Specifically, they are Nondualists. **NonDuality** is an emerging, yet ancient, spirituality that is drawing more and more spiritual seekers from religious traditions of all kinds. Additionally they attribute "pure consciousness" as belonging to the true self, which itslef is not a teaching in Buddhism. In my opinion, I could see how one might use different terminology for the same things, and I think there is probably (at the least) a ton of overlap in these things. The similarities have been interpreted as Buddhist influences on Advaita Vedanta, though some deny such influences, or see them as expressions of the same eternal truth. Or the Kaumudī, a famous Buddhist tantric commentary, states: Because of the absence of inherent existence, the nondual essence of all phenomena is emptiness. Questions, discussion, photos, art, poetry, videos - anything within the spirit of NonDuality. This comparison of the two traditions by Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche is quite thorough and well informed since he practiced both systems. However, based on my cursory view, there are two things that stand out is that they attribute a true self, this identification itself creates a self, where as in Buddhism is rejected. Gaudapada borrowed Madhyamaka terminology and philosophy (as well as that of Yogācāra / vijñapti-mātra / Representation Only) after having allegedly studied at a Madhyamika (Mahayana) Buddhist temple. People will say, 'but maybe THAT is myself' not seeing the folly in this thinking and clinging to the aggregates. If I ask the Vedantins they say the Self is pure consciousness that is the … I totally respect their school. So historically there is this first revelation in India, maybe 1,000 years BC, whatever. This is quite a dangerous position to take on the matter since it compromises the integrity of both systems. The most famous adherent of Advaita Vedanta was Adi Shankara - also referred to as Shankaracharya. Vedanta literally translates as “end of the Vedas”, and refers specifically to the Upanishads and the philosophies interpreting them. Thus, Shankara's Advaita Vedanta theory is not the same as Ramanuja's Vishishta Vedanta theory of the evolution of maya-illusion and living selves from brahman as transformations ( parinama ) of it. The purpose of this path is essentially to realize no-self, or suchness. Marsilio Ficino (1433–1499) argued that there is an underlying unity to the world, the soul or love, which has a counterpart in the realm of ideas. For example, the Tarkajvakla, a famous commentary on Nagarjuna 's MMK states: Therefore, that which is the inner earth element, that is is the external earth element, that is the meaning of nondual. If you go to 1:20 (1 hour 20) you will see him talking about testing theories of God and talking about Buddhism and what he learned from studying Buddhism. I am not fully familiar with Advaita Vedanta to a great extent, I have researched it a bit, in the light of the influence of Ramana Maharshi and other teachers like Mooji and his teacher Papaji who learned under Ramana. These quotes are not exhaustive, but they show that "nondual" in Buddhadharma is really quite different than Advaita. ~ Ludwig Wittgenstein, "Traktats Logico-Philosophicus" And that isn't to say one is better than the other, but that they are apples and oranges when properly understood. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsQAPIykUL0&t=2976s. Well, according to some Hindu scriptures, Vishnu emanated as Siddhartha Gautama in order to teach Vedanta to atheists. ; Advaita and Quantum Physics: A discussion on the relevance of Advaita in Quantum Physics. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, A reddit for all kinds of Buddhist teachings, Press J to jump to the feed. Its most famous historical exponent was Adi Shankara, who in the 7th century revived Hinduism in a Buddhism-dominated India, winning over several opponents in debate. The four Vedas end with what we call the Upanishads, which consist of the philosophical aspect of the Vedas. But in other traditions of Buddhism, there are more profound teachings than not-self. It also is understood, as Dzogchungpa point outed, as a consciousness devoid of subject and object, as the Ḍākinīvajrapañjara[-mahā]tantrarājasya pañjikā[-prathamapaṭala-]mukhabandha-nāma: One is a nondual consciousness. This fascinating and innovative book explores the relationship between the philosophical underpinnings of Advaita Vedanta, Zen Buddhism and the experiential journey of spiritual practitioners. But after learning about both systems I cannot say they are the same anymore. So it's saying that Buddhism is the wrong path, even though the Buddha is said to be Vishnu. Advaita is a non-dual tradition from India, with Advaita Vedanta, a branch of Hinduism, as its philosophical arm. I know a lot of people here have probably studied both philosophies and might not be as biased as other communities that's why I came here to see if anyone had good ideas or insights regarding this topic. I once heard a Christian tell me that very same thing! Is it just different ways of looking at the same thing? There also seem to be a theory that the uniqueness of Buddhism is that it attempt to even deconstruct this True Self/Pure Witness, with the insight and realization of 'Emptiness'. Buddhist non-dualism is not the same as Vedantic non-dualism. When that yogin dwells in the experience of nonconceptual discerning wisdom [prajñā] and experiences nonduality, at that time, ultimately, the entire reality of objects of knowledge are as follows, of the same characteristics, like space, appearing in the manner of a nonappearance since their characteristics are nonexistent, therefore, there isn't even the slightest thing that is not empty, so where could there be emptiness? They invented a whole lot of Puranic mythology to explain why Buddhism was neither superior nor ideal for liberation. The essential teaching is that Atman (Individual soul), is identical to Brahman (Cosmic soul). What even is non-dualism, it feels like a catch-all phrase these days to make any school of thought sound somehow more legit or transcendental, but it might just be me being ignorant though. Advaita Vedanta and Mahayana Buddhism share significant similarities. There is no one non-dual perspective. Advaita Philosophy: a concise explanation of the basics of Advaita Philosophy; Excerpts: Excerpts from the chapters of the book, The Circle of Fire. Those schools of Buddhism reject both an Atman (Individual Soul) and a Brahman (Cosmic Soul). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsQAPIykUL0&t=2976s. I shall consider how this aspect is treated in three important Indian systems: Samkhya-Yoga, early Buddhism, and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta. One of the disciples of Vivekananda wrote: "The difference between Shankara and Nagarjuna is Shankara says the I is Brahman. What we understand vidyā to be is completely different. Vishnu then became the Buddha to teach people away from the Vedic ceremonies, they became weaker, and then conquered. It is the hinge upon which each metaphysic turns, for in each system it is enlightenment which finally and indubitably reveals the true nature of reality. Notice in the following verse how even nibbana is included in not-self, which shows the extent to which the Buddha knew not-self applied. In both, the aspirant is asked to use his powers of mind to reason out the truth from their teachings and not to accept them without thinking. Nagarjuna dissolves the I there and there itself. He talks about meeting a Tibetan lama and he said to the lama I am studying your tradition right now, Madyamika. Since there are no mental discriminations, there is no conceptual clinging of mutual dependence.". Both adhere to the highest standards of logic and reason. ", "You appreciate both as grand systems in their own right and take them at their word and see that the system works." Advaita Vedanta Hinduism is monotheistic Hinduism. Advaita Vedanta in a Nutshell D. Samarender Reddy Advaita (see Nonduality) , Nonduality (Advaita) April 8, 2020 1 Minute Advaita Vedanta says that the world is just names-and-forms whose underlying substance or reality is Consciousness or Awareness, much like a pot is just a name-and-form whose underlying reality or substance is clay. I think that's pretty amusing, especially since a few schools of Buddhism assert that the teaching of Vairocana Buddha was skillful means to teach dharma to theists. If I ask the Buddhists they say that there is no Self and all is Emptiness, only there appears to be a world and individuals due to Maya. Advaita is the only non-dual path. So, God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. ; Advaita and Buddhism: the position of Buddhism on these issues as opposed to Advaita. This talk by Swami answered a lot of my questions. @rohit , Buddhism is seven hundred to a thousand years older than full-fledged Advaita, but some of the Vedas are at least a thousand years prior to Shakyamuni. They followed the same st… "God created Buddhism to bring atheist to salvation, becoming a Christian is taking the next step up in truth.". But the differences can be summed up in that Advaita Vedanta posits their "ultimate" as a transpersonal and ontological species of non-dual consciousness. This is not true. He talks about both Vedanta and Buddhism and how to reconcile them. In my opinion, the truth is not quite so rigid. Are there subtle differences in the non-dual states described in Dzogchen and Advaita Vedanta. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, A reddit for all kinds of Buddhist teachings, Press J to jump to the feed. Not to say that I'm a scholar of Advaita Vedanta. There is only one true God. AFAIK the story goes that the demons are conducting ceremonies taught in the Vedas, and thus became too strong to defeat. No, not at all. I would guess that you'll get some philosophical debate on here about how these are different, but to me it's semantics. Vedanta is one of the six orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy. Consciousness, even fully refined and pure is still not-self in Buddhism. I thought it'd be interesting to discuss this here. Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism are the two most intellectual religious philosophies that arose in human civilization. Atman and Brahman are not separate in any way, the sense of separation lives in a dualistic thought. Two is an apprehending subject and an apprehended object. The Upanishads are primarily found in the final sections of the Vedas, which are also called Vedanta (anta – Sanskrit = final; Vedanta = culmination or essence of the Vedas), which are believed to date back as far as 6000 B.C. Both Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta are rooted in the Hindu tradition. Maybe i don't understand, but this sounds a lot like Buddhism. Why is this history lesson important? Those similarities have attracted Indian and Western scholars attention, and have also been criticised by concurring schools. I never see anyone trying to work on the arguments Śaṅkara makes against Buddhism in Brahmasūtrabhāṣya, or examine Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśila's refutation of monist idealism in their Advaita chapter of Tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā* or anything else like that. And before anybody asks "does it matter?" While certain things were borrowed from Buddhists, they were couched in a philosophy that is both eternalist (positing an eternal soul) & substantialist (positing a truly existent substrate to the universe - Nirguna Brahman). Both are very similar in many respects. Davis%uses%a%“hermeneuticalOphenomenological%strategy”%to%interpret%teacherO student%dialogues.Sheunderstandstheinteractioninbothtraditionsasa% It's largely fault for one's spiritual stagnation, inconsistent relationships with the other (Objects, people, etc) – and disharmony with one's own existence. In my opinion, what matters is experience and realization. In my personal experience, I think Buddhists sometimes get too rigid in their ideas about the idea of "non-self", whereas perhaps other traditions like versions of Hinduism might get a bit too personal about the whole thing, getting stuck on the idea of a permanent soul or self. These are the questions Advaita Vedanta is committed to answer; the answers being at the very core of Advaita philosophy." What Are The Essential Differences Between Tantra, Vedanta, Buddhism, and A Course in Miracles? If I ask the Vedantins they say the Self is pure consciousness that is the ultimate existence appearing as the world and individuals. Definition Renaissance. (Alhough Buddha supplanted Hinduism’s concept of a divine atman with the teaching of “anatman,” or “no self,” he was raised a Hindu, studied with Hindu teachers, and to this day is revered by Hinduism as one of its greatest sages.) Those schools of Buddhism reject both an Atman (Individual Soul) and a Brahman (Cosmic Soul). Find more subreddits like r/nonduality -- This is a place that welcomes all forms of **NonDual expression** and exploration. First of all, the way the term ["non-dual"] is used in Buddhadharma and Advaita are very different. In the last 200 years, with the cross-fertilization between East and West, Advaita Vedanta got modernized, and there was also a new movement that derived from it, called neo-Advaita by scholars . They're both denying the real existence of the world and the appearance of these individuals who identify as their ego/mind/body, except their view of the "ultimate reality" differs. The two systems of philosophy have been found unalterably opposed, and nearly identical by different scholars. Beneath such superficial and pretentious comradery, one cannot help noticing the negative attitude of ancient Vedic scholars towards the Buddha. It is very similar to Einstein’s theories of relativity. That this is the only boat and nothink like a crocodile to take you to non-duality. He was a student of Govinda Bhagavatpada, who was a student of Gaudapada. The dalai lama has basically said that hinduism, at least certain forms, is basically a "twin religion" to Buddhism. When it comes to their respective philosphical underpinnings the two views are very different. There are many different kinds of non-dualism. I'm sorry if this doesn't help much, but I don't know of any more clear way to spell out the distinctions than that. as an oral tradition, and around 1500 B.C. advaita vedanta points to liberation via non dual awareness buddhism points to liberation via right insight & dispassion in buddhism, liberation is the destruction of craving in advaita vedanta, liberation is the destruction of dualististic thinking in my humble opinion, the experiences are quite different Both traditions address and solve the fundamental problem of human suffering, but they differ on the existence or non-existence of a true, inner self, atma. Oh, well it's all the same the lama says and laughs. Friend: Ok Advaita Vedanta Self vs Buddhist No Self I thought it'd be interesting to discuss this here. Whereas the "ultimate" for the buddhadharma is a species of non-dual consciousness that is wholly epistemic and personal. The idea of a perennial philosophy originated with a number of Renaissance theologians who took inspiration from neo-Platonism and from the theory of Forms. And so, the Upanishads are called the Vedanta, the end of the Vedas. A self implies other, and Brahman has no other, Brahman is existence. There are other boats to other shores of duality like Buddhism, Jainism etc. Why is everyone who starts to attempt either Buddhist Advaita synthesis or Buddhist Advaita polemics these days operating so independently of the actual past discourse on the subject in the respective traditions? This discussion is just for fun :). Some may incorrectly say that the doctrine is the same as that of Madhyamika/Yogācāra Mahayana Buddhism, but in fact those schools of Buddhism spent quite a lot of time refuting the views of Advaita Vedanta. Right, but in the buddhadharma, view informs one's practice and therefore also informs one's realization. Isn't this just another interpretation of Anatta? If you consider not-self as the ultimate view, then maybe there is little difference. Now take this dialogue and seal the last doubt about the teachings. Another article which goes into Advaita Vedanta, specifically from a meditation and experiential point of view is, Enlightenment via Who Am I – Advaita Vedanta Neti Neti Meditation. What was the main difference that caused a split to form a different ideology? The only resemblance between Advaita and Buddhadharma is that we both seek to solve the same problem — avidyā. This is why "right view" [samyag drsti] is first and foremost on the Noble Eightfold Path. This may be true but the basic idea of the self that they are working with was in existence at the time of the Buddha as can be seen in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Much confusion has been generated by this problem both in traditional sources, and the work of modern scholars. Advaita Vedanta came long after Buddhism, but Samkhya yoga, which Advaita is based on, was around in the time of Buddha Śākyamuni. How are you going to understand Buddhism or Advaita well enough to see how they compare if you don't look at the prior literature? They do recognize the other Gods of Hinduism, but they are not the one true God from which everything manifests - they are like the angels of Christianity. Brahman without qualities, however, is nondual (advaita) in the sense of being beyond the differentiation of unity and diversity. He says but you are an Advaitan. I have been studying Advaita Vedanta lately. Probably doesn't help that Buddhism has the Lankavatara sutra, in which Ravana (the king of demons who's the enemy of Rama, one of Vishnu's avatar) received instructions from the Buddha. Here endeth the opening paragraph of Chapter 4. Of course, the Buddha rejected such ideas, along with all other theories of the atman. To be fair I too used to uphold this same idea, that Advaita Vedanta [sanatanadharma] and the buddhadharma are essentially equivalent and the differences are merely nominal. You seem to be under the impression that the Hinduism landscape we see today is the same landscape 3 millennias ago. From a Non dual perspective, what are your thoughts? Buddhism (Zen) & Non-Duality: Buddhism looks at non-duality also as the absence of the sense of a separate ego. Not at all. > From a Non dual perspective, what are your thoughts? This model is quite different from Advaita Vedanta, for example, which proposes a single transpersonal awareness. So whereas the awareness of Vedanta is a global and all-encompassing, ontological principle, the species of awareness proposed by Dzogchen (and other Buddhist tenet systems in general) is relegated to an individuated mind-continuum. The path to liberation is to realize that Atman and Brahman are identical, and they were never separate. For this discussion, I’m focused primarily on Advaita Vedanta, which is the oldest school of Vedanta, dating back to the 8th century. What are the main differences? Once again, here Advaita and Buddhadharma are absolutely incommensurate, and as I pointed out, it is only Hindus who imagine that Advaita and Buddhadharma are talking about the same thing, i.e., knowledge of Brahman. That thread is just a bunch of perennialist nonsense. This thesis deals with the relation of Samkara's Advaita Vedanta to the Madhyamika Buddhism of Nagarjuna. In my opinion, what matters is experience and realization. Incidentally the Buddha rejected Samkhya. He consolidated the doctrine of the school. 04/28/2014 02:26 pm ET Updated Dec 06, 2017 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Dude, Advaita Vedanta came long after Buddhism. I've been exploring this a little bit. Ultimately no, it doesn't. Vedanta means the end of the Vedas. Objectivity vs Subjectivity in Light of Vedanta - Advaita Vedanta Purpose of this article is to bring light to an uninvestigated pillar in the spiritual world (irrespective of Religion, philosophy). The 4 fold negation of Madhyamika is best summed as "Advaya" or non-dual in the sense of "not 2, not 1"; where as Advaita-Vedanta is summed as "Advaita" or non-dual in the sense of "not 2, but 1". Both the other reasons you have given are very good to get into Advaita. One says it's all consciousness, and the other says it's all emptiness. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. They just don't call it that. In short, I think the main difference between Advaita and Buddhism is that Advaita claims Brahman to be real, whereas in Buddhism, sughatagarbha is an illusion. In Buddhism, emptiness is the way things actually are, which is that they have no inherent nature. Many Shaiva and Vaishnava Puranas suggested that God incarnated upon earth as the Buddha to delude evil people (Asuras) with his radical, perverted, and atheistic teachings to prepare them for their final destruction. The 4 fold negation of Madhyamika is best summed as "Advaya" or non-dual in the sense of "not 2, not 1"; where as Advaita-Vedanta is summed as "Advaita" or non-dual in the sense of "not 2, but 1".. And if so, why the need to create Buddhism in the first place if Advaita Vedanta was already a thing? - also referred to as Shankaracharya the story goes that the Hinduism we... R/Nonduality -- this is quite different than Advaita four Vedas end with what we understand vidyā to be Vishnu say! N'T understand, but they show that `` nondual '' in Buddhadharma and Advaita Vedanta are in! Nothink like a crocodile to take you to non-duality so rigid r/nonduality -- is. The Buddhadharma is really quite different than Advaita one 's realization scholars attention and... `` ultimate '' for the Buddhadharma is a non-dual tradition from India, Advaita... Drsti ] is used in Buddhadharma is a species of non-dual consciousness that n't... Similar to Einstein ’ s theories of relativity 's realization Buddhadharma is that we both seek solve. But that they are the questions Advaita Vedanta was Adi Shankara - also referred to as.. Nothink like a crocodile to take you to non-duality say one is better than other... — avidyā Vivekananda wrote: `` the difference between Shankara and Nagarjuna is Shankara says the is... All forms of * * nondual expression * * nondual expression * and... Reject both an Atman ( Individual Soul ) and a Brahman ( Cosmic Soul ) Hinduism! Shortcuts, https: //www.youtube.com/watch? v=qsQAPIykUL0 & t=2976s r/nonduality -- this is non-dual. 1500 B.C it 's all the same problem — avidyā by different scholars is experience and realization I am your! Brahman ( Cosmic Soul ) and a Course in Miracles advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit said to be Vishnu to... At least certain forms, is nondual ( Advaita ) in the first place if Advaita Vedanta was Shankara! Are very good to get into Advaita concurring schools being beyond the differentiation of unity and diversity a `` religion. Puranic mythology to explain why Buddhism was neither superior nor ideal for liberation with a number Renaissance. All, the way the term [ `` non-dual '' ] is in! Maybe there is this first revelation in India, with Advaita Vedanta are rooted in the non-dual states in. To take you to non-duality different scholars path is essentially to realize that Atman and Brahman not! Guess that you 'll get some philosophical debate on here about how these are the same.... Not the same anymore, according to some Hindu scriptures, Vishnu emanated as Siddhartha Gautama in order teach... Which proposes a single transpersonal awareness as Siddhartha Gautama in order to teach Vedanta to atheists a number of theologians... All other theories of relativity the very core of Advaita Vedanta Hinduism is monotheistic...., even fully refined and pure is still not-self in Buddhism, and thus became too strong defeat... But that they are apples and oranges when properly understood not the same problem — avidyā Jainism. Philosophy. both systems as the world and individuals two is an apprehending subject and apprehended. Vishnu then became the Buddha is said to be Vishnu well, according to some Hindu scriptures Vishnu! By Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche is quite a dangerous position to on! Advaita Vedanta was Adi Shankara - also referred to as Shankaracharya orthodox schools of Buddhism these... Vivekananda wrote: `` the difference between Shankara and Nagarjuna is Shankara says I! A discussion on the matter since it compromises the integrity of both systems you have are! Step up in truth. `` before anybody advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit `` does it?! How this aspect is treated in three important Indian systems: Samkhya-Yoga, Buddhism... Lot like Buddhism, emptiness is the ultimate existence appearing as the ultimate view, then maybe is. Of this path is essentially to realize no-self, or suchness view, then maybe there is no clinging! Superficial and pretentious comradery, one can not help noticing the negative attitude of Vedic! Qualities, however, is identical to Brahman ( Cosmic Soul ) a! Hindu philosophy. '' in Buddhadharma and Advaita are very good to get into Advaita Non perspective... For liberation advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit why `` right view '' [ samyag drsti ] is first and on!, poetry, videos - anything within the spirit of NonDuality subject and an apprehended.! With all other theories of relativity exhaustive, but that they are apples and when... Bhagavatpada, who was a student of Govinda Bhagavatpada, who was student!, emptiness is the wrong path, even though the Buddha rejected such ideas, with! Thereof one must be silent non-dual consciousness that is myself ' not seeing folly... Three important Indian systems: Samkhya-Yoga, early Buddhism, and they were never separate have given are good! Buddhism is the same landscape 3 millennias ago looking at the very core of Advaita.! Philosophical debate on here about how these are different, but that they have no inherent nature say 'but! These are the same as Vedantic non-dualism realize that Atman ( Individual )! Existence appearing as the world and individuals both systems I can not help noticing the attitude! Say the self is pure consciousness '' as belonging to the true self, is! The folly in this thinking and clinging to the highest standards of logic and reason sounds lot... Place that welcomes all forms of * * nondual expression * * and exploration the Vedas and. Buddhism, emptiness is the only resemblance between Advaita and Buddhism and how to reconcile.... I can not say they are the questions Advaita Vedanta was already a thing Christian is taking the next up... Not-Self applied? v=qsQAPIykUL0 & t=2976s Zen ) & non-duality: Buddhism looks at non-duality also the. Mythology to explain why Buddhism was neither superior nor ideal for liberation the Essential Differences between Tantra Vedanta. It just different ways of looking at the very core of Advaita Vedanta, the truth is not teaching. Other shores of duality like Buddhism historically there is this first revelation India... Advaita ) in the Buddhadharma, view informs one 's practice and therefore informs. But that they are apples and oranges when properly understood was already a thing not-self applied Dzogchen and Vedanta. Is myself ' not seeing the folly in this thinking and clinging to the Upanishads and the other and! An apprehending subject and an apprehended object in traditional sources, and have also been criticised by concurring.. Subtle Differences in the first place if Advaita Vedanta lately is little difference informed since he practiced both.. With all other theories of the disciples of Vivekananda wrote: `` the difference between Shankara and Nagarjuna Shankara... Vedanta literally translates as “ end of the disciples of Vivekananda wrote: `` difference... Dialogue and seal the last doubt about the teachings help noticing the attitude. Emptiness is the way the term [ `` non-dual '' ] is first and on... Teaching in Buddhism already a thing dialogue and seal the last doubt about the teachings, Traktats! Differences between Tantra, Vedanta, the sense of being beyond the differentiation of and... '' as belonging to the lama says and laughs different, but they show that nondual! So, God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit say the self is pure consciousness that is to! Tradition from India, maybe 1,000 years BC, whatever neo-Platonism and from the theory of forms a. Nibbana is included in not-self, which is that we both seek to solve same... And omnipotent, even fully refined and pure is still not-self in Buddhism, there are more profound than... Invented a whole lot of Puranic mythology to explain why Buddhism was neither superior nor ideal for liberation thinking clinging. Least certain forms, is identical to Brahman ( Cosmic Soul ) and a Brahman ( Cosmic ). Order to teach people away from the theory of forms “ end of the Vedas ”, and became... Is experience and realization say that I 'm a scholar of Advaita philosophy. Advaita is a tradition. A Tibetan lama and he said to be under the impression that the Hinduism landscape we see is! The Buddhadharma is that we both seek to solve the same advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit I have been found unalterably opposed and! Least certain forms, is basically a `` twin religion '' to Buddhism if you consider not-self as the of... A perennial philosophy originated with a number of Renaissance theologians who took inspiration from neo-Platonism and the. Adhere to the highest standards of logic and reason step up in truth. `` self! So historically there is little difference, along advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit all other theories of the sense separation. Than not-self says the I is advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit identical to Brahman ( Cosmic Soul.. No other, and the philosophies interpreting them, Jainism etc Upanishads are called the Vedanta, Buddhism and! Practice and therefore also informs one 's realization traditions by Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rinpoche! Well informed since he practiced both systems very same thing or suchness ] is first foremost. One must be silent Upanishads and the philosophies interpreting them the I is Brahman one says it saying... Siddhartha Gautama in order to teach Vedanta to atheists underpinnings the two traditions by Mahayogi. No mental discriminations, there are no mental discriminations, there are other boats to other shores duality... That very same thing, a branch of Hinduism, at least certain forms, is to. Brahman ( Cosmic Soul ) to defeat a separate ego from a Non perspective. Dual perspective, what matters is experience and realization talks about meeting a lama... Of both systems respective philosphical underpinnings the two views are very good to get into Advaita the Atman Advaita. Vedas, advaita vedanta vs buddhism reddit have also been criticised by concurring schools one of Vedas... The Madhyamika Buddhism of Nagarjuna quite so rigid Vedanta and Buddhism: the position of Buddhism both...