Exploring Hindu-Buddhist Philosophies: The Role of Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment in Fostering Resilience among Young Indians

Exploring Hindu-Buddhist Philosophies: The Role of Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment in Fostering Resilience among Young Indians

Goswami S.¹, Brahmi M.², Suresh G.¹, Sharma G.², Kumar J.²

¹Indraprastha College for Women, University of Delhi, India

²Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.806055

Received: 15 May 2024; Accepted: 31 May 2024; Published: 03 July 2024

ABSTRACT

Rooted in the profound philosophies of Hinduism and Buddhism, this research endeavors to meticulously examine the intricate interrelationships among resilience, the concept of a quiet ego, and non-attachment. The primary objective of this inquiry is to systematically elucidate the contributions of a quiet ego and non-attachment to the psychological well-being and adaptability of the contemporary younger generation confronted with a myriad of complex challenges. The aim is to discern the underlying traits that underpin resilience within the contextual framework of these venerable philosophical traditions. Central to this investigation is the transcendence of the ‘ego’ or ‘Ahaṁkāra’ in Hindu philosophy, wherein the cultivation of a self-concept that is less self-centered and more psychologically flexible assumes paramount significance in navigating adversities. Concurrently, the Buddhist principle of ‘Non-Attachment’ and its Hindu counterpart, ‘Anasakti,’ advocate for relinquishing fixations, material possessions, and desired outcomes. Embracing a psychological stance characterized by acceptance, impermanence, and liberation from life’s tumultuous nature, these principles acquire particular relevance in the Indian context. The contemporary link between a quiet ego, non-attachment, and psychological distress underscores the detrimental impact of excessive self-focus on health, as elucidated by Tayal et al. (2020). To empirically test our proposition, we recruited 200 respondents (20-25 years) from urban regions of India. Utilizing the Quiet Ego scale (QES) (Wayment & Bauer, 2014), Non-attachment scale (NA-7) (Sahdra et al., 2010), and Resilience scale (RS-14) (Wagnild & Young, 1993), our statistical analyses unveiled a robust positive correlation between Quiet Ego (QE), Non-Attachment (NA), and resilience. Furthermore, our study delved into the predictive relationship between QE and NA on resilience, revealing a statistically significant model where both factors positively influenced resilience (p<0.001). This underscores the crucial role of a quiet ego and practicing non-attachment as effective predictors of coping with life stressors. In the broader context, our findings emphasize integrating these concepts into contemplative practices and interventions for a culturally relevant and holistic approach to resilience enhancement. By exploring beyond Western paradigms and integrating principles from Indian Darshanas, such as the ‘Quiet Ego’ and ‘Non-Attachment,’ our research offers a clear and cohesive pathway to a more nuanced understanding of human resilience, facilitating effective coping strategies in the face of life’s challenges. This narrative underscores the profound potential of these cultural elements in cultivating resilience, providing valuable insights for both research and practical applications.

Keywords: Quiet Ego, Anasakti, Non-Attachment, Stress, Resilience, Eudaimonia.

INTRODUCTION

In the contemporary, rapidly evolving landscape, the younger generation grapples with multifaceted challenges stemming from technological advancements, career flux, financial pressures, and shifting societal norms (Kalia, 2002). These challenges underscore the pivotal role of resilience, a key factor essential for effectively adapting to distress and fostering mental well-being, significantly influenced by cultural factors (Castro & Murray, 2010). Notably, a comprehensive meta-analysis by Chua et al. (2023) found a robust correlation between cultural engagement and psychological resilience. Within the Indian context, Hinduism and Buddhism contribute significantly to cultivating composure and adaptability through practices such as yoga and meditation (Sahdra et al., 2010). These ancient traditions uniquely address psychological distress through introspective approaches, emphasizing foundational concepts like ‘Ego’ (Ahamkara) and non-attachment (Anitya) (Pandey & Naidu, 1992). The cultural nexus between these practices and resilience underscores the enduring relevance of age-old wisdom in navigating contemporary challenges.

Quiet Ego

As posited by Bauer and Wayment (2008), a “quiet ego” refers to a psychological orientation characterized by a balance between individual needs and desires and those of others. This mindset prioritizes personal growth, internal values, and the well-being of others over external validation and material success, as Liu et al. (2022) suggest. Snyder and Lopez (2001) list humility, tolerance, gratitude, forgiveness, a secure self-concept, responsibility, altruism, and other traits of a quiet ego. Developing a quiet ego requires self-awareness and mindfulness, which calms the mind and improves relationships and well-being (Huey, 2013). Bauer and Wayment (2008) define quiet ego as detached awareness, interdependence, compassion, and growth. These traits emphasize the importance of self-improvement, personal growth, interconnectedness, and their many benefits to individuals and society (Hartman & Zimberoff, 2008). An inflated ego or excessive self-interest has adverse effects, according to research. According to Leary (2006), excessive self-reflection can lead to depression, anxiety, and social conflict when people dwell on the past, anticipate the future, or form distorted self-perceptions. Studies like Mor and Winquist (2002) highlight the psychological distress caused by maladaptive self-focus. Bauer and Wayment (2008) warn that unchecked egotism harms health, well-being, self-esteem, productivity, and social harmony. Positive psychology researchers worry about the rise of egotism, especially among youth, and call for research on transcending self-preoccupation (Lomas, 2016). The academic literature emphasizes the importance of a quiet ego for individual and societal well-being.

Non-Attachment and Its Linkages with Mindfulness

In Western psychological discourse, attachment is construed as an emotional bond between individuals, crucial for engendering a sense of safety and security (Bowlby, 1979). This bond is pivotal in providing support, stress management, and emotional regulation, substantiated by a robust empirical foundation (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Conversely, attachment carries negative connotations for human well-being in Buddhist thought and practice. Sahdra et al. (2010) delineate attachment, or rāga and upādāna in Sanskrit, as a cognitive distortion wherein an object’s admirable qualities are exaggerated, and its undesirable qualities are negated, constituting a mental affliction (Asanga, 4th–5th Century BCE/1950). Buddhism posits that attachment impedes adaptability through rigid afflictions, advocating non-attachment as a remedy that recognizes impermanence (Sahdra et al., 2010). Disregarding impermanence (‘Anitya’) leads to mental suffering, aligning with the Eight Noble Paths (Grabovac et al., 2011). Further, detachment is essential to experience the eternal bliss of the self (Gita 5:21). This state allows individuals to find joy in simple activities, such as washing utensils, as taught by Hanh (1991).

Contemporary research underscores the correlation between non-attachment and mindfulness, wherein mindfulness, defined by Bishop (2004) as involving attention regulation, acceptance, and non-judgmental awareness of one’s present surroundings, is emphasized by Whitehead et al. (2018). Empirical evidence supports this association, with a study revealing a positive relationship between mindfulness practice and non-attachment (Feliu-Soler et al., 2016). Although non-attachment shares commonalities with mindfulness, it remains distinct, involving the absence of control over conscious content (Sahdra et al., 2016). Non-attachment emerges as a mediator between mindfulness and subjective well-being, depression, stress, and anxiety (Whitehead et al., 2018). Promoting non-attachment through mindfulness-based practices impacts overall health (Montero-Marin et al., 2016).

Quiet Ego and Non-attachment in the Indian Context

In the domain of Indian psychology, extensive scholarly inquiry investigates the concepts of a quiet ego and non-attachment rooted in Eastern traditions, with a particular focus on Hinduism and Buddhism. Gupta and Agrawal (2022) emphasize the significance of ‘Ahaṁkāra’ as a self-based identity intricately linked to the material realm. Described as an illusory state obstructing self-realization, Ahaṁkāra finds elucidation in revered scriptures like the Bhagavad Gita and Upanishads. The process of self-realization involves transcending Ahaṁkāra and achieving union with pure consciousness (Brahman) through the practice of non-attachment, termed ‘Anasakti,’ representing liberation from materialism. In Hinduism, the concept of ‘Anasakti,’ akin to non-attachment, is evident in the Bhagavad Gita (Mukundananda, n.d.; Banth S & Talwar C, 2006). Studies notably highlight the correlation between non-attachment and favorable mental health outcomes in the Indian context. Nguyen (2017) observes explicitly that in Buddhism in India, non-attachment is linked to reduced levels of stress, depression, and anxiety. This connection aligns with the foundational teachings of Eastern traditions, emphasizing the transformative potential of disengagement from material pursuits.

The Interplay of Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment in Shaping Resilience

The current association between a quiet ego, non-attachment, and psychological distress underscores the deleterious impact of excessive self-focus. In the Indian context, an emphasis on self-focus, heightened self-importance, and attachment to desires has been identified as detrimental to health, as noted by Tayal et al. (2020). As advocated by Wayment and Bauer (2008), positive psychology emphasizes the importance of transcending ego and prioritizing values such as collectivism, compassion, and interdependence. Empirical evidence supports the assertion that quiet ego and non-attachment play instrumental roles in fostering resilience. Contemplative practices have yielded beneficial outcomes for youth, contributing to enhanced self-esteem, improved emotion regulation, and heightened social competence (Weare & Nind, 2011). Individuals characterized by a quiet ego tend to exhibit greater overall well-being, as expounded by Wayment and Bauer (2008). Notably, self-compassion emerges as a pivotal mediator in mitigating stress and facilitating proactive coping, as delineated by Bui et al. (2021). Furthermore, mindfulness practices have proven effective in reducing stress among college students and concurrently enhancing their overall well-being (Biegel et al., 2009). The synergy of a quiet ego and reduced attachment has been found to correlate positively with various favorable outcomes, as asserted by Singh and Raina (2015). Luyten et al. (2017) have demonstrated that a quiet ego is inversely related to depression and anxiety while concurrently contributing to a heightened sense of purpose in life. Moreover, mindfulness-based stress reduction techniques have been efficacious in alleviating stress and anxiety among adolescent psychiatric outpatients, as evidenced by studies conducted by Biegel et al. (2009) and Thirthalli et al. (2013).

The amalgamation of contemplative practices, self-compassion, and mindfulness contributes to individual resilience and underscores these principles’ universal relevance in fostering overall psychological health across diverse populations (Tho, 2023). Given the extensive body of research highlighting the mental health benefits associated with a quiet ego and non-attachment, further exploration of their intricate relationship with resilience becomes imperative.

Objectives of the Study

The objective of this study was to explore the interconnection between quiet ego, non-attachment, and resilience through the administration of online self-report questionnaires. Adopting a cross-sectional design, participants completed the form once, encompassing an informed consent section and three standardized psychological scales. The choice of online surveys was deliberate, owing to their efficacy in accessing a diverse sample, ensuring efficiency, and providing participants the option of maintaining anonymity, thereby fostering candid responses.

The primary aim of the investigation was to assess the predictive potential of quiet ego and non-attachment on resilience. This was accomplished by utilizing a multiple regression model, with resilience as the dependent variable and quiet ego and non-attachment as independent predictors. The formulated hypotheses below serve as the structured framework to attain the previously stated objective.

Hypothesis-1→ H_A: There is a statistically significant relationship between resilience and quiet ego.

Hypothesis-2→ H_A: There is a statistically significant relationship between resilience and non-attachment.

Hypothesis-3→ H_A: Resilience will be significantly predicted by quiet ego and non-attachment.

METHOD

Data Acquisition

This research involved the participation of 200 individuals (N=200), chosen through purposive and snowball sampling methods, with meticulous attention to gender equity (comprising 100 males and 100 females). Rigorous inclusion criteria were applied to ensure that all participants were Indian residents aged between 20 and 25, either currently enrolled in or having completed higher education. The average age of respondents was 20.995 years, with 190 residing in urban areas and 10 in rural locales, predominantly from regions such as New Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, Kerala, Karnataka, and West Bengal. In terms of education, 72% were pursuing bachelor’s degrees, 18.5% had completed them, some were engaged in master’s programs, and a few possessed master’s degrees. The study strictly adhered to ethical guidelines for human participants as stipulated by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), obtaining requisite approval from the Institute Ethics Committee of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi (IEC-IITD; Proposal No. P021/P0101).

Instruments Used

Our study evaluated individual traits associated with well-being and adaptability using three distinct psychological scales. The Quiet Ego Scale (QES), a tool developed by Wayment and Bauer in 2014, measured diminished self-indulgence and heightened consideration of self and others through its 12 items, demonstrating commendable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α: 0.734). Previous studies have also attested to the QES’s robust construct and conceptual validity (Wayment & Bauer, 2014). The Non-Attachment Scale (NAS-7), rooted in Buddhist principles and designed to assess the willingness to relinquish fixations and expectations for the sake of inner peace and happiness, exhibited reliability in our study (Cronbach’s α: 0.734). Sahdra and colleagues (2010) previously established satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity for the NAS-7 scale. Measuring resilience with critical characteristics, the Resilience Scale (RS-14) developed by Wagnild and Young in 1993 demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α: 0.858). Previous research in collectivistic cultures has affirmed the satisfactory validity of the RS-14 scale (Liu et al., 2015; Zahid et al., 2021). These chosen scales provided us with reliable constructs to test our hypotheses rigorously. Scores obtained from the administered questionnaires underwent coding, filtering, and cleaning procedures using R-Jamovi (The Jamovi Project, 2023; R Core Team, 2021) to facilitate descriptive and inferential analyses.

RESULTS & ANALYSIS

Before engaging in statistical analyses on the dataset, it was ensured that key assumptions, pivotal for conducting correlation and regression analyses, were met. Verification of linearity and independence preceded the examination of homoscedasticity through a scatter plot of standardized residuals. The resulting randomly scattered cloud of data points affirmed the fulfillment of this assumption. Multicollinearity between independent variables, namely quiet ego and non-attachment, was assessed through Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values, yielding 1.068, with a tolerance of 0.936, indicative of a low correlation between the variables. Autocorrelation was examined using the Durban-Watson statistic, which fell within acceptable limits. Violations of normality assumptions for all three variables were identified through the Shapiro-Wilks normality test. However, it is noteworthy that normality pertains to residuals rather than score values in regression analysis. The central limit theorem becomes applicable with a sufficiently large sample size, as in this case (e.g., 200 or more), where the residual distribution approaches normality. Additionally, visual inspections, including normal probability (P-P) plots, histograms, Q-Q plots, mean, and 5% trimmed means of the variables, substantiated the absence of violations of the normal distribution assumption. Consequently, all assumptions were satisfied, rendering the data suitable for regression modeling (Fox & Weisberg, 2020).

Hypothesis 1 & 2: Unveiling the Relationship of Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment with Resilience

A correlational examination was conducted to test hypotheses 1 and 2. In light of multiple correlations, Bonferroni corrections were applied to control the family-wise error rate, reducing the risk of false positives. After correction, the adjusted p-value was calculated as ‘p=0.0167’, maintaining a significance level of ‘p=0.05’. Table 1 presents the correlation coefficients. Hypothesis 1 posited a statistically significant relationship between resilience and quiet ego. The correlation matrix unveiled a significant positive correlation [r(200)= 0.417, p<.001, (adjusted-p)<0.0167], leading to the retention of hypothesis 1. Similarly, hypothesis 2 proposed a statistically significant relationship between resilience and non-attachment, with a significant positive correlation observed [r(200)= 0.564, p<.001, (adjusted p) <0.0167]. Consequently, we failed to reject hypothesis 2 as well.

Table 1. Table Displaying Pearson Correlation Coefficients between Quiet Ego, Non-attachment, and Resilience.

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

Hypothesis 3: Predicting Resilience through Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment

Table 2 delineates the outcomes of the multiple regression analysis conducted to examine Hypothesis 3. The results revealed a statistically significant model (F (2,197) = 64.950, p < 0.001), with the independent variables (IVs) accounting for 39.7% of the variance in the dependent variable (DV), namely resilience (R² = 0.397). In Table 3, both the quiet ego (β = 0.295, p < 0.001) and non-attachment (β = 0.487, p < 0.001) positively forecast resilience. This signifies that for every one standard deviation alteration in the quiet ego and non-attachment scores, resilience augments by 0.295 and 0.487 standard deviation units, respectively. Notably, non-attachment positively impacts resilience more than the quiet ego. Consequently, Hypothesis 3 is upheld as we do not reject it.

Table 2. Table Displaying summary of Multiple regression model results.

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

Table 3. Table showing Regression coefficients for Independent Variables (IVs: Quiet ego and Non-attachment) on Dependent Variable (DV: Resilience)

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

DISCUSSION

This study’s primary objective was to scrutinize the intricate relationships between quiet ego, non-attachment, and resilience among young Indian adults (study concept map in Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Quiet Ego (QE), Resilience (RS) & Non-Attachment (NA) Nexus Study Concept Map.

Past research has indicated initial associations between quiet ego, non-attachment, and resilience-related factors, including emotional regulation, cognitive flexibility, internal locus of control, and social support (Sahdra et al., 2010; Wayment & Bauer, 2016). However, empirical investigations within Indian samples are scarce, necessitating a more in-depth exploration. The study aimed to unravel these connections and ascertain how quiet ego and non-attachment contribute to predicting resilience. The ensuing sections detail the examination of three hypotheses and present the obtained results.

Hypothesis 1: Unveiling the Relationship Between Quiet Ego and Resilience

The initial hypothesis posited a substantial positive association between quiet ego and resilience, a proposition substantiated by the data [(r = 0.417, p<.001, (adjusted-p)<0.0167]. A quiet ego characterized by diminished self-centeredness, enhanced flexibility, and adaptability significantly correlated with resilience. Previous studies, such as those conducted by Wayment, Bauer, and Sylaska (2015), have also found a noteworthy link between a quiet ego and resilience. For instance, Liu et al. (2022) implemented a three-session quiet ego intervention, resulting in heightened detached awareness, interdependence, compassion, and growth, ultimately contributing to improved psychological flourishing—an attribute closely associated with resilience.

In 2019, Wayment et al. observed that a four-session workshop on quiet ego significantly aided hospital healthcare workers in managing compassion fatigue and burnout, showcasing the efficacy of compassion-based strategies in stress reduction. A compassionate component within a quiet ego fosters concern for others, enhancing self-efficacy, positive coping, community perception, and resilience, particularly in high-stress professions (Mealer et al., 2012). A study explored a resilience-focused seminar for foster caregivers and uncovered positive outcomes by enhancing caregivers’ understanding of protective factors and the impact of attachment on foster children. These findings resonate with broader research on the quiet ego’s link to heightened resilience, indicating potential applications in various caregiving contexts (Modica, 2019). Moreover, neurobiological evidence from Wayment et al. (2015) supported the positive correlation between a quiet ego and resilience, demonstrating its value as a resource for addressing academic, social, and professional challenges.

Hypothesis 2: Understanding the Relationship Between Non-Attachment and Resilience

The second hypothesis proposed a significant positive correlation between non-attachment and resilience [r = 0.564, p< .001, (adjusted-p)<0.0167]. This finding substantiates hypothesis 2, establishing that increased non-attachment aligns with greater resilience. The NAS-7 questionnaire’s items, assessing the ability to perceive problems as opportunities for growth and acknowledging grief without becoming overwhelmed, played a crucial role in measuring resilience. In Buddhist philosophy, non-attachment surpasses mere relinquishment, embodying a commitment to serene composure and equanimity amid life’s stresses (Brown, 2020). Rooted in mindfulness, it fosters cognitive flexibility (Keng et al., 2011). Practicing detachment and non-reactive awareness enhances resilience, allowing skillful responses to adversities (Desbordes et al., 2015).

Research in South India by Rajeev and Hebbani (2022) linked ‘Anasakti’ (the Hindu equivalent of non-attachment) with resilience in adults. Anasakti reduced stress, enhanced well-being, and fostered resilience by emphasizing duty, emotional balance, and present-focused attention (Chandur et al., 2018). Building on the affirmed positive effects of non-attachment on well-being and stress reduction, a study by Ho et al. (2022) conducted in Eastern populations further supports this trend. Their research demonstrated that non-attachment individuals exhibited lower levels of psychological distress and increased emotional resilience. Additional studies substantiating the positive effects of non-attachment on well-being, Klein (2018) and Whitehead et al. (2018) reported consistent findings in diverse populations. In tandem, Gupta and Agrawal’s (2022) study conducted explicitly in urban India underscores the universal applicability of non-attachment in mitigating emotional stress. Research evidence suggests a robust and cross-cultural pattern, endorsing non-attachment as a versatile strategy for enhancing emotional well-being and reducing stress across different societal contexts (Mak, 2023).

Hypothesis 3: Predicting Resilience through Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment

Hypothesis 3 posited that both Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment would significantly predict Resilience. The outcomes affirm robust positive predictions, with Quiet Ego (β = 0.295, p<0.001) and Non-Attachment (β = 0.487, p<0.001) emerging as significant contributors. Notably, a one-standard-deviation change in Quiet Ego and Non-Attachment corresponds to 0.295 and 0.487 standard deviation units change in Resilience, respectively.

While direct research on Eastern concepts of non-attachment, quiet ego, and resilience is limited, previous studies show essential associations. Emotional regulation, cognitive flexibility, problem-focused coping, and self-compassion are linked to non-attachment and a quiet ego (Liu et al., 2020; Wayment, 2016; Sahdra, 2010). A quiet ego’s inclusive identity promotes empathy and cooperation during distress (Wayment & Silver, 2021). College students with quiet egos showed more empathy in mass shootings, strengthening communities (Ozbay et al., 2007). In India, Misra & Mishra (2022) suggest that ‘Ahaṁkāra,’ an enlightened ego, sees suffering as a path to happiness, boosting resilience. Jaizaieri et al. (2013) found that a quiet ego’s ‘compassionate self-identity’ promotes positive emotions and stress resilience. Quiet ego promotes academic well-being through proactive coping and social connectedness (Wayment, 2016). Transitioning college students with a quiet ego report less stress, self-control, and self-compassion (Wayment et al., 2019). A quiet ego, self-acceptance, and compassion reduce self-doubt and improve self-reported health in unemployed or financially struggling adults (Wayment et al., 2018). In conclusion, a quieter ego promotes positive, compassionate self-dialogue, allowing people to accept and cope with stressors. Research suggests a quieter ego is linked to problem-focused coping strategies during stress (Bauer & Bonanno, 2001; Fredrickson, 2013). A quiet ego encourages open feedback and diverse perspectives, fostering creativity. Moreover, a quiet ego promotes openness to new ideas and experiences, improving adaptability and flexibility in handling unexpected challenges (Bauer, 2008). The growth-oriented mindset encourages proactive coping and resilience by viewing obstacles as learning and growth opportunities (Wayment & Bauer, 2008). Beyond stress coping, resilience includes a strong self-concept characterized by “determined” and “life meaning” in the RS-14 scale. Liu et al. (2022) link a quiet ego to self-concept clarity, promoting honest self-awareness for realistic self-assessments. In India, a quieter ego increases self-consciousness in young adults, helping them set goals and communicate (Jacob & Sudhamayi, 2020). Mindfulness, a quiet ego, and detached awareness are linked to positive affect and life satisfaction. A quiet ego predicts resilience by affecting cognitive functions and decision-making, reducing self-focused rumination, and expanding identity beyond the self to reduce distress (Mor & Winquist, 2002).

Marin et al. (2016) found previously that Vipassana meditation retreats boost non-attachment, positive affect, cooperation, awareness, self-direction, and life satisfaction. Non-attachment, or ‘decentredness,’ helps people see thoughts and feelings as fleeting (Celiento, 2015). This helps people overcome challenges by letting them act without being consumed by them. Accepting adversity as temporary events promotes integration, aligning with mindfulness and non-attachment (Sahdra et al., 2016). However, non-acceptance and avoidance hinder emotion regulation and coping (Fresco et al., 2007). Soler et al. (2021) link centeredness, acceptance, and non-attachment. The study also emphasizes the need to introspectively understand the constructed self and reality by highlighting the conceptual overlap between attachment and the ego. One contemporary definition of ‘ego’ involves people confusing their mental representations with their entire identity, disrupting their peace of mind and preventing constructive action (Soler et al., 2021). Hindu ‘Anasakti,’ similar to non-attachment, promotes resilience by creating an internal locus of control and proactive stress management (Pande & Naidu, 1992). This contrasts with an external locus of control linked to stress-related mental health issues (Munoz et al., 2017). High levels of anasakti reduce depression and anxiety, buffering stress-strain (Pande & Naidu, 1992). Gleig (2016) examines Western Buddhism’s mindfulness, non-attachment, and trauma healing using Leitch and Miller-Karas’ Trauma Resilience Model (TRM). TRM focuses on non-attachment and its role in promoting psychological resilience through vipassana practice. Zwack and Schweitzer’s (2013) study emphasizes mindfulness and constructive engagement to build resilience in medical professionals, while Singh and Raina’s (2015) well-being model tests Anasakti, emphasizing ‘stable intellect’ to promote adaptive coping and emotional balance.

CONCLUSION

This investigation scrutinized the interplay between quiet ego, non-attachment, and resilience through correlation and regression analyses. Findings uncovered a robust positive correlation among resilience, quiet ego, and non-attachment. Multiple regression analysis affirmed quiet ego and non-attachment as potent predictors of resilience (p<0.001). These outcomes underscore the significance of fostering a quiet ego and embracing non-attachment to cultivate resilient qualities, encompassing emotional regulation, adaptability, coping strategies, and self-compassion. The study accentuates the efficacy of incorporating Eastern contemplative attributes in nurturing positive psychological traits.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

While resilience research predominantly aligns with Western paradigms, this study underscores the scarcity of literature exploring the role of Eastern contemplative practices in resilience. Furthermore, the study addresses the research gap concerning Indian youth, contributing culturally relevant insights to positive psychology and resilience models. Mental health professionals are encouraged to integrate techniques fostering a quiet ego and non-attachment in stress, adversity, and trauma interventions, including cognitive-behavioral therapy. These approaches facilitate healthier perspectives on loss and grief in counseling, aligning with culturally sensitive resilience methodologies and deviating from conventional biomedical and pharmacological stress management approaches (Smith et al., 2020).

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

This study’s constraints involve a narrow sample, predominantly comprising 20-year-old urban bachelor’s degree seekers from New Delhi, employing a cross-sectional design. Subsequent research should embrace longitudinal approaches, integrate probability sampling to enhance generalizability, diversify demographics for comprehensive insights, and incorporate qualitative methodologies. To deepen comprehension, future investigations could delve into mediating and moderating variables within the intricate dynamics of quiet ego, non-attachment, and resilience, employing advanced analytical techniques such as path model analysis to unravel nuanced relationships and foster a more holistic understanding.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors thank UX Lab and Prof. Jyoti Kumar for his invaluable support and guidance throughout our research project. Our heartfelt gratitude to IIT Delhi and Indraprastha College for Women Delhi for the support that helped make the writing of this paper possible.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

ETHICS STATEMENT

Approval was obtained from the Institute Ethics Committee of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi (IEC-IITD; Proposal No. P021/P0101).

REFERENCES

1. American Psychological Association. (2023). Dictionary of Psychology. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/resilience
2. Asanga. (1950). Abhidharmasamuccaya (Pralhad Pradhan, Ed.). Santiniketan, India: Visva Bharati. (Original work published 4th to 5th century BCE)
3. Bauer, J. J., & Bonanno, G. A. (2001). Doing and being well (for the most part): Adaptive patterns of narrative self-evaluation during bereavement. Journal of Personality, 69, 451–482.
4. Bauer, J. J. (2008). How the ego quiets as it grows: Ego development, growth stories, and eudaimonic personality development.
5. Bauer, J. J., & Wayment, H. A. (2008). The psychology of the quiet ego.
6. Bauer, J. J. (2008). How the ego quiets as it grows: Ego development, growth stories, and eudaimonic personality development.
7. Biegel, G. M., Brown, K. W., Shapiro, S. L., & Schubert, C. M. (2009). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for the treatment of adolescent psychiatric outpatients: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(5), 855-866. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016241
8. Bishop SR, Lau M, Shapiro S, Carlson L, Anderson ND, Carmody J, et al. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. (2004) 11:230–41. doi: 10.1093/clipsy.bph077
9. Bowlby, J. (1979). The Bowlby-Ainsworth attachment theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(4), 637- 638.
10. Branney, P., & White, A. (2008). Big boys don’t cry: Depression and men. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 14(4), 256-262.
11. Brown, K. W. (2020). Five facets of mindfulness and psychological health: Evaluating a psychological model of the mechanisms of mindfulness. Assessing Mindfulness and Acceptance Processes in Clients, 27-49.
12. Castro, F. G., & Murray, K. E. (2010). Cultural adaptation and resilience. Handbook of adult resilience, 375-403.
13. Celiento, S. (2015). Working with Anxiety: An Essay on Mindfulness and Psychology.
14. Chua, J. H., Cheng, C. K. T., Cheng, L. J., Ang, W. H. D., & Lau, Y. (2023). Global prevalence of resilience in higher education students: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Current Psychology, 42(26), 22645-22663.
15. Davis, L. (2013). Mindfulness, non-attachment, and other Buddhist virtues.
16. Desbordes, G., Gard, T., Hoge, E. A., Hölzel, B. K., Kerr, C., Lazar, S. W., & Vago, D. R. (2015). Moving beyond mindfulness: defining equanimity as an outcome measure in meditation and contemplative research. Mindfulness, 6(2), 356-372.
17. Fernando, R. K. (2006). A good woman: silencing the self, rumination, and depression in romantic relationships (Doctoral dissertation, University of Otago).
18. Fresco DM, Segal ZV, Buis T, Kennedy S. Relationship of posttreatment decentering and cognitive reactivity to relapse in major depression. J Consult Clin Psychol. (2007) 75:447–55. doi: 10.1037/0022- 006X.75.3.447
19. Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2020). Companion to Applied Regression. [R package]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=car.
20. Grabovac, A. D., Lau, M. A., Willett, B. R. (2011). Mechanisms of mindfulness: A Buddhist psychological model. Springer Science Business Media. Published online. doi: 10.1007/s12671- 011- 0054-5.
21. Gupta, K. & Agrawal, J. (2022). An empirical study of ancient wisdom. Effect of Anasakti (Non-Attachment) and Ahamkara (Ego) on well-being amongst Indians. European Journal of Mental Health, 17(3), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.5708/EJMH.17.2022.3.6
22. Hartman, D., & Zimberoff, D. (2008). Higher Stages of Human Development. Journal of Heart-Centered Therapies, 11(2).
23. Hirani, S., Lasiuk, G., & Hegadoren, K. (2016). The intersection of gender and resilience. Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing.
24. Ho, C. Y., Ben, C. L., & Mak, W. W. (2022). Nonattachment mediates the associations between mindfulness, well-being, and psychological distress: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Clinical Psychology Review, 95, 102175.
25. Huey, L. S. (2013). Lesson behind the Tortoise and the Hare: Quiet Ego as Mediator between Mindfulness and Human Flourishing (Doctoral dissertation, Help University).
26. Jacob, J. M., & Sudhamayi. (2020). The relation between quiet ego and self-consciousness among emerging adults in India. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.25215/0801.080
27. Jamovi – open statistical software for the desktop and cloud. (n.d.). https://www.jamovi.org./
28. Kalia, M. (2002). Assessing the economic impact of stress [mdash] The modern-day hidden epidemic. Metabolism-clinical and experimental, 51(6), 49-53.
29. Keng, S. L., Smoski, M. J., & Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of mindfulness on psychological health: A review of empirical studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(6), 1041-1056.
30. Leary, M. R. (2004). The curse of the self: Self-awareness, egotism, and the quality of life. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
31. Leary, M. R., Twenge, J. M., & Quinlivan, E. (2006). Interpersonal Rejection as a Determinant of Anger and Aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(2), 111-132. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_2
32. Lomas, T. (2016). The positive power of negative emotions: How harnessing your darker feelings can help you see a brighter dawn. Hachette UK.
33. Mak, W. W., Ng, S. M., & Yu, B. C. (2023). Nonattachment is Associated with Positive Belief in Humanity and Life and Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Mindfulness, 14(11), 2617-2625.
34. Mealer, M., Jones, J., & Moss, M. (2012). A qualitative study of resilience and posttraumatic stress disorder in United States ICU nurses. Intensive care medicine, 38, 1445-1451.
35. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York, NY: Guilford.
36. Misra, G., & Mishra, I. (2022). Selfhood and Pathways to Well-being: Some Indian Perspectives. Mind and Society, 11(03), 9-16.
37. Modica, T. M. (2019). Promoting the Cultivation of Resilience Resources for Foster Children during the Transitions in Foster Care and Beyond (Doctoral dissertation, Azusa Pacific University).
38. Montero-Marin, J., Puebla-Guedea, M., Herrera-Mercadal, P., Cebolla, A., Soler, J., Demarzo, M., … & García-Campayo, J. (2016). Psychological effects of a 1-month meditation retreat on experienced meditators: the role of non-attachment. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1935.
39. Mor, N., & Winquist, J. (2002). Self-focused attention and negative affect: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 638-662.
40. Mukundananda, S. (n.d.). Chapter 5, Verse 21 – Bhagavad Gita, The Song of God – Swami Mukundananda. Bhagavad Gita – the Song of God, by Swami Mukundananda. https://www.holy- bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/5/verse/21
41. Munoz, R. T., Brady, S., & Brown, V. (2017). The psychology of resilience: A model of the relationship of locus of control to hope among survivors of intimate partner violence. Traumatology, 23(1), 102.
42. Murray, G., Judd, F., Jackson, H., Fraser, C., Komiti, A., Pattison, P., … & Robins, G. (2008). Big boys don’t cry: An investigation of stoicism and its mental health outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(6), 1369-1381.
43. Naidu, R. K., & Roseman, I. (1992). Data on anasakti. Unpublished report, University Of Allahabad, Allahabad.
44. Naseem, S., & Munaf, S. (2020). Resilience and aggression of adolescents, early and middle-aged adults: Analyzing gender differences. Pakistan Journal of Gender Studies, 20(1), 155-172.
45. Neff, K. D., & McGehee, P. (2010). Self-compassion and psychological resilience among adolescents and young adults. Self and identity, 9(3), 225-240.
46. Ozbay, F., Johnson, D. C., Dimoulas, E., Morgan Iii, C. A., Charney, D., & Southwick, S. (2007). Social support and resilience to stress: from neurobiology to clinical practice. Psychiatry (Edgmont), 4(5), 35.
47. Pande, N., & Naidu, R. K. (1992). Anāsakti and health: A study of non-attachment. Psychology and Developing Societies, 4(1), 89-104.
48. R Core Team (2021). R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. (Version 4.1) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org. (R packages retrieved from MRAN snapshot 2022- 01-01).
49. Rajeev, A., & Hebbani, S. (2020). Anasakti and resilience in older adults in south India: a correlation study. International Journal of Indian Psychȯlogy, 8(4).
50. Rodriguez-Llanes, J. M., Vos, F., & Guha-Sapir, D. (2013). Measuring psychological resilience to disasters: are evidence-based indicators an achievable goal?. Environmental Health, 12(1), 1-10.
51. Sahdra, B. K., Shaver, P. R., & Brown, K. W. (2010). A scale to measure nonattachment: A Buddhist complement to Western research on attachment and adaptive functioning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(2), 116-127.
52. Sahdra, B., Ciarrochi, J., Parker, P., Marshall, S., & Heaven, P. (2015). Empathy and nonattachment independently predict peer nominations of prosocial behavior of adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. 1-.3389/fpsyg.2015.00263.
53. Sahdra, B., Ciarrochi, J., & Parker, P. (2016). Nonattachment and Mindfulness: Related but Distinct Constructs. Psychological Assessment, 28(7), 819-829 https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000264
54. Shi, M., Liu, L., Wang, Z. Y., & Wang, L. (2015). The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between big five personality and anxiety among Chinese medical students: a cross-sectional study. PloS one, 10(3), e0119916.
55. Singh, K., & Raina, M. (2015). Development and validation of a test on Anasakti (non-attachment): An Indian model of well-being. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 18(9), 715-725.
56. Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2001). Handbook of positive psychology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
57. Soler, Montero-Marin, J., Domínguez-Clavé, E., González, S., Pascual, J. C., Cebolla, A., Demarzo, M., Analayo, B., & García-Campayo, J. (2021). Decentering, Acceptance, and Non-Attachment: Challenging the Question “Is It Me?” Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 659835–659835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.659835
58. Swann Jr, W. B. (2012). Self-verification theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, ed.
59. Tayal, N., Priya, M., & Sharma, N. (2020). Ahamkara and health: an empirical review. Journal of Indian.
60. Tho, P. T. (2023). The Process of Innovation Mindfulness Practice (IMP) on the Burnout of Adulthood in Hanoi (Doctoral dissertation, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University).
61. Timmers, M., Fischer, A. H., & Manstead, A. S. (1998). Gender differences in motives for regulating emotions. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 24(9), 974-985.
62. Vogel, D. L., Heimerdinger-Edwards, S. R., Hammer, J. H., & Hubbard, A. (2011). “Boys don’t cry”: Examination of the links between endorsement of masculine norms, self-stigma, and help-seeking attitudes for men from diverse backgrounds. Journal of counseling psychology, 58(3), 368.
63. Wagstaff, G. F., & Rowledge, A. M. (1995). Stoicism: Its relation to gender, attitudes toward poverty, and reactions to emotive material. The Journal of social psychology, 135(2), 181-184.
64. Wagnild GM, Young HM. Development and psychometric evaluation of the Resilience Scale. J Nurs Meas. 1993;1:165–178.
65. Wang, S., Wong Y. J., & Yeh K. (2016). Relationship harmony, dialectical coping, and nonattachment: Chinese indigenous well-being and mental health. The Counseling Psychologist, 44, 78-108.
66. Wayment, H. A., & Bauer, J. J. (2008). Transcending self-interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego. In H. A. Wayment & J. J. Bauer (Eds.), Transcending self-interest: Psychological explorations of the quiet ego (pp. 3-17). American Psychological Association.
67. Wayment, H. A., & Bauer, J. J. (2014). The quiet ego scale: Measuring the compassionate self-identity. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(1), 302-322
68. Wayment, H. A., Bauer, J. J., & Sylaska, K. (2015). The quiet ego scale: Measuring the compassionate self-identity. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 999-1033.
69. Wayment, H. A., West, T. N., & Craddock, E. B. (2016). Compassionate values as a resource during the transition to college: Quiet ego, compassionate goals, and self-compassion. Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 28(2), 93-114.
70. Wayment, H. A., Huffman, A. H., & Irving, L. H. (2018). Self-rated health among unemployed adults: The role of quiet ego, self-compassion, and post-traumatic growth. Occupational Health Science, 2, 247-267.
71. Wayment, H. A., Huffman, A. H., & Eiler, B. A. (2019). A brief “quiet ego” workplace intervention to reduce compassion fatigue and improve health in hospital healthcare workers. Applied Nursing Research: ANR, 49, 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2019.05.002
72. Wayment, H. A., & Cavolo, K. (2019). Quiet ego, self-regulatory skills, and perceived stress in college students. Journal of American College Health, 67(2), 92-96.
73. Wayment, H. A., & Silver, R. C. (2021). Grief and solidarity reactions 1 week after an on-campus shooting. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(5-6), NP2423-NP2442.
74. Weare, K., & Nind, M. (2011). Mental health promotion and problem prevention in schools: What does the evidence say? Health Promotion International, 26(Suppl 1), i29-i69. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dar075
75. Zahid, N., Zahid, W., Khalid, W., Azam, I., Ikram, M., Hassan, A., … & Ahmad, K. (2021). Resilience and its associated factors in head and neck cancer patients in Pakistan: an analytical cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer, 21(1), 888.
76. Zwack, J., & Schweitzer, J. (2013). If every fifth physician is affected by burnout, what about the other four? Resilience strategies of experienced physicians. Academic medicine : Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 88(3), 382–389. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318281696b