Within the expansive landscape of Eastern philosophy, Brahman, a cornerstone of the Upanishads, represents the ultimate, unchanging reality. The exploration of brahman in buddhism reveals a fascinating divergence, particularly when contrasted with the teachings of Gautama Buddha and the core Buddhist doctrine of anatta, or non-self. This concept directly challenges the notion of an eternal, individual essence, a challenge further emphasized within various Theravada and Mahayana schools of Buddhism, which assert the impermanence of all phenomena.
Unveiling the Philosophical Tapestry of Hinduism and Buddhism
Hinduism and Buddhism stand as two of the most profound and influential philosophical and religious traditions to have emerged from the Indian subcontinent. Rooted in shared cultural and historical soil, they have, over millennia, branched into distinct yet interconnected systems of thought and practice.
They have shaped not only the spiritual landscape of Asia but also increasingly resonated with seekers and scholars across the globe.
This exploration aims to comparatively analyze key concepts within Hinduism and Buddhism.
The focus will be on their perspectives concerning ultimate reality, the nature of the self, the pathways to liberation, and the very methods they employ to understand these profound concepts.
By juxtaposing these elements, we seek to illuminate the unique contributions of each tradition.
Additionally, this comparison will offer insights into the broader human quest for meaning, truth, and transcendence.
The Indian Philosophical Landscape
Both Hinduism and Buddhism arose in a vibrant intellectual climate characterized by intense philosophical inquiry and diverse spiritual practices.
This shared context is crucial for understanding their initial points of convergence and their subsequent divergences.
Hinduism, often considered the older tradition, evolved gradually from the Vedic period, assimilating various indigenous beliefs and practices.
Buddhism, in contrast, emerged in the 6th century BCE as a distinct reform movement challenging certain aspects of prevailing Hindu thought.
Purpose and Scope of Comparative Analysis
The purpose of this outline is to provide a structured framework for understanding the core philosophical tenets of Hinduism and Buddhism.
It emphasizes comparative analysis, highlighting both common ground and critical differences.
This comparative approach allows us to appreciate the distinctive character of each tradition more clearly.
By examining their respective views on reality, the self, and liberation, we can gain a deeper understanding of their underlying assumptions and their implications for ethical conduct and spiritual practice.
Moreover, by exploring their methodologies for understanding these concepts, we can appreciate the diverse ways in which each tradition engages with the fundamental questions of human existence.
Brahman vs. Anatta: Contrasting Views of Ultimate Reality
[Unveiling the Philosophical Tapestry of Hinduism and Buddhism
Hinduism and Buddhism stand as two of the most profound and influential philosophical and religious traditions to have emerged from the Indian subcontinent. Rooted in shared cultural and historical soil, they have, over millennia, branched into distinct yet interconnected systems of thought…]
At the heart of the philosophical divergence between Hinduism and Buddhism lies their fundamentally different conceptualizations of ultimate reality. Hinduism, particularly through the lens of Vedanta, posits the existence of Brahman, an all-encompassing, eternal, and unchanging reality. Conversely, Buddhism, in its core teachings, introduces the concept of Anatta (Anatman), the doctrine of "no-self," which challenges the notion of a permanent, individual essence. This section delves into these contrasting viewpoints, exploring their metaphysical underpinnings and implications.
Brahman: The Absolute Reality in Hinduism
Within the vast spectrum of Hindu thought, the concept of Brahman holds a central position. Brahman represents the ultimate ground of being, the source from which all existence emanates and to which it eventually returns. The Upanishads, foundational texts of Vedanta, describe Brahman as the immutable and infinite reality, transcending all limitations of space, time, and causality.
Advaita Vedanta and Shankara’s Interpretation
The Advaita Vedanta school, championed by the influential philosopher Shankara, presents a non-dualistic understanding of Brahman. According to Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is the sole reality, and the perceived diversity of the world is ultimately an illusion (Maya) arising from ignorance (Avidya).
Shankara meticulously systematized this interpretation, emphasizing the oneness of Atman (the individual self) with Brahman. His commentaries on key Hindu scriptures, such as the Brahma Sutras, serve as cornerstones of Advaita Vedanta, elucidating the path to self-realization through the dispelling of ignorance and the recognition of the Atman-Brahman identity.
Anatta: The Buddhist Doctrine of "No-Self"
In stark contrast to the Hindu concept of a permanent, underlying self (Atman), Buddhism introduces the doctrine of Anatta, or "no-self." This doctrine asserts that there is no enduring, unchanging essence or soul within an individual.
Instead, what we perceive as the "self" is merely a temporary aggregation of constantly changing physical and mental constituents, known as the Five Aggregates (Skandhas): form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness.
Anatta vs. Atman: A Fundamental Divergence
The contrast between Anatta and Atman represents a profound philosophical divergence. While Hinduism posits the existence of a true self that is ultimately identical to Brahman, Buddhism denies any such permanent entity.
This denial is not nihilistic; rather, it is intended to dismantle the illusion of a fixed self, which is seen as the root cause of suffering and attachment. By understanding the impermanent and interconnected nature of existence, one can loosen the grip of ego and progress towards liberation.
Ethical and Soteriological Implications
The differing views on ultimate reality significantly shape the ethical and soteriological frameworks of Hinduism and Buddhism. In Hinduism, the realization of Atman’s identity with Brahman leads to Moksha, liberation from the cycle of rebirth, achieved through knowledge, devotion, and righteous action.
The ethical implications are rooted in the understanding that all beings are interconnected through Brahman.
In Buddhism, the understanding of Anatta leads to Nirvana, the cessation of suffering, achieved through the cultivation of wisdom, compassion, and ethical conduct.
The emphasis on compassion stems from the recognition that all beings are subject to suffering due to their attachment to the illusion of a permanent self. Thus, the contrasting metaphysical foundations of Brahman and Anatta give rise to distinct yet equally profound pathways to ethical living and spiritual liberation.
The Self: Atman and the Five Aggregates
Having explored the distinct conceptions of ultimate reality in Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus now shifts to the nature of the self, a pivotal concept where their philosophical divergences become particularly apparent. While Hinduism posits the existence of an enduring individual self, Atman, intrinsically linked to the universal Brahman, Buddhism fundamentally challenges this notion with its doctrine of Anatta, or "no-self," emphasizing the impermanent and composite nature of existence.
Atman: The Enduring Self in Hinduism
In Hindu philosophy, particularly within the Vedanta schools, Atman represents the individual self or soul. It is not merely a temporary construct but an eternal and unchanging essence that resides within each being.
The Upanishads are replete with discussions on Atman, portraying it as being of the same nature as Brahman, the ultimate reality. This implies that the individual self is, in its deepest essence, identical to the cosmic principle that underlies all existence.
The Relationship Between Atman and Brahman
The relationship between Atman and Brahman is central to understanding the Hindu concept of the self. Advaita Vedanta, as systematized by Shankara, asserts the non-duality of Atman and Brahman. This means that the apparent distinction between the individual self and the ultimate reality is ultimately an illusion (Maya).
Realization of this non-duality is the key to liberation (Moksha). Through practices such as Jnana Yoga (the path of knowledge), individuals can transcend the illusion of separateness and recognize their true nature as Brahman.
Self-Realization: Recognizing the Identity
Self-realization in Hinduism is the process of directly experiencing the identity between Atman and Brahman. This is not merely an intellectual understanding, but a profound experiential realization that transforms one’s perception of reality.
It entails dismantling the ego and the sense of individual selfhood, allowing the inherent unity of all things to shine through.
The Five Aggregates (Skandhas): Buddhism’s Deconstruction of the Self
In stark contrast to the Hindu concept of Atman, Buddhism proposes the doctrine of Anatta, which denies the existence of a permanent, independent self. Instead, Buddhism posits that what we perceive as the "self" is merely a composite of five aggregates, known as Skandhas.
These aggregates are:
- Rupa (Form): The physical body and material aspects.
- Vedana (Sensation): Feelings and sensations, both pleasant and unpleasant.
- Sanna (Perception): The process of recognizing and identifying objects.
- Sankhara (Mental Formations): Thoughts, emotions, intentions, and volitional activities.
- Vijnana (Consciousness): Awareness and sensory consciousness.
The Impermanent Nature of the Self
According to Buddhist philosophy, these five aggregates are constantly changing and impermanent. There is no fixed or enduring entity that remains constant throughout life.
The illusion of a permanent self arises from our clinging to these aggregates and identifying with them as "I" or "mine." This clinging is the root of suffering, according to the Four Noble Truths.
Anatta and the Cessation of Suffering
By understanding the impermanent and composite nature of the self, one can begin to loosen the grip of attachment and aversion that fuels suffering. The practice of mindfulness and meditation is essential for cultivating this understanding and directly experiencing the Anatta.
Ultimately, the goal is to transcend the illusion of self and realize Nirvana, a state of liberation from suffering and the cycle of rebirth. The realization of Anatta is essential to reaching such a destination.
Emptiness and Interdependence: Sunyata and Pratītyasamutpāda in Buddhism
Having explored the distinct conceptions of ultimate reality in Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus now shifts to key Buddhist concepts that illuminate the nature of reality. Sunyata (Emptiness) and Pratītyasamutpāda (Dependent Origination) are fundamental to understanding the Buddhist worldview, offering profound insights into the interconnected and impermanent nature of existence.
Sunyata: The Absence of Inherent Existence
Sunyata, often translated as "emptiness" or "voidness," is a complex concept central to Mahayana Buddhism, particularly the Madhyamaka school founded by Nagarjuna. It is not a nihilistic assertion of non-existence, but rather a radical declaration that all phenomena lack inherent, independent existence.
Essentially, Sunyata suggests that things do not exist svabhava, that is, by their own intrinsic nature. Instead, their existence is contingent and relational. This means that any object, concept, or even self is empty of an unchanging, self-sufficient essence.
This understanding challenges our conventional way of perceiving the world, which tends to solidify and reify things as having fixed identities. By recognizing the emptiness of inherent existence, one can begin to dismantle the attachments and aversions that fuel suffering.
Implications of Emptiness
The implications of Sunyata are far-reaching. If nothing exists inherently, then our fixed notions of self, other, good, and bad are ultimately constructs of our minds.
Recognizing this allows for a more flexible and compassionate approach to life. It also dissolves the basis for clinging and grasping, leading to a profound sense of freedom.
Moreover, Sunyata emphasizes the interconnectedness of all things. Since nothing exists independently, everything is related to everything else. This understanding leads directly into the concept of Dependent Origination.
Pratītyasamutpāda: The Web of Interconnectedness
Pratītyasamutpāda, often translated as "Dependent Origination" or "Interdependent Arising," is the principle that all phenomena arise in dependence upon other phenomena. It is a cornerstone of Buddhist philosophy, articulating the causal interconnectedness of all things.
It posits that nothing arises in isolation; rather, everything is the result of a complex web of causes and conditions. This interconnectedness extends not only to physical phenomena but also to mental and emotional states.
Think of a plant. Its existence depends on sunlight, water, soil, and a host of other factors. Remove any of these conditions, and the plant ceases to exist. Similarly, every aspect of our lives is intricately linked to countless other factors.
Understanding Causality and Conditionality
Pratītyasamutpāda highlights the importance of understanding causality. Actions have consequences, and these consequences, in turn, become causes for future events.
This understanding emphasizes the power of our choices and the importance of cultivating wholesome actions. Furthermore, it highlights the role of conditions.
Even with the right causes, favorable conditions are necessary for things to arise. This underscores the importance of creating environments that support well-being and compassion.
The Interplay of Sunyata and Pratītyasamutpāda
Sunyata and Pratītyasamutpāda are not contradictory but complementary concepts. Sunyata explains how things can be interconnected and interdependent. Because phenomena lack inherent existence, they are free to arise in dependence on other phenomena.
In other words, if things had fixed, independent natures, they would be unable to change or interact with each other. It is precisely because they are empty of inherent existence that they are able to participate in the dynamic web of Dependent Origination.
Together, Sunyata and Pratītyasamutpāda offer a profound understanding of the nature of reality, emphasizing the interconnectedness, impermanence, and ultimately, the emptiness of all things. Grasping these concepts provides a powerful foundation for cultivating wisdom and compassion, leading towards liberation from suffering.
Paths to Liberation: Nirvana vs. Moksha
Having explored the distinct conceptions of ultimate reality in Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus now shifts to the ultimate goals of each tradition: Nirvana in Buddhism and Moksha in Hinduism. While both concepts represent forms of liberation from the cycle of rebirth and suffering, they differ significantly in their philosophical underpinnings and the paths prescribed for their attainment. This section will delve into these differences, examining the nuances of each concept and their respective implications.
Nirvana: Extinguishing Suffering in Buddhism
Nirvana, in Buddhism, signifies the extinction of suffering (dukkha) and the cessation of the cycle of rebirth (samsara). It is a state of profound peace and liberation achieved through the eradication of craving, aversion, and ignorance – the root causes of suffering.
The term "Nirvana" literally means "to extinguish" or "to cool down," implying the extinguishing of the fires of greed, hatred, and delusion.
The attainment of Nirvana is not a annihilation, but rather a transformation of consciousness, leading to a state beyond description or conceptualization.
Theravada Perspective on Nirvana
In Theravada Buddhism, Nirvana is primarily understood as the ultimate goal for individual practitioners. It is the cessation of suffering for the individual who achieves it.
The focus is on personal liberation through practices such as mindfulness, meditation, and adherence to the Eightfold Path.
The Arhat, a fully enlightened being in Theravada, attains Nirvana upon death, ending the cycle of rebirth.
Mahayana Perspective on Nirvana
Mahayana Buddhism expands on the concept of Nirvana. It emphasizes the Bodhisattva ideal, where practitioners postpone their own Nirvana to help others achieve enlightenment.
Mahayana introduces the concept of emptiness (sunyata), suggesting that all phenomena, including Nirvana, are devoid of inherent existence. This means that Nirvana is not a separate, independent state, but rather an understanding of the true nature of reality.
Mahayana emphasizes that Nirvana and Samsara (the cycle of rebirth) are not fundamentally different. Recognizing the emptiness of both allows one to act compassionately within the world while remaining free from attachment.
Moksha: Liberation and Union in Hinduism
Moksha, in Hinduism, refers to liberation from the cycle of rebirth (samsara) and union with the ultimate reality, Brahman. It is the transcendence of individual existence and the realization of one’s true nature.
Unlike Nirvana, which focuses on the cessation of suffering, Moksha often emphasizes the realization of the true self (Atman) and its identity with Brahman.
Moksha is seen as the ultimate goal of human life, and it can be attained through various paths, known as Yogas.
The Paths to Moksha
Hinduism provides different paths, or yogas, to attain Moksha, catering to various temperaments and inclinations:
Karma Yoga
Karma Yoga, the path of action, involves performing one’s duties without attachment to the results. Selfless service and ethical conduct are key components.
Bhakti Yoga
Bhakti Yoga, the path of devotion, emphasizes love and devotion to a chosen deity. Surrender and emotional connection are central to this path.
Jnana Yoga
Jnana Yoga, the path of knowledge, involves the intellectual pursuit of truth through study, reflection, and contemplation. Discernment between the real and the unreal is crucial.
The Role of Knowledge in Moksha
Knowledge, particularly as presented in the Upanishads and systematized in Vedanta philosophy, plays a significant role in achieving Moksha. Advaita Vedanta emphasizes the non-dualistic nature of reality, asserting the oneness of Atman and Brahman.
Through self-inquiry and contemplation, one can realize this unity and transcend the illusion of separateness, leading to Moksha. The knowledge of the identity between Atman and Brahman is not simply intellectual understanding but transformative realization.
Contrasting Nirvana and Moksha
While both Nirvana and Moksha represent liberation, their underlying philosophies differ. Nirvana focuses on the cessation of suffering through the extinction of craving and ignorance, whereas Moksha emphasizes union with the ultimate reality through self-realization.
Buddhism, with its doctrine of Anatta (no-self), denies the existence of a permanent, unchanging self.
Hinduism, particularly Advaita Vedanta, posits the existence of Atman, which is ultimately identical to Brahman.
The paths to liberation also differ. Buddhism emphasizes the Eightfold Path, including ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom. Hinduism offers various yogas tailored to individual preferences and inclinations.
Ultimately, both Nirvana and Moksha represent profound spiritual achievements, offering paths to transcend the limitations of human existence and realize ultimate freedom and peace. Their differences reflect the diverse philosophical landscapes of ancient India, each providing unique insights into the nature of reality and the path to liberation.
Key Philosophical Schools: Advaita Vedanta and Madhyamaka
Having explored the distinct conceptions of ultimate reality in Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus now shifts to two highly influential schools of thought: Advaita Vedanta within Hinduism and Madhyamaka within Buddhism. While rooted in different metaphysical frameworks, both schools offer profound insights into the nature of reality and the path to liberation. This section will analyze the core tenets of each school, highlighting their key contributions and distinguishing features.
Advaita Vedanta: The Doctrine of Non-Duality
Advaita Vedanta, often translated as "non-dualism," is arguably the most influential school of Vedanta, a major tradition within Hinduism. Its central tenet is the absolute oneness of Brahman, the ultimate reality, and Atman, the individual self.
This school posits that the perceived multiplicity of the world is an illusion (Maya) arising from ignorance (Avidya). True knowledge (Jnana) consists in realizing the identity of Atman and Brahman, thereby dispelling the illusion of separateness and attaining liberation (Moksha).
The Role of Shankara
Shankara (Adi Shankaracharya), an 8th-century philosopher and theologian, is widely regarded as the systematizer of Advaita Vedanta. Through his extensive writings and commentaries, Shankara provided a rigorous philosophical foundation for the doctrine of non-duality.
He argued that Brahman is the sole reality, devoid of any attributes or distinctions (Nirguna Brahman). The world, with its apparent diversity, is merely a superimposition on Brahman, like a mirage in the desert.
Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta provides a compelling vision of reality as an undifferentiated, eternal, and blissful consciousness. His teachings have profoundly influenced Hindu thought and continue to inspire spiritual seekers today.
Analysis of Shankara’s Commentaries
Shankara’s commentaries on the Prasthanatrayi—the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras, and the Bhagavad Gita—are central to understanding Advaita Vedanta. In these commentaries, Shankara meticulously analyzes key scriptural passages to demonstrate their consistency with the doctrine of non-duality.
He employs a variety of hermeneutical techniques, including distinguishing between higher knowledge (Para Vidya), which reveals the true nature of Brahman, and lower knowledge (Apara Vidya), which deals with the empirical world. Shankara’s commentaries are not merely interpretations of scripture; they are rigorous philosophical arguments that systematically defend the Advaita position.
Madhyamaka: The Middle Way of Emptiness
In contrast to Advaita Vedanta’s emphasis on a singular, ultimate reality, the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism, founded by Nagarjuna in the 2nd century CE, emphasizes the emptiness (Sunyata) of all phenomena. Madhyamaka, also known as the "Middle Way," rejects both substantialism (the belief in inherent existence) and nihilism (the denial of all existence).
Instead, it argues that all things are devoid of intrinsic nature or self-existence. They exist only in relation to other things, arising from causes and conditions.
Nagarjuna’s Critique of Inherent Existence
Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way) is the foundational text of the Madhyamaka school. In this work, Nagarjuna systematically refutes various philosophical positions, demonstrating the logical inconsistencies of asserting inherent existence.
He employs a method of reductio ad absurdum (prasangika), showing that any attempt to define or characterize reality ultimately leads to self-contradiction. By demonstrating the emptiness of all concepts and categories, Nagarjuna aims to liberate beings from attachment to fixed views and pave the way for enlightenment.
The concept of emptiness is not to be understood as nihilistic void, but rather as the absence of inherent, independent existence. All phenomena arise dependently, are interconnected, and are constantly changing.
This understanding of emptiness can lead to a profound sense of liberation from clinging and grasping, allowing one to experience the world with greater clarity and compassion.
Methodological Approaches to Understanding
Having explored the distinct conceptions of ultimate reality in Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus now shifts to the methods employed to understand these intricate philosophical concepts. Examining these traditions necessitates a multifaceted approach, encompassing textual analysis, comparative philosophy, and meditative practices. Each methodology provides unique insights into the core tenets of Hinduism and Buddhism, fostering a deeper appreciation of their respective worldviews.
Textual Analysis: Deciphering Sacred Scriptures
Textual analysis forms the bedrock of understanding both Hindu and Buddhist philosophies. Sacred scriptures serve as primary sources, containing profound insights into metaphysics, ethics, and soteriology.
The Hindu Tradition: Unveiling the Upanishads and Brahma Sutras
Within Hinduism, the Upanishads hold immense philosophical significance. These texts, forming the concluding sections of the Vedas, delve into the nature of Brahman, Atman, and the relationship between the individual self and ultimate reality. Careful examination of key Upanishads, such as the Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka, reveals diverse perspectives on these fundamental concepts.
The Brahma Sutras, also known as the Vedanta Sutras, systematically present the philosophical teachings of the Upanishads. Composed by Badarayana, these sutras offer concise yet profound statements that require careful interpretation. Commentaries on the Brahma Sutras by various scholars, including Adi Shankaracharya, provide diverse interpretations of Vedanta philosophy.
The Buddhist Tradition: Exploring the Pali Canon and Mahayana Sutras
In Buddhism, the Pali Canon (Tipitaka) serves as the foundational text for Theravada Buddhism. This collection of scriptures contains the teachings of the Buddha, including the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. Analyzing the Suttas (discourses) within the Pali Canon provides insights into the Buddhist understanding of suffering, impermanence, and the path to liberation.
Mahayana Buddhism relies on a vast array of sutras, including the Heart Sutra and the Diamond Sutra. These sutras explore concepts such as emptiness (sunyata) and the nature of reality. Examining these texts provides insights into the Mahayana perspective on the bodhisattva ideal and the path to enlightenment.
Comparative Philosophy: Bridging Divergent Perspectives
Comparative philosophy plays a crucial role in understanding the similarities and differences between Hindu and Buddhist concepts. By juxtaposing these traditions, we can gain a more nuanced appreciation of their respective strengths and limitations.
Identifying Commonalities and Divergences
Comparative analysis reveals both shared ground and significant divergences. For instance, both traditions emphasize the importance of ethical conduct and the cultivation of wisdom. However, their metaphysical frameworks differ substantially, particularly regarding the nature of the self and ultimate reality.
Fostering Cross-Cultural Understanding
By engaging in comparative philosophy, we can foster cross-cultural understanding and bridge the gap between different worldviews. This approach encourages critical reflection on our own assumptions and biases, allowing us to appreciate the richness and complexity of human thought.
Avoiding Oversimplification
When comparing Hinduism and Buddhism, it is essential to avoid oversimplification. Both traditions encompass a wide range of schools and interpretations, each with its unique nuances. A thorough understanding requires careful attention to historical context and intellectual diversity. Nuance is key.
Frequently Asked Questions: Brahman in Buddhism
Does Buddhism accept the concept of Brahman as the ultimate reality?
No, Buddhism fundamentally rejects the concept of Brahman as presented in some Hindu traditions, particularly the notion of an eternal, unchanging, absolute self. Buddhist philosophy centers around impermanence (anicca), non-self (anatta), and suffering (dukkha), directly contradicting the idea of a permanent, blissful brahman.
How does Buddhism differ from Hinduism in its understanding of ultimate reality?
Hinduism often posits Brahman as the ultimate, unifying principle and source of everything, with the individual self (Atman) ultimately being identical to it. In contrast, Buddhism emphasizes the absence of a permanent self and focuses on achieving liberation through understanding impermanence and emptiness, without relying on a brahman-like concept. This divergence is a key distinction regarding brahman in buddhism.
What is the Buddhist alternative to the Hindu Brahman?
Instead of Brahman, Buddhism offers concepts like emptiness (sunyata) and dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) to explain reality. These emphasize the interconnectedness and impermanence of all phenomena. Nirvana represents liberation from suffering, achieved through understanding these principles, rather than merging with a divine entity or brahman.
Does Buddhism acknowledge the word "Brahma" at all?
Yes, but in Buddhism, "Brahma" refers to deities inhabiting celestial realms within the cycle of rebirth (samsara). These Brahma gods, although powerful and long-lived, are still subject to impermanence and are not equivalent to the Hindu concept of Brahman. These deities exist within the Buddhist cosmology but do not represent the ultimate reality as brahman in buddhism does in Hindu thought.
So, there you have it – a glimpse into how the concept of Brahman in Buddhism differs quite significantly from its Hindu counterpart. While both traditions explore the ultimate reality, they approach it with very different frameworks. It’s a fascinating contrast, and hopefully, this article has shed some light on the nuances of Brahman in Buddhism and how these two major religions understand the core of existence.
