen union with a transcendent absolute (Brahman), or Eremitic Hermitism, where
solitude is a sacred vocation for divine communion, Buddhist solitude is fundamentally
diagnostic and transformative: it is a space where the practitioner confronts impermanence,
craving, and self-construction. Moreover, Buddhist solitude is not an end but a means to
cultivate mindfulness, ethical clarity, and ultimately, compassionate re-engagement with
the world. This relational return, embodied in the bodhisattva ideal, distinguishes Buddhist
solitude as both inwardly liberating and outwardly responsive, offering a unique synthesis
of introspection and ethical action.

These cross-cultural perspectives converge on a shared understanding: solitude, when
chosen intentionally, facilitates connection with a higher self or spiritual truth. Within Bud-
dhism, this connection is cultivated through mindfulness, which encourages practitioners
to turn inward, observe their thoughts without judgment, and develop insight into the
nature of suffering and impermanence.

Leavitt et al. (2021) argue that the rise of mindfulness in Western contexts, particularly
through Kabat-Zinn’s work in the 1980s, coincided with a renewed appreciation for inten-
tional solitude and stillness. While theoretical links between mindfulness and solitude have
been proposed (Bommarito 2020; Cleveland 2020; Leavitt et al. 2021), empirical research
remains limited. One notable exception is Soysal and Bakalım’s (2021) study, which found
that mindfulness mediates the relationship between solitude and life satisfaction. Their
findings suggest that mindfulness enhances the quality of solitude, transforming it into a
source of psychological wellbeing.

Further support comes from Hartstone and Medvedev (2021), who examined New
Zealand undergraduate students’ experiences across three phases of the COVID-19 pan-
demic. Their longitudinal study revealed that individuals with higher baseline levels of
mindfulness and life satisfaction experienced significantly less anxiety, depression, and
stress during lockdown. These findings suggest that mindfulness may buffer against the
emotional toll of social isolation, particularly during periods of enforced solitude. Lee et al.
(2020) similarly reported increased loneliness and depression among young adults during
the pandemic, reinforcing the need to understand how mindfulness and solitude interact
to support mental health.

Taken together, these findings point to a reciprocal relationship between mindfulness
and solitude. Mindfulness enhances the capacity to experience solitude positively, while
solitude provides the conditions necessary for deepening mindfulness. This interplay is
central to Buddhist contemplative practice, where solitude is not merely a physical state but
a spiritual orientation that fosters insight, emotional regulation, and ultimately, liberation
from suffering.

Drawing together insights from Buddhist doctrine, historical exemplars, and psy-
chological research, we propose an integrated framework. This model illustrates how
mindfulness mediates the experience of solitude, transforming it into a source of wellbeing
and resilience.

10. An Integrated Framework: Mindfulness as a Pathway to Positive
Solitude and Wellbeing

This framework illustrates the interrelated processes through which mindfulness
facilitates positive solitude, ultimately countering loneliness and enhancing wellbeing (see



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 15 of 19

Figure 1; bolded terms in the text correspond to key components of the framework). It
integrates Buddhist philosophical principles with contemporary psychological research, as
discussed throughout the article. Each concept is linked to the relevant section where it is
explored in detail.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework.

Mindfulness (refer to 8 & 9), defined as non-judgmental awareness of the present
moment cultivated through intentional practice, initiates a transformative process. In
Buddhist tradition, this is reflected in the Buddha’s 49-day solitary meditation under the
Bodhi tree, Milarepa’s mountain retreats and poetic praise of solitude, and the Satipat.t.hāna
Sutta’s emphasis on solitude as the optimal condition for cultivating mindfulness.

It supports three foundational conditions:
Autonomy (refer to 2, 4 & 6.2):

• Psychological: Choosing solitude freely rather than experiencing it as imposed.
• Buddhist: The muni (sage) in the Muni Sutta lives in solitude “not led by others,”

reflecting volitional withdrawal rooted in wisdom.

Inner-Directedness (refer to 2 & 4):

• Psychological: A reflective orientation toward one’s internal world.
• Buddhist: Cittaviveka (mental detachment) and Upādhiviveka (liberation from at-

tachments) in the Cūl.avedalla Sutta illustrate solitude as a path to insight and freedom
from suffering.

Solitary Activities (2, 4 & 6.1):

• Psychological: Engagement in meaningful, self-chosen pursuits.
• Buddhist: Practices such as meditation, chanting, and ethical reflection in forest

monasteries and hermitages exemplify solitude as purposeful and transformative.

Together, these conditions give rise to positive solitude, a state in which the dominant
relationship is with oneself (refer to 2, 6.3, & 7). This form of solitude is not merely the
absence of others but a chosen and enriching experience that supports psychological and
spiritual growth. In Buddhist contemplative spaces, solitude is architected and ritualized



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 16 of 19

to support mindfulness, embedded in a spiritual lineage (Dharma, Sangha), preventing
isolation, and a space of healing, insight, and compassionate re-engagement.

Positive solitude contributes to two key outcomes:
Emotional Regulation (refer to 4, 5, 7, 8, 9):

• Psychological: Mindfulness helps process and manage emotions.
• Buddhist: Solitude allows practitioners to confront suffering (dukkha) and culti-

vate equanimity.

Relational depth (refer to 4, 5 & 8):

• Psychological: Solitude fosters clarity, compassion, and gratitude, enhancing relationships.
• Buddhist: The bodhisattva ideal (e.g., Vimalakı̄rti) shows that solitude deepens rela-

tional capacity, enabling compassionate service.

These outcomes help to counter loneliness, reframing aloneness as a constructive and
fulfilling experience. Ultimately, this process leads to enhanced wellbeing, characterized
by greater life satisfaction, reduced psychological distress, and a deeper sense of meaning
and purpose.

This framework underscores the therapeutic and spiritual potential of solitude when
cultivated mindfully, aligning with Buddhist perspectives that view solitude not as iso-
lation, but as a gateway to insight and liberation. It illustrates the interrelated processes
through which mindfulness facilitates positive solitude, ultimately countering loneliness
and enhancing wellbeing. It integrates Buddhist philosophical principles, as exempli-
fied in historical figures, canonical texts, and contemplative spaces, with contemporary
psychological research.

11. Conclusions
Mindful solitude reframes aloneness not as absence, but as presence: a chosen and en-

riching experience that fosters emotional regulation, contemplative insight, and relational
depth. Throughout this article, we have explored solitude as a spiritually and ethically
grounded condition for healing, drawing from Buddhist doctrine, historical exemplars,
and contemporary psychological research. What distinguishes this study is its integrative
approach: by bringing Buddhist contemplative traditions into dialogue with empirical psy-
chology, we offer a framework in which mindfulness mediates solitude through autonomy,
inner-directedness, and meaningful solitary activities. This synthesis affirms solitude as
a vital condition for wellbeing, not only in therapeutic terms but also within a broader
soteriological and ethical context.

Where previous research has tended to treat solitude and loneliness as binary oppo-
sites or has focused narrowly on either psychological or spiritual dimensions, this article
proposes a more nuanced and relational model. It acknowledges the divergence between
secular mindfulness programs and traditional Buddhist ethics while affirming their com-
plementarity in addressing suffering.

In an age marked by hyperconnectivity and rising loneliness, mindful solitude offers a
counter-narrative: a space of intentional withdrawal that supports clarity, resilience, and
compassionate re-engagement with the world.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.K. (Buddhist perspective) and K.W. (psychology);
writing—original draft preparation, H.K.; writing—review and editing, H.K. and K.W.; supervision,
H.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.



Religions 2025, 16, 1439 17 of 19

Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is
not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments: During the preparation of this manuscript the author(s) used [CoPilot] for the
purposes of creating Figure 1 based on the authors’ prescription. The authors have reviewed and
edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
Averill, James R., and Louise Sundararajan. 2013. Experiences of solitude: Issues of assessment, theory, and culture. In The Handbook

of Solitude: Psychological Perspectives on Social Isolation, Social Withdrawal, and Being Alone. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.,
pp. 90–108. [CrossRef]

Baer, Ruth A. 2003. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and
Practice 10: 125–43. [CrossRef]

Birditt, Kira S., Jennifer A. Manalel, Hannah Sommers, Gloria Luong, and Karen L. Fingerman. 2019. Better off alone: Daily solitude is
associated with lower negative affect in more conflictual social networks. The Gerontologist 59: 1152–61. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Bodhi, Bhikkhu. 2010. The Noble Eightfold Path: The Way to the End of Suffering. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society.
Bommarito, Nicholas. 2020. Seeing Clearly: A Buddhist Guide to Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [CrossRef]
Boucher, Daniel. 2008. Bodhisattvas of the Forest and the Formation of the Mahāyāna: A Study and Translation of the Rās. t.rapālaparipr. cchā-sūtra.

Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Bronkhorst, Johannes. 1993. The Two Traditions of Meditation in Ancient India. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Bronkhorst, Johannes. 2009. Buddhist Teaching in India. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Buddharakkhita, Acharya, trans. 1985. The Dhammapada. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, Verse 305. Available online:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.21.budd.html (accessed on 1 November 2025).
Buttrick, Nicholas, Hyewon Choi, Timothy D. Wilson, Shigehiro Oishi, Steven M. Boker, Daniel T. Gilbert, S. Alper, Mark Aveyard,

William Cheong, Milica V. Čolić, and et al. 2019. Cross-cultural consistency and relativity in the enjoyment of thinking versus
doing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 117: e71–e83. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Chang, Garma C. C. 1999. The Hundred Thousand Songs of Milarepa. Boston: Shambhala.
Chen, Anlin, Nathan Porter, and Yiyuan Tang. 2022. How does Buddhist contemplative space facilitate the practice of mindfulness?

Religions 13: 437. [CrossRef]
Chiesa, Alberto. 2012. The difficulty of defining mindfulness: Current thought and critical issues. Mindfulness 4: 255–68. [CrossRef]
Cleveland, Rachel. 2020. Aware I am alone: Intersections of solitude and mindfulness. Pedagogia Christiana 45: 37–52. [CrossRef]
Coplan, Robert J., William E. Hipson, Kathryn A. Archbell, Lily L. Ooi, Daniel Baldwin, and Jeremy C. Bowker. 2019. Seeking

more solitude: Conceptualization, assessment, and implications of aloneliness. Personality and Individual Differences 148: 17–26.
[CrossRef]

Ding, Xiaoyu, Bo Shang, and Fang Yu. 2022. How to cope with loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic? Perspectives of
Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism. Religions 13: 1085. [CrossRef]

Dowman, Keith, and Robert Beer. 2014. Legends of the Mahasiddhas: Lives of the Tantric Masters. Rochester: Inner Traditions.
Galanaki, Evangelia P. 2013. Solitude in children and adolescents: A review of the research literature. Psychology and Education–An

Interdisciplinary Journal 50: 79–88.
Göttler, Christine. 2018. Realms of Solitude in Late Medieval and Early Modern European Cultures: An Introduction. In Solitudo.

Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, pp. 1–28. [CrossRef]
Grossman, Paul. 2011. Defining Mindfulness by How Poorly I Think I Pay Attention during Everyday Awareness and Other Intractable

Problems for Psychology’s (Re)Invention of Mindfulness: Comment on Brown et al. (2011). Psychological Assessment 23: 1034–40.
[CrossRef]

Hartstone, Jennifer M., and Olga N. Medvedev. 2021. The Role of Mindfulness and Life Satisfaction in Psychological Distress During
the COVID-19 Lockdown in New Zealand: A Quasi-experimental Study. Mindfulness 12: 2693–706. [CrossRef]

Hatano, Atsushi, Cagla Ogulmus, Hiroshi Shigemasu, and Kou Murayama. 2022. Thinking about thinking: People underestimate how
enjoyable and engaging just waiting is. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 151: 3213–29. [CrossRef]

Hipson, William E., Robert J. Coplan, Mélanie Dufour, Kaitlyn R. Wood, and Jeremy C. Bowker. 2021. Time alone well spent? A
person-centered analysis of adolescents’ solitary activities. Social Development 30: 1114–30. [CrossRef]

Hyland, Terry. 2017. McDonaldizing spirituality: Mindfulness, education, and consumerism. Journal of Transformative Education 15:
334–56. [CrossRef]

Kabat-Zinn, Jon. 2003. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 10:
144–56. [CrossRef]

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118427378.ch6
https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bpg015
https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny060
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29924314
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190887506.001.0001
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.21.budd.html
https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000198
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30035566
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13050437
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0123-4
https://doi.org/10.12775/PCh.2020.003
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.020
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13111085
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004367432_002
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022713
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01731-4
https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001255
https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12518
https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344617696972
https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bpg016


Religions 2025, 16, 1439 18 of 19

Kabat-Zinn, Jon. 2011. Some reflections on the origins of MBSR, skillful means, and the trouble with maps. Contemporary Buddhism 12:
281–306. [CrossRef]

Kabat-Zinn, Jon, and J. Mark G. Williams. 2013. Mindfulness: Diverse Perspectives on Its Meaning, Origins and Applications. Abingdon: Routledge.
Leavitt, Chelom E., Beth Butzer, Robert W. Clarke, and Katerina Dvorakova. 2021. Intentional solitude and mindfulness: The benefits

of being alone. In The Handbook of Solitude: Psychological Perspectives on Social Isolation, Social Withdrawal, and Being Alone. Hoboken:
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., pp. 340–50. [CrossRef]

Lee, Christine M., Jennifer M. Cadigan, and Ian C. Rhew. 2020. Increases in loneliness among young adults during the COVID-19
pandemic and association with increases in mental health problems. Journal of Adolescent Health 67: 714–17. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Lee, Tzu-Fan. 2022. Buddhist Ethics for Laypeople: From Early Buddhism to Mahayana Buddhism. Singapore: Springer Nature, vol. 10,
pp. 103–9, ISBN 9789811684678. [CrossRef]

Long, Christopher R., Melissa Seburn, James R. Averill, and Thomas A. More. 2003. Solitude Experiences: Varieties, Settings, and
Individual Differences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29: 578–83. [CrossRef]

Lyons, Elizabeth J., Deborah F. Tate, Dianne S. Ward, Kurt M. Ribisl, Jennifer M. Bowling, and Sriram Kalyanaraman. 2014. Engagement,
enjoyment, and energy expenditure during active video game play. Health Psychology 33: 174–81. [CrossRef]

McVarnock, Alexandra, Tiffany Cheng, Lenka Polakova, and Robert J. Coplan. 2023. Are you alone? Measuring solitude in childhood,
adolescence, and emerging adulthood. Frontiers in Psychiatry 14: 1179677. [CrossRef]

Munz, Peter. 1956. Relationship and solitude in Hinduism and Christianity. Philosophy East and West 6: 137–52. [CrossRef]
Murphy, Ann. 2016. Mindfulness-based Therapy in Modern Psychology: Convergence and Divergence from Early Buddhist Thought.

Contemporary Buddhism 17: 275–325. [CrossRef]
Murthy, Vivek H. 2023. Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects

of Social Connection and Community; Washington: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available online:
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf (accessed on 1 November 2025).

Nguyen, Thuy, Richard M. Ryan, and Edward L. Deci. 2018. Solitude as an Approach to Affective Self-Regulation. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 44: 92–106. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Nguyen, Thuy-vy, Ellen Taylor-Bower, and Katie Yau. 2023. Solitude in Context: A Systematic Review of How Societal Norms and Physical
Environment Shape Perceptions of Solitary Experiences. OSF Preprints. Available online: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/xb8gd_v1
(accessed on 1 November 2025).

Nguyen, Thuy-vy, Netta Weinstein, and Edward Deci. 2022. Alone with our thoughts: Investigation of autonomy supportive framing
as a driver of enjoyment during quiet time in solitude. Collabra: Psychology 8: 31629. [CrossRef]

Nikitin, Jana, Florian S. Rupprecht, and Christina Ristl. 2022. Experiences of solitude in adulthood and old age: The role of autonomy.
International Journal of Behavioral Development 46: 510–19. [CrossRef]

Nilsson, Håkan, and Ali Kazemi. 2016. Reconciling and thematizing definitions of mindfulness: The big five of mindfulness. Review of
General Psychology 20: 183–93. [CrossRef]

Ñān. amoli, Bhikkhu, and Bhikkhu Bodhi. 2005. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikāya (MN 44).
New York: Wisdom Publications.

Ost Mor, Shiri, Yaakov Palgi, and Doron Segel-Karpas. 2021. The Definition and Categories of Positive Solitude: Older and Younger
Adults’ Perspectives on Spending Time by Themselves. International Journal of Aging and Human Development 93: 943–62. [CrossRef]

Pauly, Tanja, Jessica C. Lay, Susan B. Scott, and Christiane A. Hoppmann. 2018. Social relationship quality buffers negative affective
correlates of everyday solitude in an adult lifespan and an older adult sample. Psychology and Aging 33: 728–38. [CrossRef]

Petersen, Eva, Anja Bischoff, Gisela Liedtke, and Andrew J. Martin. 2021. How Does Being Solo in Nature Affect Well-Being? Evidence
from Norway, Germany and New Zealand. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18: 7897. [CrossRef]

Prabhu, Venkatesh. 2020. Solitude, spiritual beings and social responsibility. The Journal of East West Thought 10: 65–76.
Purser, Ronald. 2019. McMindfulness: How Mindfulness Became the New Capitalist Spirituality. London: Repeater Books.
Roberts, Laura, Sandra Buecker, and Katharina T. Horstmann. 2021. Loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic:

A systematic review enriched with empirical evidence from a large-scale diary study. European Psychologist 26: 272–84. [CrossRef]
Roberts, Peter Alan. 2022. The King of Samādhis Sūtra (Introduction). 2022-06-09. 84000 Translating The Words of The Buddha.

Available online: https://84000.co/translation/toh127?id=&part=#UT22084-055-001-introduction (accessed on 1 November 2025).
Rodriguez, Melissa, Sarah Pratt, Benjamin W. Bellet, and Richard J. McNally. 2023. Solitude can be good—If you see it as such:

Reappraisal helps lonely people experience solitude more positively. Journal of Personality 93: 118–35. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rotaru, Andreea, and Vikas Sumant. 2014. Annotated translation of the Kauśika-Sūtra: Domestic rites and ethical practices in

Atharvavedic tradition. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 82: 103–4.
Sharf, Robert H. 1995. Buddhist modernism and the rhetoric of meditative experience. Numen 42: 228–83. [CrossRef]
Sharf, Robert H. 2014. Mindfulness and mindlessness in early Chan. Philosophy East and West 64: 933–64. [CrossRef]
Sharf, Robert H. 2015. Is mindfulness Buddhist? (And why it matters). Transcultural Psychiatry 52: 470–84. [CrossRef]

https://doi.org/10.1080/14639947.2011.564844
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119576457.ch24
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.08.009
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33099414
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8468-5
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029005003
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031947
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1179677
https://doi.org/10.2307/1397079
https://doi.org/10.1080/14639947.2016.1228324
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217733073
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29072531
https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/xb8gd_v1
https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.31629
https://doi.org/10.1177/01650254221117498
https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000074
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415020957379
https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000278
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18157897
https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000453
https://84000.co/translation/toh127?id=&part=#UT22084-055-001-introduction
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12887
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37724779
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568527952598549
https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.2014.0074
https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461514557561


Religions 2025, 16, 1439 19 of 19

Simard, Judith, and Ladislav Volicer. 2020. Loneliness and isolation in long-term care and the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of the
American Medical Directors Association 21: 966–67. [CrossRef]

Somaraju, Lakshmi H., Laura A. Bizo, Emma C. Temple, and Benjamin Cocks. 2023. Differences between meditators and non-meditators
in mindfulness, its components and related qualities. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological
Issues 42: 4923–35. [CrossRef]

Soysal, Fatma S. Özlem, and Osman Bakalım. 2021. Relationship between preference for solitude and life satisfaction: The mediating
role of mindfulness. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling 52: 243–57. [CrossRef]

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro. 2019. Zen and Japanese Culture. Edited by R. M. Jaffe. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691182964.
Available online: https://books.google.com/books/about/Zen_and_Japanese_Culture.html?id=QQJWEAAAQBAJ (accessed on
1 November 2025).

Thanissaro, Bhikkhu, trans. 1997. Khaggavisān. a Sutta: A Rhinoceros (Snp 1.3). Access to Insight. Available online:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.03.than.html (accessed on 1 November 2025).

Tiso, Francis V. 1989. A Study of the Buddhist Saint in Relation to the Biographical Tradition of Milarepa. New York: Columbia University.
Tiso, Francis V. 1996. The Biographical Tradition of Milarepa: Orality, Literacy and Iconography. The Tibet Journal 21: 10–23.
Tse, David C. K., Janelle C. Lay, and Junko Nakamura. 2022. Autonomy Matters: Experiential and Individual Differences in Chosen

and Unchosen Solitary Activities From Three Experience Sampling Studies. Social Psychological and Personality Science 13: 946–56.
[CrossRef]

Weerasekera, Indika N. 2024. The Notion of Solitude in Pali Buddhist Literature: Finding a Space in the Crowd. London and New York:
Bloomsbury Academic.

Weinstein, Netta, Hanne Hansen, and Thuy Nguyen. 2023a. Definitions of Solitude in Everyday Life. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin 49: 1663–78. [CrossRef]

Weinstein, Netta, Thuy Nguyen, and Hanne Hansen. 2021. What time alone offers: Narratives of solitude from adolescence to older
adulthood. Frontiers in Psychology 12: 714518. [CrossRef]

Weinstein, Netta, Thuy Vu Nguyen, and Hanne Hansen. 2023b. With my self: Self-determination theory as understanding the role of
solitude in personal growth. In The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 402–11.

Wilson, Timothy D., David A. Reinhard, Erin C. Westgate, Daniel T. Gilbert, Nicole Ellerbeck, Christine Hahn, Caleb L. Brown, and
Amina Shaked. 2014. Just think: The challenges of the disengaged mind. Science 345: 75–77. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2020.05.006
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01530-z
https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2021.1977239
https://books.google.com/books/about/Zen_and_Japanese_Culture.html?id=QQJWEAAAQBAJ
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.03.than.html
https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211048066
https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221115941
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.714518
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1250830

	Introduction 
	Introducing Solitude 
	Buddhist Solitude—Historic Figures 
	Historical and Scriptural Foundations of Mindful Solitude 
	Buddhist Wisdom and the Reframing of Loneliness 
	Contemporary Solitude: Definitions and Distinctions 
	Solitary Activities vs. Pure Solitude 
	Autonomous Solitude Versus Forced Solitude 
	Aloneness Versus Loneliness 

	The Benefits of Solitude: A Buddhist Mindfulness Perspective 
	Mindfulness as a Mediator 
	The Relationship Between Mindfulness and Solitude 
	An Integrated Framework: Mindfulness as a Pathway to Positive Solitude and Wellbeing 
	Conclusions 
	References