Nietzsche mentions Schopenhauer in two separate sub-sections in his chapter on the religious character. In the first, he claims “This gruesome question—the mark of religious crisis and awakening still stands in the background of the newest arrival in philosophy (which is to say the Schopenhauerian philosophy), almost as the problem in itself. How is the negation of the will possible? How is the saint possible? This really seems to have been the question that started Schopenhauer off and made him into a philosopher”. Here Nietzsche seems to be condensing the works of Schopenhauer into a single question that is targeted at answering the question that he himself is attempting to answer. Although, it is not clear if this a fair or charitable condensing of Schopenhauer’s ideas. Is this an example of the student trying to overcome a question that proved impenetrable for his master? If so, we must explore the relationship between the two in greater detail. 
Much has been written about the relationship between Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and considering the influence that Schopenhauer is said to have on Nietzsche him being mentioned is no surprise. Scholar Grace Dolson asserts that “We have found no great similarity in their theories, and their interests were on the whole even more widely separated. Yet the relation between them was a real and important one. What seems especially to have attracted Nietzsche to Schopenhauer was radical independence of tradition and public opinion, and where he praises the latter's work it is usually for this freedom from outside influences". This account of their relationship lines up with the way that Nietzsche frames Schopenhauer’s philosophy within his own text. While Nietzsche does not seem to be overly critical of his contemporary’s philosophy, he also does not treat it as something worth exploring in greater depth and seems implicitly critical about its validity.  Schopenhauer’s presentation in this chapter aligns with Dolson view of the two’s relationship which she claims " was exactly the intellectual attitude that appealed most strongly to him. He controverted many of Schopenhauer's views with great bitterness, but he always recognized that there was an enemy worthy of him".   However, this still leaves us with the question, what aspect of Schopenhauer’s philosophy is Nietzsche railing against in this chapter? Hopefully, an exploration of Schopenhauer’s second appearance in this chapter will answer that question.       
Nietzsche mentions Schopenhauer in conjunction with a prominent religious figure when he says that “Anyone who has ever really looked with an Asiatic and supra-Asiatic eye into and down at the most world negating of all possible ways of thinking—beyond good and evil, and no longer, like Schopenhauer   and the Buddha, under the spell and delusion of morality—anyone  who has done these things… will have inadvertently opened his eyes to the inverse ideal; to the idea of the most high-spirited”.  A couple of things can be extrapolated from this passage. First, Dolson suggests that the parallel between the two is predicated on the fact that “For both, existence is the greatest of evils, involving all the others, and the saint is he who approaches most closely to the state of Nirvana". An assertion that seems in line with Nietzsche vision of Schopenhauer’s philosophy of negation and preoccupation of the negation of the saint. This passage seems critically important to both the chapter and the work as a whole since Nietzsche explicitly mentions the title of the entire work. Here, Nietzsche’s critique of Schopenhauer seems much more explicit, since he refers to him as delusional. However, this is complicated by the fact that Nietzsche still claims that both of these figures have seen beyond into the ideal of the most high-spirited. It is important to note that Nietzsche does not assert that this is a good thing, but simply accepts it as a consequence of action. While this parallel and Nietzsche’s earlier exploration into Schopenhauer’s philosophy seems more appropriate for this chapter, the mention of the Asiatic eye raises more questions about Nietzsche end goal. Questions that can better be explored in the section on sects and locations.
