A CRITICAL AND COMPARATIVE STUDY OF

HINDUISM AND BUDDHISM WITH SPECIFIC

REFERENCE TO NEPAL

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH BENGAL UNIVERSITY

FOR THE AWARD OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY

BY
SUJATA DEO

GUIDE
PROF. DEBIKA SAHA

DEPARTMENT OF STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY

NORTH BENGAL UNIVERSITY
FEBRUARY, 2017
Dedicated in
Memory of My
Grandmother Laxmi Devi
Grandfather Dameshawar Narayan Deo,
Mother Sumitra Devi
And
Uncle Narendra Deo
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In preparation and materialisation of this thesis I am greatful to my supervisor

Prof. Debika Saha. She has taken keen interest in my research work and given suggestions
at almost every stage.

I am greatful to both ‘Tribhuvan University’ and ‘North Bengal University’ which

have given me golden opportunity to conduct the research on such an important topic. I
express my gratitude towards ICCR (Indian Council of Cultural Relation) which has
granted me scholarship to complete this very stupendous task. I am greatful to the
Department of Psychology and Philosophy of Trichandra College which has given me
permission to go ahead in my research work. I am extending my thanks to Prof. Usha
Kiran Subba (Head of the Department), Prof. Ganga Pathak, Dr. Bharati Adhikari, Dr.
Ramchandra Aryal, Dr. Gobind Saran Upadhyaya, Lec. Narayan Sharma and Kamala
Sharma of Trichandra College.

I am offering my thanks to Dr. Nirmal Kumar Roy (Head of the Department) for
his kind help and support. I wish to thank Prof. Raghunath Ghosh, Prof. Jyotish Chandra
Basak, Prof. Kantilal Das, Dr. Koushik Joardar, Dr. Laxmikant Padhi, Dr. Anirban
Mukherjee, Dr. N. Ramthing and Smt. Swagata Ghosh for their valuable suggestions. I
would like to acknowledge with thanks the help given to me by the staffs of North Bengal
University Library and also to the staffs of the Department of Philosophy viz, Priyanka
Roy, Shree Balaram Kundu and Goutam Das.

I owe my special thanks to Prof. Mahendra Singh who inspired me to complete this
task. I express my regards to my father Mr. Jitendra Narayana Deo, my mother Smt.
Sheela Deo, my father-in-law Mr. Surya Narayana Lal Deo and my mother-in-law Smt.
Kamali Devi who from time to time instigated me to complete this work.

I am indebted to my husband D.E. Manoj Kumar Deo and my son Sanjog Dev. As
without their encouragement, it would have been impossible for me to finish this work.

I owe my loving thanks to my sisters Sangita Dev and Binita Dev for their kind
support.

i
ABSTRACT

The present dissertation is about the comparative study of the two major religions
of the world, Hinduism and Buddhism that has given order and peace to our civilization.
The significance of the study is that though the two religions appear to be different and at
some points even opposite to philosophy but they are essentially the same when we
understand the spiritual aspect of these religions. The research study clearly shows that the
differences between these two religions are merely cultural and spiritual.

The main text of the study has been divided into five chapters. The first chapter
traces the origin of the Newar communities which practice Buddhism in a different
manner. Buddhism in Nepal is different from Buddhism been practiced in other parts of
the world. Buddhism has been a part of life in many communities of Nepal, more basically
in Newar communities.

The second chapter focuses on four major philosophical concepts of the two
religions, Hinduism and Buddhism viz, God, Atma, Karma and Moksha (Nirvana).

In both religions, the word Dharma plays a very important role. The word Dharma
(dhamma-Pali) denotes not exactly religion but something more than that. It connotes a
way of life including the socio-cultural life. Dharma is generally defined as ‘righteousness’
or ‘duty’ Dharma is the principle of righteousness. It is the principle of holiness. It is also
the principle of unity. Dharma is that which leads one to the path of perfection and glory.
Both the religions believe that Dharma is that which makes one divine. Moksha is the
ultimate goal in both the religions. The path to God or Nirvana may be different, but the
goal is the same. According to Hinduism, the ultimate goal is to unite soul, Atman to
Paramatma.

Hindu concept of Avidya and Buddhist Avijja is also very similar in

epistemological sense. Misapprehension (Mithya-Jnana), faults (Dosha), activity
(pravaritti) birth (Janma) and pain (Dukha) constitute the world. False notion or false
knowledge is the root of all misery and pain. From Mithya-Jnana or false notion comes the
fault of like and dislike (Raga-Dvesha): from Raga-Dvesha proceeds karma or action-
virtuous or vicious, which forces a man to pass through repeated births for the sake of its
reward or punishment. From these births proceed misery and pain. It is the aim of both the

iii
religions to eradicate the false notion or mithya jnana which is the root of all miseries and
pains. On the successive annihilation of misapprehension, faults, activity, birth and pain,
there follows release (Apavarga) of soul.

In Buddhism, the ultimate goal is Nirvana. The attributes of God in Hinduism and
realization of Nirvana in Buddhism are essentially the same. It is the state of mind or
beyond mind, which is free from worldly defilements, free from ego (Ahankara).
Hinduism teaches the real or essential nature of God. Buddhists believe that a God is not
the highest level of spirituality. Entry into bliss and freedom of Nirvana and emancipation
from the world of suffering and rebirth is gained through undergoing Buddhist discipline.
In Hinduism, God is absolute and transcendent; this world being merely its manifestation
is necessarily fragmental and imperfect. Hence, the essence of both religions coincide here.
For self protection, man has created God, on whom he depends for his own protection,
safety and security, just as a child depends on its parent. According to Buddhism, our ideas
of God and soul are false and empty. Though highly developed as theories, they are all the
same extremely subtle mental projections, garbed in an intricate metaphysical and
philosophical phraseology. These ideas are so deep-rooted in man, and so near and dear to
him, that he does not wish to hear, nor does he want to understand any teaching against
them. The Buddha knew this quite well. In fact he said that his teaching is against man’s
selfish desires. The concept of Atman in these two religions posits them in opposite
direction. On the one hand, Hinduism believes in the existence of absolute personal
Atman, and the Godhead, ‘Paramatma’. The salvation of the soul takes by union of Atma
with Paramatma. On the other hand, the Buddha, though believes in the essence of the
atman, but thinks that it is not absolute. Atman too transient in nature. Anatta is a Pali term
used in Buddhist thought and meaning non-self (Sanskrit, anatman). This is one of the
three marks of all conditioned existence and is central to Buddhist teaching. For the
Buddha, Atman is nothing but the five aggregates (Panca Skandha) Mind or Atman is
composed of four elements. Vigyana (consciousness) Sanghya (Cognition), Vedana
(Sensations), and Sanskara (Volition). The Buddhist theory of no soul is predominantly a
rejection of Hindu orthodox philosophy.

The philosophies of Karma in these two religions are very similar. Karma
is needed as long as single trace of impurity exists within a soul or Atman, right from first
manifestation to last. The effort of every soul or Atman remains reducing gross impurities
within. It is only through complex process of Karma that every soul or Atman gains more

iv
purity as one proceeds ahead in cosmic cycle of life. Hindus believe that human beings do
their action with good or bad consequences. They might reap the rewards of their action in
a heaven or hell in which the self is reborn for a period of time. Both religions believe that
human life is precious. It is a marvellous opportunity for spiritual growth. Therefore, they
suggest, it should be used wisely. Life must not be frittered away, because it may be cut
short, at any time by death. The law of karma is believed to be dynamic, fluid and flexible
because it is neither rigid nor mechanical. Nirvana in Buddhism is a state of living in
which mind is free from any wrong thoughts as anger, lust or worldly desires.

The third chapter discusses about the Vajrayana School in Nepal. The Vajrayani
community has special contribution in the evolution of Buddhism in Nepal. For example
Vajrayana community has developed the various modes and methods of tantras and yogas.

Tantric Buddhism is another aspect of Buddhism. Around 300 AD, so many tantric
works have come out from Buddhism. Vajrayana also is one of the tantric methods which
describes in very comprehensive way to attain emancipation.

Chapter four explores religious symbolism and rituals in Nepal. Buddhists and
Hindus live together. They understand each other. They worship each other’s gods
(Buddha, being worshipped as god). They visit temples as well as stupas. It is, therefore,
easy for us to understand the practice of animal sacrifices and the ceremony of Sraddha
performed by the Buddhists living promiscuously among the Hindus.
Chapter five brings the concluding note. The current thesis tries to show that the
essence of these two religions has always been renunciation, meditation and liberation.
Both sects give focus on compassion and non-violence towards all living beings. Both
sects deal with the existence of hells and heavens and also with higher and lower worlds.
Both religious communities present the concepts of the existence of gods or deities but in
different ways. Hindus have thousands of Gods, but Buddhists have only one god, that is
Buddha himself.

In the post modern world, we need to understand these two religions into their
depth and dimension because society is fragmented in terms of all its norms and values.
Comparing Hinduism and Buddhism, we find Hinduism addresses those problems which
we confront in our daily life. But Buddhism creates a world of its own, of meditation
preparing the ground for Nirvana. Buddhism tries to make people away from life of luxury
and life of advantage and benefits. Quite contrast to it. Hinduism equips us with proper
skills to handle the complexity of life.

v
PREFACE

The present dissertation is about the comparative study of the two major religions
of the world, Hinduism and Buddhism, that has given order and peace to our civilization.
The main text of the study has been divided into five chapters.

The first chapter traces the origin of the Newar communities which practices
Buddhism in a different manner.

The second chapter focuses four major philosophical concepts of the two religions,
Hinduism and Buddhism viz, God, Atman, Karma and Moksha. In both religions, the word
Dharma plays a very important role. God is the centre of Dharma. The term God itself
becomes irrelevant in Hinduism as the divine nature of God lies within. Hinduism
believes in existence of absolute personal Atman, and the Godhead, Paramatma. The
Buddhist theory of no soul is predominantly a rejection of Hindu orthodox philosophy.
Both Buddhism and Hinduism believe in an endless cycle of births, known as samsara.
They also both seek release from this cycle.

The philosophy of Karma in these two religions are very similar. The law of Karma
is believed to be dynamic, fluid and flexible because it is neither rigid nor mechanical.

The third chapter discusses about the Vajrayana School in Nepal. Nepal become
not only a focal point where these divergent religious practices converged, but also a
melting pot of different kinds of religious thoughts and rituals which were transformed into
the Nepali version of Vajrayana.

Chapter four explores religious symbolism and rituals in Nepal. Nepal is the centre
point of Hinduism and Buddhism. Lumbini and Pashupatinath join Hindus and Buddhists
together.

Chapter five brings the concluding note. Comparing these two religions we find
both similarities and differences. In the context of Nepal, we can find that bond between
Hinduism and Buddhism is very strong Hindus and Buddhist have regard and respect to
each others and both religious groups celebrate their spiritual activities in spirit of
togetherness.

The present world faces a great deal of crisis because values and norms of human
beings are very quickly vanishing in this world. If we understand both these religions
properly, we can instill norms and values to the society.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No

Acknowledgement i - ii

Abstract iii - v

Preface vi

Chapter One: Introduction 1-8

Chapter Two: Philosophical Foundations of Hinduism and Buddhism

Section – 1 9 - 33

Existence of God in Hinduism and Buddhism

Section – 2 34 - 49

Concept of Atman/Soul in Hinduism and Buddhism

Section – 3 50 - 65

Concept of Karma in Hinduism and Buddhism

Section – 4 66 - 90

Concept of Moksha in Hinduism and Buddhism

Chapter Three: Vajrayana School in Nepal 91 - 99

Chapter Four: Religious symbolism and Rituals in Nepal 100 - 120

Chapter Five: Conclusion 121 - 127

Bibliography 128 - 134

Index 135 - 137

Chapter One
Introduction

Sir Author Conan Doyle, famous writer once remarked, ―No other people on earth,
Watson, has produced such intricate beauty in as small a space as the Valley of
Kathmandu. One trenchant observer has described it best as a kind of coral reef, built up
laboriously over the centuries by unrecorded artisans. As a human achievement, it ranks
with the creations of Persia and Italy.‖

Nepal is an ancient country in terms of religion, culture and civilization. It is a land

of contrast which consists of Himalayas, mountains and Terai. The origin of the word
‗Nepal‘ is connected with Kathmandu valley. Newar has been the permanent community in
Kathmandu valley. Name of Nepal is linked with Newar communities. According to the
legend, Manjushri explored the Kathmandu valley. It was full of water at that time. He
drained out the water and made the land habitable. After making the valley habitable, a
certain sage called ‗Ne‘ protected the valley for a certain period of time. ‗Ne‘ is Pali word
which means protection. The valley was started to be recognized from ‗Ne‘ word leading it
to Nepal. There is another description of the etymological meaning of Nepal. The term
‗Ne‘ is from Tibeto-Burma language. That is, the term Nepal means the house of wool in
Tibeto-Burma Lexicon. The description of the word Nepal can also be found in Kautilya‘s
Arthasastra. In accordance with Kautilya‘s Arthasastra, Nepal is described as a place of
trade, of diamond work and leather.

Nepal has been a fertile land of the development of religion where Buddhism and
Hinduism have prospered together. In Nepal, there are many castes that practiced
Hinduism and Buddhism simultaneously. The best example can be found in Newar
communities. The Newar communities are Buddha Margi and Shiv Margi, Basically in
Newar community there are Vajaracharyas who are hereditary priests of Rajopadhaya who
are Shiva Margi. That is to say, Hinduism and Buddhism are being practiced by some
community. It may not be out place to say that Hinduism has made its impact on Buddhism
and vice-versa.

In Nepal, we find temple and monasteries together where Buddha‘s images are
prayed and in monasteries Hindu Gods are prayed. There is a famous monastery in

1
Syambhu situated in Kathmandu valley where there is a praying room in which many Gods
are prayed. Another example can be found in the prayer room of Pasupathinath. Since it is
the most sacred place of Hindu where on the auspicious occasion, Buddha is placed at the
feet of Shiva. People believe that Buddha is connected with Lord Shiva. Similarly, there
are many Buddhist festivals which are celebrated by Hindus and vice-versa. In the same
way on various occasions Monks are invited by Hindus and priests are invited by Buddhist.
In most of the cases some people are Hindus and Buddhist. In Kathmandu valley, Daishain
(Durga Puja) and other festivals like Laxmi puja and Bhaitika are celebrated by all the
people irrespective of Hindus and Buddhist.

Hinduism is the major religion of Nepal right from the start of civilization. Nepal
since it has been a place of solitude because of forest and mountains has been the place of
meditation and penance Many Saints like Astrabakra, Yagnavalkya, Gargi and others have
been important in Hindu philosophy under the reins of King Janak. There are various
examples in Ramayana and Mahabharata where land of Nepal has been directly
associated. In modern History, Muslim invasion in India paved the way for the migration
of many saints and devoted Hindus in Nepal. The growth of Hinduism in Nepal is
responsible for the foundation of Kingdom which was totally based on Hindu religion.
That is to say, Lord Vishnu had organised Nepalese people and given to them their flag
Sun and Moon symbolizing Hinduism. In Puran, it is mentioned that Kings are
incarnations of God over the long span of the Nepalese history. All kings have been
Hindus and they ruled over the Kingdom under the faith of Hinduism. This was the
prominent factor that Hinduism became a state religion. Many kings thought themselves as
incarnations of God. The words of the kings become the law of land.

Here we may discuss how Buddhism has developed as an international religion

spreading from Nepal, India, Central Asia, China, South Asia and parts of the world. As
we know that Buddha was born as a Hindu and developed a new religion through
enlightenment, credit of it goes to Maurya emperor role to spread the message of
Buddhism. In other word, Buddhism spread through the Silk Road to China and it spread
to Koria and Japan.

In Nepal it developed more in mountain area than the Tarain area. On the side of
China border of Nepal, Buddhism has been much more in stronger position. That is to say,

2
Buddhism has been practiced more in Mongalian community. It has been more popular
than Aryan communities in Nepal.

In Kathmandu valley there are various places of Buddhist monasteries like

Shymbhu, Seto Gumba, Kapan Gumba and others where thousands of Vikshu students are
trained.

In Kathmandu valley, there is place called Buddhanilkantha where meditation is

also opened and available to the common people. To release the stress, people joined there
even from medical point of view. Now a days focus has been more on development of
Buddha‘s birth place Lumbini. Partly because of tourist mission and partly because
historical values, it has been a major project of Government of Nepal, supported by China.
In days to come, Buddhism in Nepal would be much stronger than before. In Nepal,
Lumbini University has also been set up with focusing on Buddhist-literature, Art, Culture
and Buddhist Philosophy.

Buddhism in Nepal is different from Buddhism been practiced in other parts of

world. Buddhism has been a part of life in many communities of Nepal, more basically in
Newar communities; Newar Buddhist Practitioners lead common life. Their attitudes
towards food habits are different. They eat both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food.
Similarly, some Monks in Newar communities lead the family life too. Denu (Charity) is
the main virtue among the sixth perfection. It is the way of developing the nature of non-
attachment to material values. Nepal is the only country where true Vajarayana Tantric
culture is still alive and practiced today among the Shakya Newar of the Katmandhu
valley.

In Newar Buddhist, social male force is associated with karma. They link it with
chetna. They believe that Karma ripens and one has to undergo the previous actions.
Among the Newar communities Vajrayana gives stress on ritual aspects.

Thus, apart from Newar communities, Lama (Mongolian) practices Buddhism from
faith to death. They are more inspired by Tibetian Buddhist than Indian Buddhist.

Ideology of Newar Buddhism is in fact the outcome of gradual changes and

modification. They believe in the middle path as the golden way to obtain the objective

3
life. Newer Buddhist gives emphasis on the ten important rules as part of the fundamental
practice of Buddhist dharma.

1. Not to take life

2. Not to steal
3. Not to commit sexual misconducts.
4. Not to tell lies.
5. To take food in proper way.
6. Not eat at a wrong time.
7. Not to watch dancing.
8. Not to wear fine cloths
9. Not to sleep on high and big bed.
10. Not to use perfumes.

Apart from this, Newar Buddhist practice pravarjya ceromony (Monastic

initiations) Pravarjya is the Sankrit term used in ancient times. It is derived from the root
Vraj (to go). It is the term which denote the first right of iniciation given to a lay man,
wishing to became a Buddhist Monk. Those who want to be Bhikshu, they follow it.

The Vajrayana and Sakya follow this very strictly. The Vajrayana receive a chariya
inicians on the sixth day that entitles the person to become priest and spiritual guide.
Similarly, there are various Pujas like-Pancho, Guru Mandala, Kalas Puja. Lokpalabali,
Kumari Puja and other practiced by Newar communities. There is use of Tantra in
Buddhism too. The Tantric Vajrayana follow the path which are divided in components,
pranjayana and Upaya which are symbolized by female and male forces so the Tantric
process the way of emancipation. The influence of Vajaryana tradition is traced in the
Kathmandu valley in the 7th and 8th century. As a whole, rituals of Buddhism and structure
of Newar are inter-woven and inter linked. The Hinayana and Vajrayana have always been
antagonistic towards since the division of various sects in Buddhism. This is indeed an
unfortunate historical event that developed in Buddhism. Hinayanist always gave emphasis
upon personal realization of Nibbana by rigorous practice of Vipassana meditation in
isolation. Whereas, Vajarayanist believed in social involvement and never believed in
personal achievement of Nirvana.

4
Vajaryana is a branch of Mahayana. The philosophy of Vajarayana can be defined
in the light of Tantric works. It gives stress to Vajrayana as the causes and Mantra as the
effect.

Vajaryana is explained as a path which leads to transcendental perfect

enlightenment. Therefore, in the Tantric scripture, Vajaryana is defined as a means not as a
goal. Tracing the history of Vajaryana in Nepal, it can be said that Vajaryana as a branch
of Mahayana got flourished in Kathmandu valley. The arrival of great Buddhist
philosopher, Aacharya Vasubandhu (4th century) is the evidence of the presence of Tantric
Buddhism in Nepal. In the seventh century, in the time of Anshu Barma, Tantrism
developed in Nepal. In the age of Santaraksita (The Tantric Preacher), Tantrism developed
around 7th and 8th centuries. Buddhism had learning centre in Bihar and Bengal. From 11th
to 14th century, Nepal became a testing ground for different systems of religious thought
and practices imported from India. The reform led by Shankaracharya had also tremendous
impact on Buddhism in Nepal.

In the background of this, Buddhism in Nepal specially in Newar society Tantric

Buddhist-rituals are existing side by side. In connection with Vajarayana and their
influences, deities were introduced in Vajaryanic Scriputures in the course of time.

Literally speaking, religion is a principle of unification and harmonisation

(Latin: Religio-nis: Re=Back; Ligare=bind). The term religion suggests that the two
objects of unification were originally unified and have been only temporarily
separated. Religion is thus based on the faith in the ultimate unity of man and God,
the finite and infinite, and hence, any religion which posits a permanent gap between
man and God, covertly denies its claim to be called a religion. 1

Religion is intricately linked with human civilization. It has its roots in its all
climbs, cultures, and ways of life. It is realistic, idealistic, utopian and mythical in its
nature and dimension. It is worldwide phenomenon, more than set of beliefs, values. It is
not dogma nor is it based on fanaticism. As in this context, Swami Vivekananda remarks,
―Religion is realization in life.‖2 Obviously, it is sacred engagement with that which is
believed to be spiritual reality. An educated understanding of religion must take into
account its distinctive qualities and patterns as a form of human experience as well as the
similarities and difference in religions across human cultures. About religion there are two

5
major waves of thinking; one set of thinking is that religion encourages dogmatic and
fanatic thinking and attitudes. In this context, Jawaharlal Nehru remarks, ―Religion is a
3
shelter of tortured people, is dogma and superstition.‖ But another wave of thinking
stands quite contrast to it. Gandhi takes religion as a tool of discharging one‘s own duties
and responsibilities towards mankind. He tries to link it with politics. Gandhi remarks,
―Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics, they have not understood what
religion is.‖ 4 In other words, religion for Gandhi has been a tool of serving and helping
people.

In all cultures, human beings make a practice of interacting with what are taken to
be spiritual powers. These power maybe in the form of Gods, Spirits, ancestors or kind of
sacred reality with which human belief themselves to be connected. It may be regarded as
external to the self, internal and both. People interact with such a presence in a sacred
manner that is with reverence and care.

As far as Hinduism is concerned, it is a hub of all important religions. It has

distinct nature, covering materialism to spiritualism, pragmatism to idealism, realism to
hypothetical ideas. It is a religious tradition of Indian origin comprising beliefs and
practice of Hindus. The denoting meaning of the word Hindu is derived from the river
Sindhu. It is primarily a geographical term that is referred to India or to a region of the port
near to Sindhu as the six century B.C.

Western thinkers associate it only with India as a nation. But literature of

Hinduism has deeper roots that can be traced in Sanskrit and Pali. Comparing it to other
religion, we find Hinduism as its own start and orientation i.e. to say acknowledgement of
Hindus came first and beliefs and practice constitute the content religion. In other religion,
beliefs and practice came first and then followers follow. It is in this background, Swami
Vivekananda in his characteristic style of expression spotlighted that it is the realization
not talk, not doctrine and not a dogma. Therefore, Hindu tradition has been always in quest
of spirituality, morality, and other ethical dimension of life. Many saints and sages have
practiced it through meditation and devotion. All these things have become a guide book,
manifesto and manuscripts of their vision and reason. These saints, thinkers and
philosophers have become torch bearer and pathfinder to the society. Some of them have
been king, emperors, teachers and even man of streets. It is in this background, Buddhism
has evolved.

6
Buddha was a spiritual philosopher and the founder of Buddhism; he was born in
Lumbini, Nepal. He was the son of the head of Shakya warrior caste. His real name was
Siddhartha Gautam. He was also known as Shakya muni. The name Gautam Buddha is a
combination of the family name Gautam and appellation Buddha, meaning ―enlightened
one‖.

As far as Buddhism is concerned, it is difficult to separate facts from the great

mass of myth and legends in which they are embedded. Buddhism is in fact revolt against
priest craft, Brahmanism, fanaticism and different superstitions that had paralyzed the
society. Buddha‘s life itself has been a great revolt. He was forced to follow in the life of
luxury, and participated in the world life of court. He hardly found pain and pangs of life at
the earliest stage. Later on, he found existence dull and disappointing and restlessness
stirred his mind. One day according to the tradition he encounters an aged man, a sick man
and a corpse and he suddenly and deeply realized that human life is nothing more than a
pool of suffering.

About this very painful and pathetic condition of human beings, western
philosophers also tries to find out certain solutions but they do have more negative views
about religion and God. Karl Marx says, ―Religion is opium of the mass.‖ 5 He even goes
to the extent to saying that, ―Religion is rooted in poverty and deprivation.‖6 In western
philosophy, Bertrand Russell remarks, ―Religion comes out of fear, fear from death, fear
from darkness, fear from insecurity.‖7

Experiencing the above scenario, he broke all the shackles and chains of
materialism, family life, illusion of Maya, wealth and power and made a herculean journey
in search of ‗Truth‘. This decision known in Buddhism as the great renunciation is
celebrated by Buddhist as a turning point in history. Gautama was 29 years old, according
to the tradition. In state of restlessness and confusion he wandered from pillar to post,
interacting with many Hindu gurus and pundits, turning the pages of many gospels and
doctrines but he found it futile and swank. He found Hindu caste system repellent. This
experience emboldened him to go ahead. About , while sitting under a tree near Gaya, in
what is known as Buddha Gaya in the state of Bihar, he experienced the great
enlightenment which revealed the way of solution from suffering. For the first time, he
preached his first sermon in the deer park near Banaras. This sermon, the text of which is
preserved, contains the nectar of Buddhism.

7
In company with, five disciples, Buddha travelled through the Valley of Ganges
River, teaching his doctrine, gathering followers and establishing monastic communities
that admitted anyone regardless of caste. He returned briefly to his native town and
converted his father, his wife and other kiths and kin to his beliefs. He gave lead to his
missionary activities for around forty five years and his soul departed in Kusinagara,
Nepal. He was about eighty years old at that time.

Buddha‘s vision, warm compassion and profound thought did both diagnostic and
prescriptive work in the society. He talks about illogicality of logic, rejects metaphysical
speculation and takes pragmatic approach about the life. Buddha‘s teaching has influenced
the life of millions of people for nearly twenty five hundred years.

This thesis is directed towards the comparative study between these two religions
and the religious philosophy under the following aspects:
1. The existence of God
2. The existence of Atman
3. The theory of Karma
4. The concept of Nirvana in Buddhism and emancipation in Hinduism.

If we go through the bird‘s eye view, we find these two religions seem to be in
opposition. But if we dive deep into subject matter, we find that Buddhism has its root in
Hinduism. Despite its differences, the research would spotlight both similarities and
differences between the two Religions.

Notes and References:

1. Sharma, R. N., (2012). Philosophy of Religion, Delhi: Surjeet Publications.
2. Vivekananda, Swami, (2012). Speeches and Writings of Swami Vivekananda; a
Comprehensive Collection, Hard Press.
3. Nehru, Jawaharlal. An Autobiography, Oxford University Press. 1989.

4. Gandhi (1927). An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth,

Laurier Books Limited.
5. Raines, John (2002). Marx on Religion, USA: Temple University Press.

6. Ibid.
7. Greenspan, Louis, and Stefan Anderson., (1999). Russell on Religion, New York:
Routledge.

8
Chapter Two
Philosophical Foundations of Hinduism and Buddhism
Existence of God in Hinduism and Buddhism
Section - 1

Existence of God in Hinduism

Hinduism was the national and constitutional religion in Nepal till some years
before. Still it is the religion of the majority of people in India and Nepal. A significant
population of Hindus lives in other countries within and outside the sub continent and has
over 900 million adherents worldwide. In some ways, it is the oldest living religion in the
world, stretching back many thousands of years. The traditions and culture of Hinduism go
back into antiquity and the earliest times.

In most other religions, a single founder is read about like Jesus Christ in
Christianity, Lord Buddha in Buddhism, and Mohammad Paigambar in Islam. Hinduism
has no single founder, no single scripture, and no commonly agreed set of teachings.
Throughout its extensive history, there have been many key figures teaching different
philosophies and writing numerous holy books. For these reasons, writers often refer to
Hinduism as 'a way of life' or 'a family of religions' rather than a single religion.

The word Hindu is of geographical origin and is derived from the name originally
given to the inhabitants that settled near the river Sindhu. The word Hindu is the Persian
rendering of the Indian word Sindhu (the Sanskrit name of the river Indus). The inhabitants
were the Aryans, in the second millennium BCE. It is believed that the word Hindu came
into being in the 6th century B.C. when the territory round the Indus formed part of the
Persian Empire. However, with the exit of Persians, the name disappeared from India.
Centuries later it came back to India with the Muslim invaders. Subsequently with the
Moghul emperors and under the British, the word Hindu came to be applied for those who
followed the age-old religion. Nevertheless, the term itself probably does not go back
before the 15th and 16th centuries when it was used by people to differentiate themselves
from followers of other traditions, especially the Muslims, in Kashmir and Bengal. The
origins of the term 'Hindu' have cultural, political and geographical impression.

9
Hinduism is the result of multifaceted growth of ideas, rituals and beliefs. The
fundamentals of Hinduism are the Vedas which are books of wisdom. Hinduism deals with
socio-cultural life. It is not actually a religion but a way of life.

Hinduism has basic concepts of Brahman, Karma, Dharma, Samsara and

Moksha. Rituals, caste system and some other practices are vices of Hinduism. In 19th
century, Buddhist ideas were incorporated into Hinduism. Historical Buddha was declared
as incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Hinduism is the Brahmanical faith. The ultimate aim of all
Hindus is to attain Brahman which is universal soul.

Hindus have the Vedas which have fundamental principles of religious and ritual
practices. These are the most ancient books of the Hindus. The word Veda means vid
which means to know. The Vedas are book of knowledge and wisdom. There are four
Vedas. These are Rigveda, Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda. The Rigveda is the
most important of the Vedas.

Hinduism is Sanatana dharma. That means the religion coming down to people
through eternity. The word dharma (dhamma-Pali) denotes not exactly religion but
something more than that. It connotes a way of life including the socio-cultural life. Nearly
every religion of the world is linked with a definite personality claimed to be its first
originator or founder. Every religion has a definite text which is regarded as its basic
religious text. But Hinduism has none. Sir Charles Eliot remarks, "Hinduism has not been
made, but has grown. It is jungle, not a building." 1
Similarly, K. M. Sen remarks in
Hinduism, "Hinduism is more like a tree that has grown gradually than like a building that
has been erected by some great architect at some definite point in time. It contains within
itself the influences of many cultures and the body of Hindu thought thus offers as much
variety as the Indian nation itself."2 The names of a host of sages and saints are of course
associated with Hinduism, but none can claim to be its founder. They have all simply
contributed to its growth in their own specific ways. The Hindu scriptures like the Vedas,
the Upanisads, the Puranas, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Bhagavadgita and
others enriched Hindu Culture.

Varying beliefs and practices can be found among Hindus. To summarise the
main principles, beliefs and practices of Hinduism seem impossible. There are various
ways, of which Hinduism more often speaks of three—the way of knowledge (gyana
marga), the way of action (karma marga) and the way of worship and prayer (Bhakti
10
marga) . Anyone according to his temperament may adopt any of these ways and attain to
salvation. Hinduism is in its very temperament against any rigid rules of religion. It is very
liberal in every way. 3

Hinduism has generally been recognised as a religion of the Aryans. Yet various
ethnic and cultural groups have exerted their influence from time to time in shaping and
reshaping the various beliefs and practices in Hinduism. Aryan beliefs and practices
themselves assimilated a great deal with the beliefs and practices of both the Dravidians
and the aboriginals. So the overall culture or religion which is now known as Hinduism is a
gradual growth out of the amalgam and synthesis of beliefs and practices of various
strands.

Hinduism is not only a religion, but a social system and a tradition too. The most
obvious and important mark of this social system has been its varna dharma or caste
system. As a matter of fact, traditionally, only a person has been able to be a Hindu who
has belonged to any of the four varnas/castes present in Hindu social system. This has been
rather the distinguishing mark of being a Hindu.

A good majority of Hindus hold some certain common beliefs and practices. Such
beliefs and practices may form the basic features of Hinduism as a religion. Some of them
can be summarised as follows:4

(1) Hinduism admits vast differences of beliefs and practices among its followers.

(2) A Hindu can be polytheistic, monotheistic, monistic and atheistic or all at the
same time.

(3) Hindus have belief in the authority of the Vedas.

(4) A Hindu belongs to one of the four varnas/castes which is an essential mark of
being a Hindu.

(5) Hindus have a belief that there is a spiritual order or realm which is the basic, the
essential and the eternal.

(6) Hindus believe that the bodily aspect of man is only external and superficial. In
his inner and essential being man is a soul. This soul in man is immortal. Nothing
can destroy it.

(7) Hindus believe in the transmigration of soul from one body to another.
11
(8) Action (kama) is the root cause of man's chain of birth and rebirth. Karma and
Samsara therefore go hand in hand.

(9) Hindus believe that release (Moksha) from this cycle of birth and rebirth is
possible.

(10) Release (Moksha) is possible by following the path of knowledge or the path of
selfless/detached actions or by the devotion to God. By Moksha, soul becomes
free from all worldly suffering and attains its original pure spiritual nature.

One can be a good Hindu without having any belief in any god or goddess. There
is a full-fledged; rather highly esteemed, system of Hindu philosophy, known as the
Samkhya system, which is clearly atheistic.5 However, an average Hindu is a firm believer
in God—either in one God or in several gods and goddesses. Hindu belief in God ranges
from polytheism through abstract monism to a concrete monotheism. There are said to be
thirty three crore (330 millions) gods and goddesses in Hindu pantheon. There is an
inherent faith in even the most illiterate of Hindus that, at bottom, there is only one God
and the various gods and goddesses are just his various forms or manifestations.

God is Antaryami, the inward dweller, the inner soul of the entire universe. He is
infinite, eternal and all-pervading. He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. He is the
supreme value also and is endowed with infinite auspicious qualities such as truthfulness,
knowledge, bliss, tenderness, compassion etc. He is the creator, preserver and destroyer of
the world.

Hindu God has three aspects within him—the creative, the preservative and the
destructive. His creative aspect is personified as Brahma, the preservative aspect as Visnu
and the destructive aspect as Shiva. These three aspects are so often taken as the three
deities, although within the one supreme Lord. Brahma, Visnu and Shiva Mahesh therefore
constitute the Hindu Trinity.

Let‘s have some historical analysis of perception of God in Hinduism. The

Sanatana Hindu system of thought can be appropriately called a synthetic tradition as it
accepted varieties of systems and subsystems in the long run of its history. Although, one
important feature of the Hindu system of philosophy is its acceptance of authority of Vedas
and God, it has always shown flexibility and tolerance towards all the schools of Indian
religion, including the Charvakas and Buddhism. For example the original Samkhya

12
system of philosophy is completely silent about the possible existence of God, although it
speaks of the traditional indemonstrability of his existence. The Vaisesika and the Yoga
systems admit of existence of God, but deny him the creation of the universe. The
Mimansa system speaks of God but denies his importance and efficacy in the moral
ordering of the world. The Charvakas deny God without qualification, while the Buddhist
system rejects God. These philosophies complement each other, and Hindu system of
philosophy accepts them as being in harmony with one another and never in contradiction.
Ultimately, all these philosophies believe in liberation or emancipation as the end goal of
life, liberation of samsaric cycle of birth and death. The basis of life is non-attachment,
moral and virtuous life and spiritual superiority to worldly values.

The Sanskrit words Bhagavan and Ishwara mean 'Lord' or 'God' and indicate an
absolute reality who creates, sustains and destroys the universe over and over again. It is
too simplistic to define Hinduism as belief in many gods or 'polytheism'. Most Hindus
believe in a Supreme God, whose qualities and forms are represented by the multitude of
deities which emanate from him. God, being unlimited, can have unlimited forms and
expressions. In the history of Hinduism, God is conceptualised in different ways, as an all
knowing and all pervading spirit, as the creator and force within all beings, their 'inner
controller' (antaryamin) and as wholly transcendent.

The notion of God in both early Rig-Veda and Upanishads is monotheistic and the
nature of God is more philosophical and spiritual in nature. The 'Song of Creation' of Rig-
Veda clearly shows cosmological conception which is wholly impersonal, without any
theistic component—
Then there was neither Aught nor Naught, no air no sky beyond
What covered it all? Where rested all? In water gulf profound?
Nor death was then, nor deathlessness, nor change of night and day.
That One breathed calmly, self-sustained; naught else beyond if lay.
Gloom hid in gloom existed first-one sea, eluding view.
That One, a void in chaos wrap, by inward fervor grew.
Which nothing with existence links, as sages searching find.
The kindling ray that shot across the dark and drear abyss—
Was it beneath? or high aloft? What bird can answer this?
There fecunding powers were found, and mighty forces strove—
A self-supporting mass beneath and energy above.

13
Who knows, who ever told, from whence this vast creation rose?
No gods had been born-who then can e'er the truth disclose?6

The Upanishads define God as "Brahman” which is the culmination of their many
gods into one "Reality" beyond comprehension. Brahman became known as "Ishwara"
through the "Trimurti" (three manifestations) of Brahman. These three manifestations are:
Brahma- the creator, Vishnu- the preserver, and Shiva- the destroyer. Ishwara became
personified later by ten mythical incarnations of Vishnu called "Avatars." Bhagavad Gita
says, "When goodness grows weak, When evil increases, I make myself a body. In every
age I come back To deliver the holy, To destroy the sin of the sinner To establish
righteousness."7 Some of these Avatars have been said to have been Krishna, Rama,
Buddha and Jesus Christ, however they must be born in India to be a full Avatar. Hinduism
says that Christ was more a "messenger of God" than an Avatar.

In Yajurveda the God is envisioned as Omnipresent, Omniscient Being who is his

own cause:

He is pervasive everywhere. He shines. He is bodiless, He has no wounds; He has no

muscles, no sinews, no nerves. He is pure. He is untouched by sin. He is all knowing. He
is witnesses everywhere (Manishi). He is present everywhere (pritivu). He is causeless
cause, self-existent. He created for creatures without end things for the world as they
should be.8

In Advaita Vedanta, the nature of God is described as Universal Consciousness.

Various names are attributed to God as Brahma, Self, God, One without the second. The
true and absolute supreme God has four most important personal virtues. He is all-
Gracious. He is all-Kind. He is all-Blissful and all-Loving, with all of his virtues. He is
omnipresent. Apart from that he is also almighty because the mighty power Maya is under
him. He is the creator because he enlivens the power, Maya, which manifests the universe.
He is omniscient because he knows each and every action of the unlimited lives of all the
unlimited souls of this universe, and so on.

According to Hindu scriptures, God is beyond any attributes of form, color and
shapes. He does not have any specific form or name and is referred to as Nirguna Brahman
(attribute-less god). However, God can take any form. He can be strong and powerful, the
provider of boons, the destroyer or the savior. These forms provide a basis for the Hindu
worshipper to easily pursue the otherwise inconceivable supreme deity. In general, Hindu

14
followers believe that God is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. Hinduism
postulates the existence of a supreme being called Ishwara with qualities such as infinity,
compassion, and bliss. How is Ishwara different from Brahman? Far from the abstract
nature of Brahman, Ishwara or God is a personal, loving being that can be considered a
reflection of Brahman as seen through the veil of Maya.

Some of the earliest Rigvedic hymns, such as the following, clearly reflect the
elements of monotheism developing in early Vedic religion—
They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna and Agni; He is the heavenly bird Garutmat.
To what is One, the poets give many a name. They call it Agni, Yama,
Matariswan.9

In the hymn addressed to Hiranyagarbha (the cosmic golden germ), we find the
following expression:
Who is our Father, our Creator, Maker, Who every place doth know and every
creature; By whom alone the gods were given their names, To Him all creatures
go, to ask Him.10
The Concept of God in Mimansa

In Mimansa school of thought, God the Brahman, the Ultimate reality or Supreme
Spirit is accepted as having the nature of Advaita, ie, non-duality. According to Samkara,

The world is the effect of something which is absolutely real, eternally conscious
and infinite. The diversity of the universe is an impossibility without a cause which
is absolutely perfect and self-sufficient. This cause of self-cause is Brahman, which
expresses itself through an infinite number of things and patterns, all of which are
merely appearances that have some practical or empirical truth but lack any
metaphysical status. All these appearances, however, depend upon and are
implicitly related to Brahman, which is both their material cause (uapadana-
karana) and their efficient cause (nimitta-karana).11

As we can see Samkara accepts the theory of cause and effect but attributed it to
the Supreme God. For him the world is neither real nor eternal. It is not unreal either, for it
is objectively perceived by the beings. It is something other than the real and unreal
(sadasadvilakshana). The world is just an illusory appearance which cannot be logically
established and must, therefore, be described and explained in terms of some higher reality.
It is this higher reality, that he calls Brahman. Although Brahman is what is assumed as
foundational, it is in no sense substantial. It is everywhere and all things imply and depend
15
on it, but it cannot be located anywhere, and since it is not a thing and cannot therefore
have spatial relationship with anything else. It is also nowhere.

In the theory of Uttara-Mimansa, the evolution of the universe is taken as the lila
(drama) of God. Creation and dissolution are thus only relative and refer to different
conditions of Brahman. Accordingly, souls and matter have a causal existence and an
effect existence. Creation is God's way of enabling the souls to reap the fruits of their past
deeds (karma). The law of karma necessitates creation. And yet, for God, the creation of
the world is said to be mere lila. The entire process of creation is a drama in which god
throughout remains just the witness and the supervisor. Ramanuja comments on the nature
of God, in a certain specific sense:

The ruling element of the world, ie, the Lord, finally who has the sentient and
non-sentient beings for his modes, undergoes a change in so far as he is, at
alternating periods, embodied in all those beings in their alternating states. The
two modes, and he to whom the modes belong, thus undergo a common a change
in so far as in the case of all of them the causal condition passes over into a
different condition. (Ramanuja‘s Bhasya on Vedanta-sutra)12

Ramanuja believed that the true relation between soul and body is beyond any
arguments. For him creation is absolutely real. The world and souls are neither created nor
destroyed. He believes in the Samkhya theory of sat-karya-vad, according to which every
effect pre-exists in its material cause and is therefore only an externalization of what it was
already existing in an implicit form. Ramanuja believes in the parinama-vada, according to
which the effect is only a transformation of the material cause. Thus, the entire universe of
matter and souls is a real and not just apparent—transformation or modification of Brahma
and yet, though matter and souls are the modes of God, they enjoy the kind of individual
existence which is theirs from all eternity. And they cannot entirely be resolved into
Brahma.

Here the concept of Avidya of Samkara is interesting to note and compare with
Buddhist notion. It is his well-known argument that Brahman appears as the world of
Maya because of ignorance (Avidya).

One who does not know the Vedas, cannot know God. Therefore, let us first refer
to what the Vedas have to say about knowing God. yasydmatarh tasya matam
matam yasya na veda sah avijndtam vijdnatdm vijnatamavijdnatdm (Veda).13

16
One who thinks that God can be understood, does not understand Him. And one
who thinks that God cannot be understood, he understands. In other words, no one can
understand God. But again, we have the Vedas emphasizing the need to know Him.

Beyond the senses are the sense objects, beyond the sense objects is the mind,
beyond the mind is the intellect, beyond the intellect is the soul, beyond the soul is
Maya, and beyond Maya is Brahman (God).14

Thus, God is totally beyond the realm of the senses, mind and intellect, which are the only
means the individual possesses. Therefore, He cannot be grasped by them.

Concept of God in Dvaita Vedanta

Dvaita (or dualistic) Vedanta came as a reaction to Samkara's advaitism. This
system of thought is related to Madhva, also known as Anandatirtha and Purnaprajna, is
regarded by his followers as an incarnation of Vayu, the son of Vishnu. He is regarded as
the propounder of dualism and he advocates the five great distinctions of God and the
individual soul, God and matter, the individual soul and matter. Madhva's philosophy is a
defense of dualism and pluralism.

God is the efficient and not the material cause of the universe, and as such, does
not create the soul and matter. An unintelligent world cannot be produced by a supreme
intelligence. God's activity is the result of his perfection. Though everything exists because
and for him and functions for him, he has nothing to gain through them, he being
intrinsically perfect. God is guided in his soul-related actions—condemning some and
rewarding others—by the karma of the individuals. He is not dependent on karma. In his
commentary on Brahma-Sutra, Madhva writes:

Though the Supreme Being and Karma are both the cause of fruit, karma does not
guide the Supreme Being; on the other hand it is the Supreme Being that guides
and rules our action. 15

Brahman is the efficient cause of the world and not its material cause. Material
cause is the modified cause and it is against scriptures to speak of Reality as having
transformations. Hence, according to Madhva, Brahma is the efficient cause alone. In this
way, the conclusion is arrived at that the ultimate Reality behind this universe is one
Absolute Self-conscious personal Being, who through the modification of His power
creates and preserves this universe and at the same time retains His immutable

17
transcendent character by dint of which he regulates and illumines it. Brahman is the all
pervading self-luminous Reality that is the cause of the Universe and also he is immutable.

Concept of God in Vaisesika

In Hindu religion, the Vaisesika system is realistic, practical and analytical which
make it very much different from other schools of Hinduism. Vaisesika system tries to
incorporate rational-critical inclinations that include ancient atomic theory but it doesn't
take universe as mechanical that is devoid of soul. Vaisesika believes both moral and
physical orders require the intervention of divine energy.

Although Kanada, the founder of Vaisesika system, didn't explicitly mention the
form of God, he attributes Vedas on the supreme energy, that is God. In Vaisesika system,
God is included within Atman. To distinguish the Atman of the common beings, the Atman
of God is called the Supreme Self or Paramatma. The Paramatma of God has the quality of
eternality and omnipresence.

In Vaisesika system, the presupposition of God is a logical necessity. God is

responsible for the cause of the world. The concept of Adrsta takes the Vaisesika to
logically conclude the necessity of God as the supreme cause of everything. The system
believes that Karma and everything that happens in the universe must be controlled by
some unseen power which they call it Adrsta. And since this, Adrsta is unseen and
transcendental to the Universe, the Vaisesika infer God's existence from the invariable
'order and arrangement' and 'the existence of a creator'. The moment we believe that the
Universe has some sort of order, it directly points to the existence of some creator that
controls the order. The analogy is given to that of 'pot'. If there is a pot, there must be
someone that must have made it. The existence of pot implies the 'potter'. Hence, the
world, which is an effect and has an order and arrangement, has a creator, God.

The Vaisesika even believes the worship of God as essential for the individual's
emancipation and mentions that even a logical investigation into God's existence would
amount to his worship. Vaisesika also believes, just like a Buddhist, in the liberation and
salvation of individual self from the cycle of Samsara. But due to ignorance, the individual
is constrained to do karma that produces merits and demerits, moving the cycle of life and
death. But, unlike a Buddhist, Vaisesika believes that God is very important for the

18
salvation of the individual. Self-surrender and ultimate faith on God help the person to
attain his salvation.

Concept of God in Bhagavad Gita

The notion of supreme spiritual being Krishna in Gita as Purushottama is

worthwhile mentioning. Krishna as Purusottama is the manifestation of the supreme
Brahman himself, who is involved in the work of creation and preservation of mankind
whenever dark forces/evils threaten the existence. Avatara descends on earth whenever
there is a decline of righteousness, to maintain harmony and peace. The purpose of the
Avatara is to establish Dharma and restore the right. Avataras are revelations of God
himself. They are self-manifestations of the divine God in form of human being. Krishna in
the battle ground of Kurukshetra reveals himself in the form of Vishvarupa to convince
Arjuna and testify him to be the divine God. But the message of Krishna to Arjuna and the
mankind is very much compatible with the message of the Buddha. In the Bhagavad Gita,
Krishna explains Arjuna how someone can realize him,
When the mind of the Yogi is in harmony and finds rest in the spirit
within, all restless desires gone, then he is a Yukta, one in God.
Then his soul is a lamp whose light is steady,
for it burns in a shelter where no winds come.
When the mind is resting in the stillness of the prayer of Yoga, and
By the grace of the sprit sees the spirit and therein finds fulfillment.
When all desires are in peace and the mind, withdrawing within gathers
The many straying senses into the harmony of recollection. 16
(Bhagavad Gita)

Further, Krishna admonishes to Arjuna—

Not by Vedas or by penance
Not by gifts or acts of worship
As I seen in such a manner,
As you have seen me. "
(na ham vedarina natapsa
Aham evean vidho'rujana
Jnatum drastum ca tattvena
Pravestum ca param tapa.) 17

(Bhagavad Gita)

19
The definitions of God in Hinduism clearly shows the similarity of principles
between the two religions (Hinduism and Buddhism)—

The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone's heart. O Arjuna, and is directing the
wanderings of all living entities.18

Bhagwan is He who possesses without limit the six types of opulence—strength,

fame, wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation.19

This is also the doctrine of Buddhism. The Buddha has always warned his
disciples not to be engaged in scriptures alone that can never achieve Nirvana.
He who constantly recites the texts
But does not act accordingly,
That heedless man, like a cowherd
That counts the cows of others,
Is not enriched by the virtuous life.20

Thus, it is clear that the concept of God becomes irrelevant when it comes to the
realization of one's emancipation in both the religions.
The concept of Avatara and deliverance of suffering of human beings is not
accepted by Buddhism which believes in individual's karmic effort in attaining
Enlightenment. So the Buddha claims—
cQf xL cQgf] gfyf], sf]xL gfyf] k/f]l;of

You are your own master, who can be otherwise?....

t'Dx]xL lsRr+ cfQKk+, cSvftf/f] tyfutf .

You have to strive yourself, the Tathagata can only show the path. 21

Samkhya, one of the six schools of Hindu philosophy founded by the sage Kapila,
believes the universe as consisting of two eternal realities: Purusha (the universal self) and
Prakriti (the basic matter of the universe). Purusha is the centre of consciousness whereas
Prakriti is the source of all material existence. The Samkhya School of philosophy says that
the Purusha is a state of pure consciousness which presides over every individual mind.
Purusha refers to a state of emancipation which is incomprehensible and transcendental. It
is above all kinds of human experience. Samkhya School of philosophy regards that is the
ultimate state of metaphysical liberation. It is a state of culmination whereby the mental

20
faculties of an individual are freed from all kinds of grossness and is in the state of
renouncement. Rather it can be said that is the absolute tranquility of the mind.

Purusha, in Samkhya, is an eternally free, absolutely independent principle,

inexplicable and unknowable by the help of ordinary experience. The Purusha transcends
all experience and stands outside the phenomenal world as a mere witness.

Bibhu Padi, in his work Indian Philosophy and Religion, states that Vaisesika
system explains the whole framework of the universe in terms of twenty five categories, all
of which can be brought under four major categories:

1. That which is neither produced nor produces;

2. That which is not produced but produces;

3. Those which are produced and do produce; and

4. Those which are produced but do not produce.

The Samkhya theory concludes that God is neither produced nor produces. If God
is something that is produced, there must be a cause before god which undermines the
omnipotence of God. God, Purusha, is the point beyond which the explanation of the
world cannot proceed. It is thus uncaused and unproduced. God is neither "before" nor
"after".

Similarly, Purusha is also unproductive. Producing involves activity and comes

under karma. But is inactive and doesn't do any karma. The absence time and space, Karma
in God eliminates any possibility of God as actively involved in the creation of the
universe. Purusha remains as pure and non-attributive. Purusha cannot be related to
anything but itself.

It is evident, from the inactive nature of Purusha in Samkhya, that they logically
conclude another important concept for the creation of universe, Prakriti. It is Prakriti that
is responsible for the creation. The external world is the result of the process of evolution,
which involves the transformation of a thing into a different form of the same thing, all the
while its substance remaining the same. The world is the effect which lies latent in its
material cause, Prakriti. The transcendental Self, Purusha, remaining outside the world,
cannot be its cause and, hence, the other ultimate reality Prakriti is supposed to be the first
cause, which nonetheless acts under the influence and supervision of Purusha.

21
The philosophy states that, unless the mind becomes free from all kinds of bonds
and falsehood, it cannot achieve the state of Moksha. Samkhya, like all other systems of
Indian Philosophy, regards ignorance as the cause of bondage and suffering. It emphasizes
the fact that a pure mind is essential to make living in this universe worthwhile. The
philosophy states that Moksha can also be attained by developing the higher faculties of
the mind which means a state when the mind is free from all kinds of negative emotions.
This is very close to the Buddha's philosophy of Avidya (ignorance) as the root cause of all
suffering. Unless human mind gets rid of all gross elements- the panchanivarana (desire,
aversion, doubt, laziness, moha), it is not possible to achieve a state of eternal bliss,
Nirvana.

Vedanta, one of the world's ancient texts based on Veda, affirms the oneness of
God and existence and the divinity of Soul. God is Absolute Existence, Knowledge and
Bliss—Satchidananda. It is the only Reality that is all pervading and, therefore, infinite
and unbound. It teaches the real or essential nature of God, the universe and the individual
being and its oneness with God. The quintessence of the teachings of Vedanta is that
Brahman is only absolute reality and the world is an illusory (Maya) appearance like a
mirage seen in a desert. Vedanta asserts that the goal of human life is to realize and
manifest our divinity. Our real nature is divine. Plato's theory of pure idea and soul is very
close to Vedanta. This Oneness of self (jiva) with Absolute Consciousness (Brahman of
God) is the goal of Vedanta.

Existence of God in Buddhism

Buddhism emerged from Hinduism. There are obvious signs of the influence of
the Vedas and the Upanishads on Buddhism. Yet Buddhism denies the authority of the
Vedas. It succeeds in presenting itself as a pure ethical and spiritual religion against the
extreme polytheism and ritualism of the Vedic tradition. Nevertheless, Buddhism is
indisputably a separate religion and philosophy. It has exerted immense influence over the
religious and philosophical thinking of the world.

Buddhism, like Islam and Christianity, has a definite origin in a definite founder.
The founder of Buddhism was Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, who was born in
Kapilavastu, Nepal. He was also called Sakyamuni (the Saint of the Sakya clan). It is also
generally believed by Buddhists that Sakyamuni had taken 550 incarnations to acquire

22
perfection and to attain enlightenment by a gradual process. The Buddha himself took 500
births before he became Boddhisattva i.e., Buddha-elect.

Sakyamuni Siddhartha was very much concerned about the unabated suffering of
man through-out his life-time. Birth, various diseases, old age and death—all are signs of
suffering and Gautama wanted to find out a permanent cure to all these sufferings of man.

He was over pressed by such concern. One night he left the palace and left his
parents, his wife and his recently born son. He himself left his house for ever and went out
in search of real knowledge—Bodhi or Prajna—with the help of which he could save
people. After leaving the palace, Siddhartha became a disciple of several teachers but
could not get the right remedy for the misery of life. It is said that he got such intuitive
light or Bodhi while he was in a Samadhi beneath a tree (now called Bodhi-Tree) in Bodh-
Gaya, India. After the 49th day of his starting meditation, Sakyamuni attained
enlightenment. Thenceforward, he was called the Buddha, the Enlightened one. He got
three-fold knowledge:

(1) Knowledge of his previous births

(2) Knowledge of the births and deaths of all other beings and

(3) The Knowledge of his release from the whole process of births and deaths.

The first sermon of Buddha became immortalized in the symbolic gesture of

Dharmachakara mudra i.e., turning the wheel of the law. Since then Buddha preached
common people that birth was at the root of all suffering and therefore it was to be
avoided. As a matter of fact, man was bound in a constant cycle of birth and death. This
cycle was to be stopped and ended. Otherwise, there could be 'no permanent end to human
suffering. The way how people generally lived and worked in the world was a sign of their
ignorance regarding the real nature of the world. The attachment to the world was the real
cause behind man's suffering and this in turn was the result of ignorance (Ajnana). If this
ignorance could be removed, man could attain a state which was called the state of
Nirvana. This state was negatively a state of the permanent cessation of all suffering and
positively a state of perfect peace and equanimity.

For the attainment of this state and removal of ignorance, Buddha preached them
an eight-fold path (Astangika marga). K. N. Tiwari comments that this eight-fold path was
neither one of complete indulgence nor one of complete asceticism. It was a middle path
23
(Majjhima nikaya). This path consisted eight disciplines—Right understanding (Samyaka
drsti), Right thought (Samyaka sankalpa), Right speech (Samyaka vaka) , Right action
(Samyaka karmanta), Right livelihood (Samyaka ajiva) , Right effort (Samyaka Vyayama),
Right mindfulness (Samyaka smrti) and Right concentration ( Samyaka samadhi).22 In this
way, Buddhism is a practical religion of pure ethical discipline. Some of the basic features
of Buddhism are mentioned here:

(1) Buddhism is a doctrine or philosophy of life.

(2) Buddhism is primarily a religion without God.

(3) Early Buddhism is a purely ethical religion free from all sorts of
ritualism.

(4) Later Buddhism, at least in the form of the Mahayana, gives vent to
ritualism, monasticism etc.

(4) Belief in the four noble truths (Chatvari Arya Satyani) and the pursuit
of the eightfold discipline (Astangika Marga) are the essence of
Buddhism.

(5) The basic creed of Buddhism is—Buddham saranam gachhami,

Dhammam saranam gachhami, Sangham saranam gachhami.

Buddha never spoke of any God. His only concern was the suffering man. He was
simply silent over such issue as whether there was a God or not. In early Buddhism there is
no mention of God. Early Buddhism is purely man-centred, humanistic religion. It is
entirely ethical in its character.

Later Buddhism accepts Buddha himself as God and believes in his various earlier
incarnations. In the modern time, images of Buddha are in temples. These images are wor-
shipped and adored more or less in the fashion of the Hindu God. Furthermore, the
Mahayana Buddhists also worship many Bodhisattvas other than the Buddha. They also
abound in various sorts of ritualistic practices. This side of Buddhism seems much closer
to Hindu polytheism.

Buddhists for the most part worship and adore Buddha as an embodiment of
holiness and compassion and as a great spiritual leader and saviour of mankind. By
worshipping him, they expect his kind helping hand for removing their suffering.

24
For Buddhist teachings, God is irrelevant for gaining enlightenment and spiritual
development. No amount of devotion or praying to a god will bring enlightenment. In
Buddhism, gods too have the nature of impermanence and come under karmic influence.
Though god might have an extremely long life compared to a human, it is determined by
karma and will eventually come to an end with the rebirth of the god into another life form.
Gods have attained the supreme existence because of their good karmas which, after being
exhausted, have to fall to earth. They themselves need to be enlightened. The gods like
every other being must strive to achieve enlightenment. This understanding differs from
Hindu views where the gods are always gods. In Hinduism, all Gods are manifestation of
the eternal Brahman. They are enlightened, free from any defilement. In Buddhism, the
gods are part of the worlds of form and desire and therefore essentially finite. While they
are in the position of Gods, they can benefit human life. Consequently, Buddhists believe
that a god is not the highest level of spirituality. Entry into bliss and freedom of Nirvana
and emancipation from the world of suffering and rebirth is gained only through
undergoing Buddhist discipline. Thus, the term god itself becomes irrelevant in Hinduism
as the divine nature of God lies within. An individual has to make an effort, by Yoga or
Bhakti, to realize this divinity within to deliver himself from the miseries of existence.
Buddhists would call this divine God within Nirvana, emancipation from the suffering of
life.

Buddhism has sometimes been called an atheistic teaching, in a derogatory sense

of non-believer in any kind of gods. Those who use the word "atheism" often associate it
with a materialistic doctrine that knows nothing higher than this world of the senses and
the slight happiness it can bestow. This is far from the truth. In Dhammachakra Sutra, after
the propagation of his Dhamma to his five followers, the Buddha describes various forms
of God who are exalted in listening to his first sermon in Sarnath, India. Only in one way,
Buddhism can be described as atheistic, namely, in so far as it denies the existence of an
eternal, omnipotent God or godhood who is the creator and ordainer of the world. From a
study of the discourses of the Buddha preserved in the Pali canon, it will be seen that the
idea of a personal deity, a creator god conceived to be eternal and omnipotent, is
incompatible with the Buddha's teachings. On the other hand, conceptions of an impersonal
godhead of any description, such as world-soul, etc., are excluded by the Buddha's
teachings on Anatta, non-self or insubstantiality. Buddhism affirms many forms of
spirituality and belief in gods which means to elevate and improve worldly life. Buddhism
25
is not, therefore, atheistic in the modern understanding which developed in the West as a
reaction to theistic Christianity.

Atheism is often associated with a materialistic doctrine. Buddhism is nothing of

that sort. In this respect, it agrees with the teachings of other religions, that true lasting
happiness cannot be found in this world; nor, the Buddha adds, can it be found on any
higher plane of existence, conceived as heavenly or divine world, since all planes of
existence are impermanent and thus incapable of giving lasting bliss. The spiritual values
advocated by Buddhism are directed, not towards a new life in some higher world, but
towards a state utterly transcending the world, namely, Nibbana.

Buddhism is not about either believing or not believing in God or gods. Rather,
the historical Buddha taught that believing in gods was not useful for those seeking to
realize enlightenment. The Buddha also plainly said that he was not a god, but "awakened".
In other words, god is unnecessary in Buddhism. For this reason, Buddhism is more
accurately called non-theistic than atheistic.

Buddhists do not make use of the term God, which characteristically belongs to
Christian terminology. An equivalent most commonly used is Dharmakaya. When the
Dharmakaya is most concretely conceived, it becomes the Buddha, or Tathagata, or
Vairochana, or Amitabha. Buddha means "the enlightened," and this may be understood to
correspond to "God is wisdom." Vairochana is "coming from the sun," and Amitabha,
"infinite light," which reminds us of the Christian notion, "God is light." As to the correct
meaning of Tathagata, Buddhists do not give any definite and satisfactory explanation, and
it is usually considered to be the combination of tatha = "thus" and gata = "gone," but it is
difficult to find out how "Thus Gone" came to be an appellation of the supreme being.

Buddhism is not atheistic as the term is ordinarily understood. However, the

followers of Buddhism usually avoid the term God, for it savors so much of Christianity,
whose spirit is not always exactly in accord with the Buddhist interpretation of religious
experience. Again, Buddhism is not pantheistic in the sense that it identifies the universe
with God. On the other hand, the Buddhist God is absolute and transcendent; this world,
being merely its manifestation, is necessarily fragmental and imperfect. To define more
exactly the Buddhist notion of the highest being, it may be convenient to borrow the term
very happily coined by a modern German scholar (19th-century German Sanskritist

26
Theodore Goldstücker ), "pantheism," according to which God is "all and one" and more
than the totality of existence.

Buddhism neither believes in the existence of God nor of soul. It is basically a

religion of the mind, which advocates present moment awareness, inner purity, ethical
conduct, freedom from the problem of change, impermanence and suffering and reliance
upon one's own experience as the sold teacher, rather than an external authority, on the
Eightfold Path. Unlike other major religions of the world, Buddhism is not centered around
the concept of God or an universal supreme being, who is responsible for the end
dissolution of the world and the existence of sentient beings. Buddhism does not even
support the existence of an external and unchanging soul.

One of the most fundamental beliefs of Buddhism is that all the multitudinous and
multifarious phenomena in the universe start from, and have their being in, one reality
which itself has "no fixed abode," being above spatial and temporal limitations. However
different and separate and irreducible things may appear to the senses, the most profound
law of the human mind declares that they are all one in their hidden nature. In this world of
relativity, or nanatva as Buddhists call it, subject and object, thought and nature, are
separate and distinct, and as far as our sense-experience goes, there is an impassable chasm
between the two which no amount of philosophizing can bridge. But the very constitution
of the mind demands a unifying principle which is an indispensable hypothesis for our
conception of phenomenality.

Buddhism recognizes the coexistence and identity of the two principles, sameness
and difference. Things are many and yet one; they are one and yet many. I am not thou,
and thou art not I; and yet we are all one in essence.

Intellectually, the coexistence of the two mutually excluding thoughts is

impossible, for the proposition, "Mine are not thine," cannot be made at the same time the
proposition, "Mine are thine." But here Buddhism is speaking of our inmost religious
experience, which deals directly with facts and not with their more or less distorted
intellectual reflections. It is, therefore, really ideal to say that Buddhism is neither
pantheistic nor atheistic nor nihilistic. Buddhism is not a philosophical system, though it is
the most rational and intellectual religion in the world. What it proposes is to make clear
facts of the deepest spiritual life and to formulate a doctrine which leads its followers to the
path of inward experience.
27
Though God plays an important role in Hindu philosophy, it's very important to
note that God alone will never deliver them from his sins. The message of Yajurveda is
very much compatible with Buddhism—

Verily the man engulfed in the darkness of ignorance and those who dissolving
the dictates of conscience are sinners given to carnal pleasures. They, in this life
and after death attain to those sexual enjoyments enwrap in affliction and
ignorance.23

Thus, according to the proclamation of an enlightened mind, God or the principle

of sameness is not transcendent, but immanent in the universe, and the sentient beings are
manifesting the divine glory just as much as the lilies of the field. A God who, keeping
aloof from his creations, sends down his words of command through specially favored
personages, is rejected by Buddhists as against the constitution of human reason. God must
be in us, who are made in his likeness. We cannot presume the duality of God and the
world. Religion is not to go to God by forsaking the world, but to find him in it. Our faith
is to believe in our essential oneness with him, and not in our sensual separateness. "God in
us and we in him," must be made the most fundamental faith of all religions.

Unlike other religions like Buddhism, Christianity or Islam, Hinduism does not
talk about a God who stays outside the universe and creates/destroys this universe. Instead
here Universe itself is the God! Universe is a self aware Paramaatma (the universal soul)
and everything else in the universe is a part of this God! We are all Aatma (souls) whose
goal is to realize and unite with this Paramaatma (Universal Soul).

The Vedas compare creation to a spider‘s web, that the spider creates and then lies
within. God is both the container of the universe and what is contained in it, which is why
the sacred Vedic texts of Hinduism say Aham Brahmasmi which means I am God. This is
because we are all a part of this Universal God. This is also the reason why we find thirty
three crore Gods in Hinduism. Since Universe itself is the God, everything else and
everybody else in the Universe is also a form of God. That's the reason why Hindus
worship water, rain, thunder, earth, moon, sun, stars, sky, humans, trees, plants, animals,
air, father, mother, elders, light, wealth, knowledge, anything and everything that you find
in this universe as God.

28
Vedic rishis/saints were attracted by the bright and beautiful aspects of nature and
so they worshiped the various forces of nature as manifestations of supreme GOD. Thus,
they worshipped a number of Nature Gods.

The word ‗Deva‘ or ‗Devta‘ is normally translated by western scholars and their
followers in India, as deity or god. But this is an incorrect interpretation due to the fact that
they have not tried to find out the root from which this word has been derived. As per
Nirukta ―Dev‖ is derived from the words da, dut, dip and divu—
b]jf] bfgfb\ jf bLkfgfb\ Wof]tgfb\ jf Wo':yfgf] eQmflt+ jf .24

According to it, knowledge, light, peace, delight and all those objects that give
peace or pleasure are callaed ―devtas‖. This fact is borne by veda mantra itself—
clUgb]jtf], jftf] b]jtf, ;"of]{ b]jtf, rGb|df b]jtf ;jjf] b]jtf
?b| b]jtflbTof b]jtf d?tf] b]jtf ljZj] b]jf a';:kltb]{jt]Gb|f] b]jtf j?tf] b]jtf . 25

Fire, Air, Sun, Vasus (space or abode), Aditya (time), learned persons of contemplative mood, all
useful and good objects, God the creator and protector of the Universe, Vedas, well earned riches
and water are all devtas, i.e., highly useful things.

Critical Comparison regarding the Existence of God in Hinduism and Buddhism

Hinduism and Buddhism both have numerous gods and both follow the same
paths to ultimately achieve Nirvana. The concept of a god or gods in Buddhism is almost
void and therefore in the eyes of some it is not even a religion. Hindus have many gods
governing different aspects of Hindu life. The three main gods in Hinduism are Vishnu
who is the sustainer; Brahma is the creator and Shiva the destroyer. They are referred as
Trinity/Trimurti. Most Hindu gods are associated with animals and therefore Hindus feel
that being a vegetarian is vital. Cows are sacred in Hinduism and are worshipped as the
divine mother, making eating beef a taboo. Buddhism involves meditation and prayer. In
Buddhism, one must understand the four noble truths which are the truth of suffering, the
truth of the origin of suffering, the truth of cessation, and the truth of the path. As
mentioned earlier, these all follow the Eightfold path, which describes the ways in which
one must live. Hindu scriptures advocate the pursuit of many goals in one‘s life including
righteous living, wealth, prosperity, love and happiness. The ultimate goal is to achieve
Nirvana.

29
The Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation and meditation was what
he primarily taught. The Hindu doctrine mentions meditation as one of the ways to attain
God. This is the path of Raja Yoga. However, the Hindu scriptures also mention Karma
Yoga (the path of action), Bhakti Yoga (the path of prayer or devotion) and Jnana Yoga
(the path of knowledge). These are different paths, which lead to the same goal - Moksha,
Nirvana or Union with God.

The reason why the Buddha did not believe in a god is that the belief is not
necessary. Some claim that the belief in a god is necessary in order to explain the origin of
the universe. But this is not so. Science has very convincingly explained how the universe
came into being without having to introduce the god-idea. Some claim that belief in god is
necessary to have a happy, meaningful life. Again we can see that this is not so. There are
millions of atheists and free-thinkers, not to mention many Buddhists, who live useful,
happy and meaningful lives without having belief in a god. Some claim that belief in god‘s
power is necessary because humans, being weak, do not have the strength to help
themselves. Once again, the evidence indicates the opposite. One often hears of people
who have overcome great disabilities and handicaps, enormous odds and difficulties
through their own inner resources, through their own efforts and without belief in a god.
Some claim that god is necessary in order to give man salvation. But this argument only
holds good if one accepts the theological concept of salvation and Buddhists do not accept
such a concept. Based on his own experience, the Buddha saw that each human being had
the capacity to purify the mind, develop infinite love and compassion and perfect
understanding. He shifted attention from the heavens to the heart and encouraged us to find
solutions to our problems through self-understanding.

Hinduism, which has thousands of gods and goddesses, is actually a monotheistic

religion. Each god is seen as one manifestation of the one Supreme God. Most Hindus
practise devotion (bhakti) to either a form of Lord Vishnu or Lord Shiva or Lord Brahman.
They see this as one essential part of religious practice.

The Buddha, on the other hand, taught that we should not concern ourselves with
worship or devotion to a particular God. The Buddha did not deny the existence of a
Supreme God: he just said that we are responsible for our own enlightenment, and not to
believe that a supreme being could help us.

30
The realization of God in Hinduism is very similar to the path of Enlightenment in
Buddhism. In Hinduism, Brahma nature is realized by philosophically understanding the
eternal and unchanging nature of one's self. The mystic yogis, who initially perform the
yogic practices, often meditate on renunciation of desires. The practice of Bhakti is aimed
at worship of the Lord as a divine person, Ishvara, or as the Supreme Person situated in his
spiritual abode. It is very important to note that Bhakti is never done with a mind of lust or
gaining anything but with total submission of one's worldly desires. This is true with the
Buddhist meditation to achieve Nirvana.

When we observe profoundly, we will find that there are numerous similarities
between Hinduism and Buddhism. It can be seen that all religions teach human beings how
to attain the highest morality level. The moral level through interpretation of reality though
relatively different, holds single purpose which is to know and recognize the Ultimate
Reality, the Creator of this universe.

Religious unity and tolerance that possess for the most part of similar ultimate
reality even though through a very different interpretation is to show that all the created
differences are of the manifestation of reality of God‘s existence and His legitimacy of the
universe creation. All these differences should be understood by all human beings because
such differences are supposed to be a symbol of the universal harmony. Hence, all these
differences should not be the source for disputation, but to be deliberated and taking the
necessary lessons of the truth of His existence and the reason why human beings are
created diversely in religion, color, language and so on – to knowing God through His
diversity of creation.

According to the Buddha, being is an aggregate of the five Skandhas

(Panchaskandhas). But none of the five aggregates alone is the self or soul (atta); and
apart from these there remains nothing to be called the soul or God. Thus, Buddha goes a
step further than the Upanishads, beyond all modes of positivity, cognition, perception and
so on, so that he is able to make us implicitly conscious of the karmic fetters from which
one must free oneself in order that one may elevate oneself to a level of awareness which is
equivalent to Nirvana.

While the Absolute is pure consciousness and pure freedom and infinite
possibility, it appears to be God from the point of view of the one specific possibility
which has become actualized. While God is organically bound up with the universe, the
31
Absolute is not. The world of pure being is not exhausted by the cosmic process which is
only one of the ways in which the Absolute reality which transcends the series reveals
itself.

God is the Absolute from the human end. When we limit down the Absolute to its
relation with the actual possibility, the Absolute appears as supreme Wisdom, Love and
Goodness. The eternal becomes the first and the last.

The religious devotee envisages the supreme reality in the form of a personal God
who is the source, guide and destiny of the world. The difference between the Supreme as
absolute Spirit and the Supreme as personal God is one of standpoint and not of essence. It
is a difference between God as he is and God as he seems to us. Personality is a symbol,
and if we ignore its symbolic character it shuts us out from the truth.

Every belief in Ultimate Reality as God is restrictive in character. It fixes limits,

boundaries. The assumption of a personal God as the ground of being and creator of the
universe is the first stage of the obscuring and restriction of the vision which immediately
perceives the great illumination of Reality. It permits the knowledge of the truth that ever
transcends God, does not annihilate God but comprises it.

Notes and References:

1. Eliot, Sir Charles. (2004). Philosophy and Self, East and West, In K. N. Tiwari,
Comparative Religion, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, p. 8.

2. Sen, K. M. (2005). Hinduism, Penguin Books, pp. 14-15.

3. Tiwari, K. N. (2004). Comparative Religion, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass

Publishers, p.9.

4. Ibid. p. 11.

5. Ibid. p. 13.

6. Padhi, Biphu, and Minakshi Padhi. (1998). Indian Philosophy and Religion, New
Delhi, D. K. Printworld, p. 20.

7. Bhagavad Gita IV.

32
8. Yajurveda 40:8. In Prasanna K. Datta (2009). Sins of Fathers, USA: Xlibris
Corporation, p. 50.

9. Rigveda 1.164.46. In Binita Pani (1993). The Indian Scriptures and The Life
Devine. New Delhi: Ashish Publishing House.

10. Dasgupta, S. N. (2008). Hindu Mysticism, USA, Wilder Publications, p. 21.

11. Padhi, Biphu, and Minakshi Padhi. (1998). Indian Philosophy and Religion, New
Delhi:D. K. Printworld.

12. Radhakrishnan, S. and Charles A. Moore. (1997). A Source Book in Indian

Philosophy, Princeton University Press, pp. 554-555.

13. Maharaja, S. S. K. (1996), Philosophy of Divine Love, India, Sadhna Bhavan

Trust.

14. Ibid.

15. Radhakrishnan, S. and Charles A. Moore. (1997), A Source Book in Indian

Philosophy, Princeton University Press, pp. 567.

16. Verma, Rajendra, (1984), Comparative Religion, Delhi, Bharatiya Book

Corporation, p. 95.

17. Ibid. p. 288.

18. Bhagvad Gita 18:61.

19. Vishnu Purana 80:25.

20. The Dhammapada 1:20.

21. The Dhammapada 20:276.

22. Tiwari, K. N. (2004), Comparative Religion, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass

Publishers, p.44.

23. Yajurveda 14-20.

24. Nirukta 7-16.

25. Yajurveda 14-20.

33
Concept of Atman/Soul in Hinduism and Buddhism
Section - 2

Concept of Atman in Hinduism

The word Atman technically means 'the Divinity'. So, in the Upanishads, except
for a few places, the word Atman has been generally used for God, absolute Divinity.
Brihadaranyak Upanishad says, "The supreme Divinity should be desired by a soul to be
visualized." Aitreya Upanishad says, "The supreme Divinity (God) existed before the
creation of this universe." The word ‗brahm‘ means the absolute Divinity who is absolutely
great and makes a soul great like himself after God realization. In Hinduism, Atman is
considered the essential 'self' of a person. The pre-Buddhist Upanishads link the Self to the
feeling "I am."

Atman refers to the non-material self, which never changes. It is distinct from both
the mind and the external body. This real self is beyond the temporary designations we
normally ascribe to ourselves, in terms of race, gender, species and nationality.

In the Upanishads, the term ‗brahma‘ mostly refers to the personal form of God
and occasionally to the impersonal (nirakar) aspect of God, which is mentioned in the
verse seven in the Mandukyoupnishad. The reason is that the nirakar aspect of God or
nirakar brahma is formless and actionless and so it is only the 'Purusha,' the personal form
of God, who does all the things. The Upanishads describe the kindness of God awarding
liberation and His abode to the souls, and the creation of the universe. This is the work of
the personal god only. That's why, there is very little description of the nirakar brahma in
them.1

Brahma is derived from the root 'brh', which means 'to grow or expand' and refers
to ' the power which of itself burst into utterance as prayer.' Philosophically speaking,
therefore, Brahman is "the power or primary principle which spontaneously manifests
itself as the universe".2

The second Upanishadic term atman for the ultimate reality is applied to whatever
constitutes the essential part of anything, more particularly. The Vedic philosophers and
later, the Upanishadic sages, tried to discover not merely a cosmic principle or the source
of the universe as a whole, but the psychic principle or the inner essence of man.

34
In the hymns of Rigveda, Atman refers both to the ultimate essence of the universe
and the vital breath in man. In the Upanishads, the word Brahman is used in the former
sense, while the word Atman denotes the inmost essence in man. The basic doctrine of the
Upanishads involves the identification of Brahman with Atman. The Supreme God
manifests itself in supreme truth in every Soul.

The most important thing is that nirakar brahma, being an existence of absolutely
dormant virtues (avyakt shakti), can never even manifest its blissfulness. It is like the
subtle dormant state of the beauty of a flower that dormantly exists in its seed that has not
even taken the shape of a plant. So, wherever the Upanishads talk about the Divine
knowledge of Bliss (chidanand) of brahma, they only refer to the personal form of God
and not the nirakar brahm.

The Upanishads offer two facts. The first one is that the soul does not belong to
maya or the mayic world because it itself is an eternal, infinitesimal and Divine entity. The
second one is that the soul has a natural and eternal relationship with God. The Upanishads
describe this fact with their aphorism like tattavamasi. It means Soul (in its pure form) is
substantially the same as God, like a drop of the ocean and the ocean itself. Soul Belongs
to God as it is eternally related to Him. Souls are unlimited in number. But the truth is that
the souls in the mayic realm are eternally blemished with the association of maya which is
an eternally existing delusive power of God that appears and multiplies itself in the form of
this world.3

There are many interesting perspectives on the ‗self‘ in Hinduism, ranging from
the self as eternal servant of God to the self as being identified with God. The
understanding of the ‗self‘ as eternal supports the idea of reincarnation. In the incarnation,
the same eternal being can inhabit temporary bodies.

Some versions of Yoga argue that, through their spiritual practices, one can come
into direct contact with one's real self or atman. Meanwhile, other Hindu philosophical and
religious theories suggest that the atman possessed by each individual is a reflection of the
Brahman or absolute in the universe. The real immortal self of human beings is identical
with brahman. Spiritual liberation or ‗moksha‘ takes place when the atman and the
Brahman join and become united. This was probably the anathema to Buddhist
philosophy. This based itself rather on the absence of a real self, anatman. It is on this
basis that Buddhism denies the existence of the atman. The notion of the self is closely
35
linked with that of the personality and also with the construction of the parts of the
individual. Many arguments arose and still arise within Buddhism about its nature, or
better, lack of essential nature.

For the self to achieve liberation, it has to know reality, both kinds of reality: its
own and that of the ultimate cause of the world. Question arises- Does the individuality of
the self survive after liberation? According to Sankara, it does not, but Ramanuja argues
that it does. Sankara suggests that the self is what lies behind consciousness. This itself is
similar to light. Consciousness and what lies behind it are both the same sort of thing. The
self is the basis to the activity of consciousness. Consciousness is the way in which the self
expresses itself. It represents the manner in which it acts. But it is important to make a
clear distinction here between them, he claims, by contrast with the Advaitin who mixes
them up.

Another form of inquiry follows - What scope is there to distinguish between the
self and consciousness in this way? We have experience of a self that is different from its
acts of consciousness, because the acts of consciousness are always changing while the self
seems to be relatively permanent. He further argues that, not only is the self the basis of
consciousness, it is also the object of consciousness. This is the case because, in every act
of knowledge, the self is aware through consciousness of something else. It is also aware
that it is aware. In other words, it is also aware of itself. This is not a separate act of
consciousness, but rather is part and parcel of the activity of consciousness itself. The
significance of this doctrine emerges when it is contrasted with Sankara's concept of
dreamless sleep (susupti). According to Sankara, in such sleep the individual self
disappears. All that remains is consciousness. This is to be identified with the absolute self.
From this, it follows that the individual self is really an illusion. There is an eternal self
which is presupposed by individual experiences. The nature of the self is something that
we intuit, and it is known through our experience. Sankara disapproves of the Nyaya
argument that we can know the self through inference. This argument starts with a series of
experiences, and then appeals to the notion of a self to which they belong.

Sankara suggests that we have no reason to think that those experiences are part
of ‗my self‘ as opposed to ‗someone else‘ unless we already accept the existence of such a
self, which is circular. Such a self can be accepted as existing right from the start of
experience, although its real status has to be qualified. Ramanuja agrees that consciousness

36
persists in dreamless sleep, but does not accept Sankara's conclusion, since the former
argues that a type of self-awareness continues in the experience of dreamless sleep. After
all, when we wake up, we attribute the experience to an individual self, and so have no
reason not to think that such a self persisted during the sleep. In such sleep, the self is
aware of itself only as a subject, but he discounts the significance of the dreamless sleep.
This does indeed provide an example of bliss, the same sort of bliss that arises on
liberation, but this is only a pale reflection of the fully fledged bliss of liberation.
Dreamless sleep merely provides a temporary relief from samsara, while when the self is in
contact with Brahman, complete relief is affected. By contrast, Ramanuja argues that our
experience is essentially dualist, since we distinguish between the knower and the object of
knowledge. Madhva also suggests that the individual differences between people must be
based on their different selves, and goes further than Ramanuja in arguing that souls
cannot be alike.

Atman has two rather contrasting meanings. In this sense, it can mean the ultimate
reality of a person. It also means the superficial aspects of the personality with which we
tend to identify ourselves. The more we get to know ourselves as we really are, the further
we can see behind the superficial to the essential aspects of ourselves. But these superficial
aspects can be important as well. According to Advaita Vedanta, only the universal
brahman is ultimately real. The ordinary personality and its notion of identity are illusory.
Yet there is also an elaborate theory of the personality and how it survives during change,
in particular transmigration. Although the self may not be ultimately real, it is still real
enough as a part of our experience to be analysable in terms of a self that can undergo
change and yet remain to a degree the same. Advaitins are particularly interested in the
nature of brahman, while at the same time they are keenly aware of the conceptual
difficulties in describing the nature of something that is absolutely one and without
differentiation.

Concept of Atman in Buddhism

In the Buddhist philosophy, they argue that, if there had been a real self, it would
have possessed certain characteristics. These include permanence, immutability, absence of
suffering and being unaffected by prior events. A real self would have been happy since it
would have been aware of itself. It would not have been changed and it would not have
been dependent on anything else. But the self, in so far as we experience it, is very
37
different in such a description. This suggests that the real self and the human self are
entirely distinct. The notion of a persistent self is an illusion from which we ought to free
ourselves. Such mental liberation is a stage on the route to liberation.

The idea of Atman entails the idea of the self as a spiritual rather than material
being. Thus, there is a strong dimension of Hinduism which emphasises detachment from
the material world and promotes practices such as asceticism. Thus it could be said that, in
this world, a spiritual being, the Atman, has a human experience rather than a human being
having a spiritual experience.

Thus, a person has to recognize this truth that he is under the bondage of maya. So
he has to renounce his ignorance by properly understanding the fact that he does not
belong to this mayic world. He only belongs to his Divine beloved God with whom he has
all kinds of sweet relationships. After knowing that, he has to love Him wholeheartedly
and selflessly. Upon god realization, the worshipper of the nirakar brahma enters the
absolutely dormant state of the Divinity called kaivalya moksha and stays there forever in a
kind of totally passed out state, because the nirakar brahma itself is an actionless dormant
Divinity.

The only Hindu school of thought that flatly denies the existence of Atman is the
Charvaka School. The Charvaka regards consciousness as a mere product of matter.
Consciousness is inseparable from life. It is always found associated with the body and is
destroyed with the body's disintegration. As Madhavacharya writes in Sarva-darshana-
samgraha:

From the four original principles or elements alone, when transformed into the
body, consciousness is produced, just as the power is developed from the mixing of
certain ingredients; and then these are destroyed, consciousness at once perishes
also… Therefore, the soul is only the body distinguished by the attribute of
intelligence, since there is no evidence for any self distinct from the body. 4

Samkara, the advaita philosopher, refutes Charvaka's theory of soullessness. His

argument mainly involves the Charvaka claim that life-movements, consciousness,
memory and the related intellectual function belong to the body for the simple reason that
they are experienced only in the body and not without it. According to Sankara, life
movements and the like do not sometimes exist even when the body exists (as at death),
and hence they cannot be products of the body.
38
Buddhist Concept of Soul and Anatma

The Buddhist term Anatman (Sanskrit), or Anatta (Pali) is an adjective in the

Digha Nikaya Sutra. It refers to the nature of phenomena as being devoid of the Soul. That
is the uncompounded subjective Self (Atman) which is the ―light (dipam), and only
refuge‖. Of the 662 occurrences of the term Anatta in the Digha Nikayas, its usage is
restricted to referring to twenty two nouns (forms, feelings, perception, experiences,
consciousness, the eye, eye-consciousness, desires, mental formations, ear, nose, tongue,
body, lusts, things unreal, etc.), all phenomenal, as they are Selfless (anatta). Contrary to
countless many popular (=profane, or =consensus, from which the truth can ‗never be
gathered‘) books written outside the scope of Buddhist doctrine, there is no ―Doctrine of
anatta/anatman‖ mentioned anywhere in the sutras. Rather anatta is used only to refer to
impermanent things/phenomena as other than the Soul, to be anatta, or Self-less (anatta).

Specifically in sutra, anatta is used to describe the temporal and unreal nature of
any and all composite, phenomenal, and temporal things, from macrocosmic to
microcosmic, be it matter as pertains the physical body, the cosmos at large, including any
and all mental machinations which are of the nature of arising and passing. Anatta in sutra
is synonymous and interchangeable with the terms dukkha (suffering) and anicca
(impermanent). All three terms are often used in triplet in making a blanket statement as
regards any and all phenomena; such as: All these aggregates are anicca, dukkha, and
anatta.

Anatta refers specifically and only to the absence of the permanent soul as
pertains any or all of the psycho-physical (nama-rupa) attributes, or khandhas (skandhas,
aggregates). The five-aggregates constitute a being—aggregates of material and mental
forces which are changing all the time—and are the prime causes of suffering. Buddha
sums up the nature of the fives khandhas in Majjima Nikaya: All corporeal phenomena
whether part, present or future, one's own or external, gross or subtle, lofty or low, far or
near, all belong to the group of corporeality; all feelings belong to the group of feelings all
perceptions belong to the group of perception; all mental formations belong to the group of
formations; all consciousness belongs to the group of consciousness.

According to the Buddha, none of the five aggregates alone is the self or soul
(atta). Apart from these there remains nothing to be called the soul.

39
The Pali compound term and noun for ―no soul‖ is natthatta, not the term anatta.
This is mentioned at Samyutta Nikaya 4.400. In this part, Gautama Buddha was asked if
there ―was no-soul (natthatta)‖. To this, Gautama equated this position to be a Nihilistic
heresy (ucchedavada). Common throughout Buddhist sutra (and Vedanta as well) is the
denial of psycho-physical attributes of the mere empirical self to be the Soul, or confused
with same. The Buddhist paradigm as regards phenomena is ―Na me so atta‖ (this/these are
not my soul). This is most common utterance of Gautama the Buddha in the Nikayas,
where ―na me so atta‖ = Anatta/Anatman. In sutra, to hold the view that there was ―no-
Soul‖ (natthatta) is = natthika (nihilist).

One way that karma is used in Buddhism is to explain transmigration of souls and
reincarnation. Buddha did not believe that a soul passes from one body to another, or also
called anatta. Instead, he said there is a series of causes that connects each life to the next
life. The way that our previous lives were led brings us to the way our current life is lived.
This then may seem that we have no power over how our life will be lived which is untrue.
Even though our life right now was produced from what acts were done in the past, our
will is only influenced but still free. That is to say, we still have the freedom to form our
own destinies. This process only says that the results from actions (ideas, impressions,
feelings, streams of consciousness) will carry over the next life.

There is no soul that passes on. Buddha used an analogy about flames on a candle
to describe this transmigration. Lighting a candle from the flame of another candle does
not mean the original flame is on the latter candle. It only means the flame of the first
candle caused the flame of the latter candle just as the actions of a previous life is the
ignition to the next life. As the candle does not actually pass its flame on to the next
candle, the previous life does not pass anything (a soul) on to its next life. Likewise, what
an individual desires or feels is not caused because something was transported in the body,
which had those desires and feelings.

Buddhism differs from the atheism (Skt. Nastika, Pali natthika) in affirming a
spiritual nature. That is not in any noticeable form, but immeasurable, infinite, and
inaccessible to observation. Of which, therefore, empirical science can neither affirm nor
deny the reality thereof of him who has ‗Gone to That [Brahman]‘ (tathatta). It is to the
Atman as distinguished from oneself (nama-rupa/khandhas, mere self as =anatta) i.e.,
whatever is phenomenal and formal (Skt. and Pali nama-rupa, and savinnana-kaya) ―name

40
and appearance‖, and the ―body with its consciousness‖.5 ‗Nonbeing (asat, natthiti ‗the all
is ultimately not‘) both of these positions are existential antinomies, and heresies of
annihilationism])‘.

In contrast to the above, it has been incorrectly asserted that affirmation of the
Atman is = sassatavada (conventionally deemed ‗eternalism‘). However, the Pali term
sasastavada is never associated with the Atman, but that the Atman was an agent (karmin)
in and of samsara which is subject to the whims of becoming (bhava), or which is meant
kammavada; such as sassatavada in sutta = atta ca so loka ca (the Atman and the world
are one), or: ‗Being (sat, atthiti [views of either sabbamatthi ‗the all is entirety‘, and
sabbamekattan ‗the all is one‘s Soul‘6 both are heresies of perpetualism]). Sasastavada is
the wrong conception that one is perpetually (sassata) bound within samsara and that merit
is the highest attainment for either this life or for the next. The heretical antinomy to
nihilism (vibhava, or = ucchedavada) is not, nor in sutta, the Atman, but bhava (becoming,
agencyship). Forever, or eternal becoming is nowhere in sutta identified with the Atman.
The Atman is ―never an agent (karmin)‖, and ―has never become anything‖ (=bhava).
These antinomies of bhava (sassatavada) and vibhava (ucchedavada) both entail illogical
positions untenable to the Vedantic or Buddhist Atman. However, the concept of
―eternalism‖ as =Atman has been the fallacious secondary crutch for supporting the no-
Atman commentarialists position on anatta implying = there is no Atman.

According to the philosophical premise of Gautama the Buddha, the initiate to

Buddhism, who is to be ―shown the way to Immortality (amata)‖7, wherein liberation of
the spirit/mind [Greek = nous] (cittavimutta; Greek = epistrophe) is effectuated through the
expansion of wisdom and the meditative practices of sati and samadhi (assimilation, or
synthesis, complete disobjectification with all objective [unreal] 'reality'), must first be
educated away from his former ignorance-based (avijja) materialistic proclivities in that he
(the common fool) ―saw any of these forms, feelings, this body in whole or part, to be my
Self/Atman, to be that which I am by nature‖.

Teaching through negative methodology of anatta in sutta pertains solely to

things phenomenal. These things were: ―subject to perpetual change; therefore unfit to
declare of such things ‗these are mine, these are what I am, that these are my Soul‘‖ 8. The
one scriptural passage in which Gautama is asked by a layperson what the meaning of
anatta is as follows: At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated herself and asked

41
of the Blessed Lord Buddha: ―Anatta, anatta I hear said venerable. What pray tell does
Anatta mean?‖ ―Just this Radha, form is not the Soul (anatta), sensations are not the Soul
(anatta), perceptions are not the Soul (anatta), assemblages are not the Soul (anatta),
consciousness is not the Soul (anatta). Seeing thusly, this is the end of birth, the Brahman
life has been fulfilled, what must be done has been done.‖9

Anatta, which has been taught in the Nikayas, has only relative value as it is
directly conducive to subjective awakening, or illumination. It is not an absolute one. It
does not say or imply simply that the Soul (atta, Atman) has no reality, but that certain
things (five aggregates), with which the unlearned man (fool = puthujjana, as is always
implied in spiritual texts, a materialist) identifies himself, are not the Soul (anatta). That is
why, one should grow disgusted with them, become detached from them and be liberated.
This principle of the extremely abused and misunderstood term anatta does not negate the
Soul as such, but denies Selfhood to those things that constitute the non-self (anatta),
showing them thereby to be empty of any ultimate value and to be repudiated.

Instead of nullifying the Atman (Soul) doctrine, it in fact compliments and affirms
it in the most logical method by which Subjective is initially gained, that by and through
objective negation. It has been said that: ‗No Indian school of thought has ever regarded
the human soul (another error, since the soul is not a possession of, nor is of the nature of
the persona, or 'human') or the carrier of human personal identity as a permanent substance
(literally meaning, absurdly permanent impermanence. This is certainly true when referring
to the empirical persona (mere self aggregates=pancakhanda, as opposed to the Person,
spirit, Atman). That the Atman is not to be understood as a thinking substance, phenomena,
or eternal soul, is certainly the case, and logically cannot be otherwise.

Anatta is a key principle in the doctrine of Buddhism and the metaphysics, thereof
quantifying anatta and being meant all physical and mental consubstantial and temporal
objectivity. All are compounded things either in simplex (matter, hyle) or complex
(mental). As an-atta is meant not-Subject (=object [phenomena]), those things, as
Buddhism declares ―the unlearned fool bemuses himself as being (those things)‖. "What do
you suppose, followers, if people were carrying off into the Jeta grove bunches of sticks,
grasses, branches, and leaves and did with them as they wished or burned them up, would
it occur to you: These people are carrying us off, are doing as they please with us, and are
burning us? No, indeed not Lord. And how so? Because Lord, none of that is our Soul, nor

42
what our Soul subsists upon! Just so followers, what is not who you are, do away with it,
when you have made done with that, it will lead to your bliss and welfare for as long as
time lasts. What is that you are not? Form, followers, is not who you are, neither are
sensations, perceptions, experiences, consciousness"10.

Just as ‗disgusting (anatta) doctrine‘ cannot make logical sense, neither does
‗anatta doctrine‘ bring light to studies of Buddhism what anatta is contextually or its
philosophical importance as being merely a qualifier of that which is evil, foul, disgusting,
phenomenal and repulsive (= anatta). Anatta is of course a doctrinal tenant within
Buddhism. However, as conventionally and irrationally conceived, there is absolutely no
such creature in Buddhism as a "no-Soul doctrine".

What has Buddhism to say of the Self? "That's not my Self" (na me so atta). This,
and the term "non Self-ishness" (anatta) predicated of the world and all "things" (sabbe
dhamma anatta). These are identical with the Brahmanical "of those who are mortal, there
is no Self/Soul", (anatmahi martyah).11 ―The Soul is the refuge that I have gone unto‖. For
anatta is not said of the Self/Soul but what it is not. There is never and nowhere in sutra, a
‗doctrine of no-Soul‘, but a doctrine of what the Soul is not (form is anatta, feelings are
anatta, etc.). It is of course true that the Buddha denied the existence of the mere empirical
―self‖ in the very meaning of ―my-self‖ (this person so-and-so, nama-rupa, anatta). The
Buddha denied the immortal (amata), the unborn (ajata), Supreme-Self (mahatta),
uncaused (samskrta), undying (amara) and eternal (nicca) of the Upanishads. That is
palpably false, for he frequently speaks of this Self, or Spirit (mahapurisha), and nowhere
more clearly than in the too often repeated formula 'na me so atta‘, ―This/these are not my
Soul‖ (na me so atta‘= anatta/anAtman), excluding body (rupa) and the components of
empirical consciousness (vinnana/ nama), a statement to which the words of Sankhara are
peculiarly opposite, ―Whenever we deny something unreal, is it in reference to something
real‖ , since it was not for the Buddha, but for the nihilist (natthika), to deny the Soul. For,
―yad anatta….na me so atta, ―what is anatta… (means) that is not my Atman‖12. The
extremely descriptive illumination of all things which are Selfless (anattati) will be both
meaningless and a waste of much time.

Anatta is a Pali term used in Buddhist thought and meaning not-self' (Sanskrit,
anatman). This is one of the three marks of all conditioned existence and is central to
Buddhist teaching. It was devised to stand in opposition to the notion of atman, the idea of

43
a constant and eternal self, which is a significant notion in Indian philosophy at the time of
the Buddha. The Buddhist theory of selflessness is predominantly a rejection of Hindu
orthodox philosophy. It has led to a very creative debate between the traditions. Buddhist
philosophers regard the Hindu notion of the self as an expression of the reification that
binds humanity to a misguided notion of what is real, while Hindu thinkers regard the
denial of the self as equivalent to nihilism. The idea of such a self is misleading, according
to Buddhism, since it is no more than an idea that we apply to the flow of consciousness,
and if we closely examine the contents of consciousness we can find no such self in it. For
Buddhism this is a crucial point, since it is the illusion that there is a self which leads to an
incorrect view of reality and so to suffering (dukkha). Once we rid ourselves of this notion,
we are on the route to escape from suffering. It is difficult to overemphasize the
significance of this notion in Buddhist philosophy.

An interesting question has often been asked about the doctrine of not-self. That
is, why the self is not actually denied, while the not-self is described as a vital notion for us
to grasp. The reason seems to be the desire to avoid the appearance of Buddhism being
nihilist, and also to vindicate the role of the not-self for our salvation. The not-self doctrine
can be regarded as an example of skilful means to employ a device that human beings want
to use to transcend the negative consequences of that device. The idea of the self is a
leading instance of attachment. It is through such attachment that we become linked to
suffering and frustration, because we do not realize that what we are attached to is
constantly changing and impermanent. The notion of the real self is a useful notion in that
it explains what we find so attractive about the idea of a permanent subject of
consciousness, and can be used to encapsulate so much of what is in fact illusory but which
seems to be solid. The point of identifying things with not-self is to point out how illusory
they are, and how we should let go of them in just the same way that we should let go of
the self. What we need to do is appreciate how suffering, change and not-self characterize
everything in which we ordinarily have confidence. This exercise sets us on the route to
nirvana.

The role of the not-self, then, is to provide us with a reason to let go of the
phenomena that imply the existence of a self. There is no need to attack the notion of the
self directly, because contemplating the nature of the experiences that presuppose that
notion brings out not only how empty they are, but also how empty is the notion that they

44
presuppose. The point is to embody one's suspicion of the reality of phenomena in one's
practice, and not disprove a particular concept which can then remain unconnected to our
behaviour. One of the interesting features of Buddhist philosophy is the suspicion of
philosophy itself, in the sense of the defense of or attack on different theoretical views.
There is even uneasiness about what might be regarded as correct views, because adhering
to these is also a form of attachment. They are held by us due to some prior cause which
links that attachment to the impermanent. This eventually leads to impermanence and
frustration. On the other hand, one can hold the right views in the right way. This involves
going beyond the process of holding views entirely because it is identified with a form of
direct intuition. From this, it follows that adhering to a doctrine of not-self can be just as
destructive as believing in the self. What we need to do is change until we can see things as
not-self. The question remains, however, - is this not itself a view that has been defended
and to which we might well become attached, although that is through practice instead of
in theory?

One of the characteristics of nirvana is that it is the opposite of everything that

characterizes the appearance of our world, in the sense that it is permanent and happy. One
might expect it also to be the opposite of not-self, but this is not the case. Nirvana is the
highest form of emptiness. Since it is empty, it cannot include the self. The self is
intimately connected to the human personality. As the forms of attachment implicit in the
personality are weakened and eventually replaced, the self certainly does not make a
comeback. The notion of the permanent self disappears. As a result, nirvana is realized.
The characteristics of the self, its permanence and immutability, do survive in nirvana, and
indeed represent the nature of the ultimate end, but not as parts of a reconstructed real self.
The notion of a real self is shown to be illusory in nirvana because the latter involves
establishing as real and permanent what goes far beyond the narrow and selfish aspects of
the ordinary notion of the human self. The latter characteristics cannot survive in nirvana,
which is precisely its opposite.

In later schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism, such as Sarvastivada,

Vajrayana, Madhyamika, and lastly Zen, the oldest existing texts (Nikayas) of Buddhism
predate all these later schools of Buddhism. Anatta is never used pejoratively in any sense
in the Nikayas by Gautama the Buddha. He himself has said: ―Both formerly and now, I‘ve
never been a nihilist (vinayika), never been one who teaches the annihilation of a being,

45
rather taught only the source of suffering, and its ending (avijja).‖13 Further by
investigation into the reference, one can be directed as to a further understanding of this
'negative' methodology which the term anatta illuminates. It should be noted with great
importance that the founder of Advaita Vedanta, Samkara used the term anatman lavishly
in the exact same manner as does Buddhism. However, in all of time since his passing,
none have accused Samkara of propounding a denial of the Atman. Such as: ―Atma-anatma
vivekah kartavyo bandha muktaye‖-―The wiseman should discriminate between the Atman
and the non-atman (anatman) in order to be liberated.‖14; ―Anatman cintanam tyaktva
kasmalam duhkah karanam, vintayatmanam ananda rupam yan-mukti karanam.‖ -―Give
up all that is non-atman (anatman), which is the cause of all misery, think only of the
Atman, which is blissful and the locus of all liberation.‖15

Every qualifying characteristic is, as the non-atman (anatman), comparable to the

empty hand. The intellect, its modifications, and objects are the non-atman (anatman). The
gain of the non-atman (anatman) is no gain at all. Therefore, one should give up the notion
that one is the non-atman (anatman). In none of the Buddhist suttas is there support for
"there is non-atman" theories of anatta. The message is simply to cease regarding the verys
khandhas in those terms by which the notion of Atman has, itself, been so easily
misinterpreted. As has been shown, detaching oneself from the phenomenal desire for the
psycho-physical existence was also a central part of Samkara‘s strategy. There is, hence,
nothing in the suttas that Samkara, the chief proponent of Advaita Vedanta, would have
disagreed with.

―A Doctrine of Anatta‖ exists as a status quo, however, there exists no

substantiation for same in sutta for Buddhism‘s denial of the Atman, or in using the term
anatta in anything but a positive sense in denying Self-Nature, the Soul, to any one of an
aggregation of corporeal and empirical phenomena which were by their very transitory
nature, ―impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and Selfless (anatta)‖.

In fact, the term ―Anatmavada‖ is a concept utterly foreign to Buddhist sutta,

existing in only non-doctrinal Theravada, in some Mahayana, and Madhyamika
commentaries. The perfect contextual usage of anatta in sutta: ―Whatever form, feelings,
perceptions, experiences, or consciousness there are (the five aggregates), these he sees to
be without permanence, as suffering, as ill, as a plague, a boil, a sting, a pain, an affliction,
as foreign, as otherness, as empty (sunya), as Selfless (anattato). So he turns his mind

46
(citta) away from these and gathers his mind/will within the realm of immortality (amataya
dhatuya). This is tranquility; this is that which is most excellent!‖16.

Critical Comparison regarding the concepts of Atman in Hinduism and

Buddhism

The Upanishadic "Self" shares certain characteristics with nibbana of Buddhism.

Both are permanent, beyond suffering, and unconditioned. However, the Buddha shunned
any attempt to see the spiritual goal in terms of "Self" because in his framework, the
craving for a permanent self is the very thing which keeps a person in the round of
uncontrollable rebirth, preventing him or her from attaining nibbana. Both in the
Upanishads and in common usage, self/Self is linked to the sense of "I am".

The main philosophical difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is that the
concept of Atman was rejected by the Buddha. Terms like anatman (not-self) and shunyata
(voidness) are at the core of all Buddhist traditions. The permanent transcendence of the
belief in the separate existence of the self is integral to the enlightenment of an Arhat.

The Buddha criticized conceiving theories even of a unitary soul or identity

immanent in all things as unskillful. In fact, according to the Buddha's statement in
Khandha Samyutta 47, all thoughts about self are necessarily, whether the thinker is aware
of it or not, thoughts about the five aggregates or one of them.

Two ideas are psychologically deep-rooted in man: self-protection and self-

preservation. For self-protection man has created God, on whom he depends for his own
protection, safety, and security, just as a child depends on its parent. For self-preservation
man has conceived the idea of an immortal Soul or Atman, which will live eternally. In his
ignorance, fear, weakness, and desire, man needs these two things to console himself.
Hence, he clings to them deeply and fanatically. The Buddha's teaching does not support
this ignorance, fear, weakness, and desire, but aims at making man enlightened by
removing them and destroying them, striking at their very root. According to Buddhism,
our ideas of God and Soul are false and empty. Though highly developed as theories, they
are all the same extremely subtle mental projections, garbed in an intricate metaphysical
and philosophical phraseology. These ideas are so deep-rooted in man, and so near and
dear to him, that he does not wish to hear, nor does he want to understand, any teaching
against them. The Buddha knew this quite well. In fact, he said that his teaching was
'against the current,' against man's selfish desires.

47
The Buddha denies the existence of self, as conceived in the Upanishadic
tradition, in the Alagaddupama Sutta. Possibly the most famous Upanishadic dictum is tat
tvam asi, "thou art that." Transposed into first person, the Pali version is eso ham asmi, "I
am this." This is said in several suttas to be false. The full statement declared to be
incorrect is "This is mine, I am this, this is my self/essence." This is often rejected as a
wrong view. The Alagaduppama Sutta rejects this and other obvious echoes of surviving
Upanishadic statements as well (these are not mentioned as such in the commentaries, and
seem not to have been noticed until modern times). Moreover, the passage denies that
one‘s self is the same as the world and that one will become the world self at death. The
Buddha tells the monks that people worry about something that is non-existent externally
(bahiddhaa asati) and non-existent internally (ajjhattam asati). He is referring respectively
to the soul/essence of the world and of the individual. The most basic presupposition of
early Brahminic cosmology is the identification of man and the cosmos and liberation for
the yogin was thought to only occur at death, with the adept's union with brahman. The
Buddha's rejection of these theories is therefore one instance of the Buddha's attack on the
whole enterprise of Upanishadic ontology.

The term anatman is found not only in Buddhist sutras, but also in the
Upanishads and lavishly so in the writings of Samkara as mentioned earlier. Anatman is a
common through negative (neti neti, not this, not that) teaching method common to
Vedanta, Neoplatonism, Buddhism, early Christian mystics, and others, wherein nothing
affirmative can be said of what is ―beyond speculation, beyond words, and concepts‖
thereby eliminating all positive characteristics that might be thought to apply to the Soul,
or be attributed to it. Self-Nature (svabhava / Atman) can never be known objectively, but
only through ―the denial of all things which it (the Soul) is not‖. The Subject
(Witness/Atman) cannot be negated (Subject precedes any object of negation, even and
also false attempts at Subject/Witness negation =nihilism). Objective negation culminates
in Subjective liberation, not to mention is the most expedient means to Atman-realization
(Atmanbodhi, cittavimutta, pannavimutta, etc.).

48
Notes and References:

1. Saraswati, Swami Prakashanand. (2001). The True History and Religion Of India.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. p. 84.

2. Hiriyanna, M. (1995). The Essentials of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidas. p. 20.

3. Saraswati, Swami Prakashanand. (2001). The True History and Religion Of India.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas. p. 83.

4. Radhakrishnan, S. and Charles A. Moore. (1997). A Source Book in Indian

Philosophy. Princeton University Press. pp. 229.

5. Digha Nikaya 2.100. [DN2.100]

6. Samyutta Nikaya 2.77. [SN 2.77]

7. Ibid.

8. Majjhima Nikaya 2.265. Samyutta Nikaya 5.9. [SN 5.9]

9. Samyutta Nikaya 2. 77. [SN 2.77]

10. Samyutta Nikaya 3.196. [SN 3.196]

11. Majjhima Nikaya 1.141. [MN 1.141]

12. Br. Sutra III. 2.22.-p.12.

13. Samyutta Nikaya 3.82. [SN 3.82]-p.13.

14. Vivekacudamani of Samkara v. 152.

15. Vivekacudamani of Samkara v. 379.

16. Majjhima Nikaya 1.436. [MN 1.436]

49
Concept of Karma in Hinduism and Buddhism
Section - 3

Concept of Karma in Hinduism

Karma literally means action. Karma means "deed or act". Karma is the law of
action and this law governs man‘s consciousness. Karma is a part of philosophy of the
Hindus. The term came into being in Hinduism, based on the Vedas and Upanishads. One
of the first and most dramatic illustrations of karma can be found in the great Hindu epic,
the Mahabharata. The original Hindu concept of karma was transformed into the religious
practices and later enhanced by several other movements within the religion, most notably
Vedanta, Yoga, and Tantra.

To the Hindus, karma is the law of the nature or phenomenal cosmos that is part
of living within the dimensions of time and space. Karma may differ on the basis of the
time factor- past, present, and future. Consequence is the part of the action and the
consequence always comes only after the action. Thus suffering is not the consequence of
a wrong act, but an actual part of the act, although the consequence may be only
experienced later. A soldier is sometimes wounded in battle, and in the excitement does not
feel any pain. Afterwards, when he is quiet and away from the battle, he feels the pain. In
this way, a man sins and feels no suffering, but later the suffering makes itself felt. The
suffering is not separated from the wound, any more than the heat from fire, though that is
experienced as a result.

All actions are parts of the laws of nature. For example, a boat without oars, sails,
or rudder is carried about helplessly by the winds and currents. The sailor finds himself
drifting along under the press of forces that he can neither change nor direct. But a clever
sailor, with oars, sails and rudder, can send along his boat in any direction he pleases, not
because he has changed the winds and the currents, but because he understands their
directions, and can use those that are going in the direction he wants, and can lay off, the
one against the other, the forces that oppose him. A man must know the laws of nature. If a
man knows the laws of nature, he can utilise those whose forces are going his way and
neutralize those which oppose. Therefore, knowledge is indispensable; the ignorant are
always slaves.

A law of nature is not a command to act in a particular way, but only a statement

50
of the conditions within which action of any kind can be done. Water boils at 100° C under
normal pressure. This is a law of nature. It does not command a man to boil water, but
states the conditions under which water boils. The laws state conditions under which
certain results follow. According to the results, desired conditions may be arranged, and,
given the conditions, the results will invariably follow. Hence, law does not compel any
special action, but only renders all actions possible, and knowledge of law is power.

The Jivatma is three-fold in his nature. He consists of Ichchha, Jnana and Kriya,
i.e. Will, Wisdom and Activity. These, in the lower world of upadhis, of forms, express
themselves as Desire, Knowledge and Action, and these three fashion a man's karma, and
each works according to a definite law. 1

Desire stands behind Thought, stimulating and directing it. Thought, energised
and determined by Desire, stands behind Action, expressing itself therein in the world of
objects. Mans nature is desire-based; as is his desire, so is his thought; as (his) thought is,
so he does action; as he does action, so he attains. Therefore, the following three laws
make up the Law of karma:

1. Desire carries the man to the place where the objects of desire exist, and
thus the desire determines the channels of his future activities.
2. Mind is the creative power, and a man becomes that which he thinks.
His mind determines his personality.
3. Circumstances are made by actions.

Devoted to the fruits of acts, whatever kind of acts a person does, covetous of
fruits, accomplishes, the fruits, good or bad, that he actually enjoys, partake of their
character. Like fishes going against a current of water, the acts of a past life are flung back
on the actor. The embodied creature experiences happiness for his good acts, and misery
for his evil ones.

These three laws cover the making of karma, because the Jivatma consists of
Will, Wisdom and Activity. These show themselves in the world by desires, thoughts and
actions. When we have divided the factors in a man's destiny into opportunities,
character—or capacities—and surrounding circumstances, we have covered them all.
Nothing else remains.

One very commonly felt difficulty in connection with karma is this: the quiry

51
followas like this: "If I am destined by my karma to be bad or good, to do this or not to do
it, it must be so; why then make any effort?" This is merely a fallacy. The fallacy of this
line of thought should be very clearly understood, if the above has been grasped, because it
turns upon a complete misunderstanding of the nature of karma. The effort is part of the
karma, as much as the goodness or badness. Karma is not a finished thing awaiting us, but
a constant becoming, in which the future is not only shaped by the past but is being
modified by the present. If a man desires to be good, he is putting forth an energy which
presently will make him good, however bad he may be now.

Another mistake sometimes made by people regarding the karma is that which
leads them to say respecting a sufferer: "He is suffering his karma; if I help him I may be
interfering with his karma." Those who thus speak forget that each man is an agent of the
karma of others, as well as an experiencer of his own. If we are able to help a man, it is the
proof that the karma under which he was suffering is exhausted, and that we are the agent
of his karma bringing him relief. If we refuse to carry the karmic relief, we make bad
karma for ourselves, shutting ourselves out from future help, and someone else will have
the good karma of carrying the relief and so ensuring for himself aid in a future difficulty.

Karma is said to be of three kinds: Prarabdham, Sanchitarm, and Vartamanam.

Prarabdha karma is that which is ripe for reaping and which cannot be avoided. It is only
exhausted by being experienced. Sanchita karma is the accumulated karma of the past, and
is partly seen in the character of the man, in his power, weaknesses and capacities. Varta-
mana karma is that which is now being created. 2

The Sanchita karma is the karma which is gathered, collected and heaped
together. It is the mass which lies behind a man, and his tendencies come from this. The
Vartamana karma is the actual, that which is now being made for the future, or the Agami,
the coming karma. The Prarabdha karma is that which has begun, is actually bearing fruit.
In Vedantic literature, it is sometimes compared to an arrow already shot.

Prarabdha karma is unchangeable within the scope of one life, since it is the
'setup' for the life in question. It is the karma of one's past life. After death, the atma leaves
the body, as the casting off of old vestments, and carries with it the samskaras
(impressions) of the past life of thoughts, actions and events. These samskaras manifest
themselves in the unchangeable situation into which one is born and also in certain key
events in one's life. These include one's birth, one's time of death, one's economic status,
52
family (or lack of family), etc.

The samskaras that one inherits from the past life create one's personality,
inclinations, talents, the things that make up one's persona. One's likings, abilities, attitudes
and inclinations are based on the thoughts and actions of past life. One's Samchita karma is
somewhat alterable with much practice and by doing a lot of efforts. This might be seen
through the Hindu system of Yoga and the dynamic of the gunas. An example can be taken
as someone who, through meditation, has slowly evolved into a more stable personality.

Vartamana or Agami karma is the karma of the present life over which the soul
has complete control. Through it, one creates one's karma in the present for the future of
the current life and in times to come.

Hindus have belief on karma. They believe that human fate is determined by the
karma. They talk about different kinds of karma but many of them are not conscious about
the kinds. They cannot say, sometimes, if an event in life has been caused by Prarabadha
or Agami karma. The idea of "bad things happening to good people" is as a result of
Prarabadha karma. This is more simply understood as karma from a past life. It is said
that karma works within a cyclical framework that sees the phenomenal universe being
created and eventually dissolving back into itself, back into realization that it was nothing
other than Maya imposed on the truth of Brahman. Therefore, people believe that karma
will eventually be worked out. What the karma has been done by them is important
because the fruit will be received accordingly. They say, through exceeding devotion and
love of God, one can be helped to speed through karma phal (karmic fruit). By developing
'vairagya' or 'detachment' from the fruits of one's karma, as Lord Krishna most famously
summarized, one can transcend karma and be liberated. One is aided by love of God. All
the Yogas of Hinduism seek to transcend karma through different means of realization.

The Bhagavad-Gita categorises karma, listing three kinds of human actions: (1)
karma: those which elevate, (2) Vikarma: those which degrade, and (3) Akarma: those
which create neither good nor bad reactions and thus lead to liberation.

In Hinduism, if one does pious activities, he can accrue good karmic credits and
attain a higher birth. Thus, he can enjoy his life with heavenly blessing without any
difficulties. However, if the pious credits are exhausted, he will fall again to earth.

53
Samkhya Yoga classifies actions into four kinds, according to their capability to
produce pleasure and pain: 1) Sukla (white) refers to those actions which produce pleasure
as well as the actions of those who are engaged in scholarly activities; 2) Krisna (black)
refers to vicious or veda-prohibited actions that produce pain; 3) Sukla-krisna
(white/black) refers to actions which produce both pleasure and pain and involve most of
our day-to-day activities; 4) Asukla-akrisna (neither white nor black) refers to actions
which neither produce pleasure nor produce pain, and thus refers to activities like
introspection and self-disciplining—activities that are conducive to yogic aspiration.3

It is believed that, if one transgresses universal and God-given laws, his soul is
degraded to the status of lower species. Only by gradual purification (and that‘s by
suffering), he can rise again to the human status. When he is in the status of the lower
species, his soul cannot exercise free will. Rather he is more or less condemned to a
"sentence."

Karma and fate are often interchangeable terms in Hinduism. Karma is

misunderstood as fate. Fate is an unchangeable destiny decreed long ago by some forces
external to human beings such as the planets and stars, or most probably the Gods. Some
argue that karma is neither fate nor predetermination. Each soul has absolute free will. Its
only boundary is karma. They say that God and Gods do not dictate the events of human
lives, nor do they test human beings. They also say that there is no cosmic force that molds
human life. Indeed, when beseeched through deep prayer and worship, the Supreme Being
and His great Gods may intercede within our karma, lightening its impact or shifting its
location in time to a period when we are better prepared to resolve it.

In Hindu astrology, or Jyotisha, they show a strong relation between human

beings and the geography of the solar system and some star clusters, but we must know
that it is not a cause-effect relation. Planets and stars don't cause or dictate karma. They
have orbital relationships which establish proper conditions for karmas. These conditions
activate and inspire a particular type of personality nature to develop. Jyotisha describes a
revealment from the orbital relationships. It reveals prarabdha Karmic patterns for a given
birth and how we will generally react to them (Kriyamana karma). With astrological
knowledge, we are aware of our life's Karmic pattern and can thereby anticipate it wisely.

We have thousands of earth lives. We experience different forms or a remarkable

variety of life patterns. We exist as male and female, often switching back and forth from
54
life to life as the nature becomes more harmonized into a person exhibiting both feminine
nurturing and masculine intrepidness. We come to earth with different roles in different
forms as princesses and presidents, as paupers and pirates, as tribals and scientists, as
murderers and healers, as atheists and, ultimately, God-realized sages. We take bodies of
every race and live the many religions, faiths and philosophies as the soul gains more
knowledge and evolutionary experience.4

Therefore, a Hindu knows that the belief in a single form of life on earth is not
possible. A single form of life in the earth followed by eternal joy or pain is utterly wrong.
Such belief merely causes great anxiety, confusion and fear. Hindus believe that all souls
reincarnate. They take one body form and then another, evolving through experiences over
long periods of time. Karma operates not only in this lifetime but across lifetimes. The
results of an action might be experienced in a new life after the present life.

Hindus believe that human beings do their actions with good or bad
consequences. They might reap the rewards of their action in this present life, or in a future
life with human rebirth, or they might reap the rewards of their action in a heaven or hell in
which the self is reborn for a period of time.

This process of reincarnation, birth after birth, is called samsara, or a continuous

cycle, in which the soul is reborn over and over again according to the law of action and
reaction. Many Hindus believe that, at death and after death, the soul is carried by a subtle
body into a new physical body. This can be a human or non-human form (an animal or
divine being). The goal of liberation (moksha) is to make us free from this cycle of action
and reaction, and from birth and rebirth. One is not liberated until he has done all his
karmas. Upanishad clearly speaks,

The object to which the mind is attached, the subtle self goes together with the
deed, being attached to it alone. Exhausting the results of whatever works he did in
the world he comes; again from that world to this world for (fresh) work. This is
for him who desires. But he who does not desire...his breaths do not depart. Being
Brahman he goes to Brahman. 5

This is very much similar to the Buddhist theory of Nirvana. The belief in karma
and reincarnation brings to every Hindu inner peace and self-assurance. That maintains
discipline of their actions. They believe that the maturing of the soul takes many lives. If
the soul is immature in the present birth, there is still hope, because there will be many
55
opportunities for him for learning and growing in future lives. These beliefs and the
attitudes eliminate their anxiety, developing a strong perception that everything is all right
as it is. And, there is also a keen insight into the human condition and appreciation for
people in all stages of spiritual unfoldment. The Bhagvad-Gita speaks, regarding the
exhaustion of karma and attaining the Brahma state—
He who is free from attachment, who is liberated, whose mind is established in knowledge,
whose actions are but actions of sacrifice only, his actions are completely dissolved.6

The lines say that his offering is Brahman, his oblation is Brahman; his sacrificial
fire is Brahman, the sacrificer is Brahman. He certainly attains Brahman who finds
Brahman situated in all activities. These are similar lines to the Buddhist concept of karma.

Concept of Karma in Buddhism

Karma (in Pali called Kamma) means in Buddhsim "action" or "doing". Whatever
one does, says, or thinks is a karma. Buddhism teaches that there are other forces beside
karma that shape our lives. These include natural forces like the changing seasons and
gravity. When a natural disaster like an earthquake strikes a community, this is not some
kind of collective karmic punishment. It's an unfortunate event that requires a
compassionate response, not judgment. In the (Anguttara Nikaya Nibbedhika Sutta), the
Buddha said the following words: Intention (cetana), monks, is karma, I say. Having
willed, one acts through body, speech and mind.

Every time a person acts or does something there is some quality of intention at
the base of the mind. It is that quality rather than the outward appearance of the action that
determines the effect. If a person professes piety and virtue but nonetheless acts or does
something with greed, anger or hatred (veiled behind an outward display of well-meaning
intent), the fruit of those actions will bear testimony to the fundamental intention that lay
behind them and will be a cause for future unhappiness. The Buddha spoke of wholesome
actions (kusala-kamma)—that result in happiness, and unwholesome actions (akusala-
kamma)—that result in unhappiness.

For Buddhists, karma has implications beyond this present life. Bad actions in a
previous life can follow a person into their next life and cause bad effects. Good actions
can cause good effects. Even an Enlightened One is not exempt from the effects of past
karma. One story tells that the Buddha's cousin tried to kill him by dropping a boulder on

56
him. Although the attempt failed, the Buddha's foot was injured. He explained that this was
karmic retribution for trying to kill his step-brother in a previous life.

In Buddhism, karma is fundamentally related to suffering and by implication, to

the idea of nirvana or the cessation of suffering through individual liberation. In Majjima
Nikaya, the Lord Buddha says-

Whatever kind of feeling (vedana) one experiences—pleasant, unpleasant or

indifferent—one approves of and cherishes the feeling and clings to it. While doing
so, lust originates; but lust of feelings means clinging to existence (upadana); and
on clinging to existence depends the karma-process (kamma-bhava); on the
karma-process rebirth depends; and depending on rebirth are decay and death,
sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. Thus arises the whole mass of
suffering. 7

Karma, therefore, has to offer a comprehensive account of universal organization

of worldly existence. In this sense, karma is primordially objective and does not
distinguish between the rich and the poor, the beautiful and the ugly, or the healthy and the
sick.

The theory of karma should not be confused with so-called 'moral justice' or
'reward and punishment'. The idea of moral justice, or reward and punishment, arises out of
the conception of a supreme being, a God. God sits in judgment. He is a law-giver and he
decides what is right and wrong. The term 'justice' is ambiguous and dangerous, and in its
name more harm than good is done to humanity. The theory of karma is the theory of
cause and effect, of action and reaction. It is a natural law, which has nothing to do with
the idea of justice or reward and punishment.

Accompanying karma, there comes usually a separate tenet called Vipaka. It

means result or effect. The reaction or effect can itself also influence an action. In this way,
the chain of causation (karma-effect) continues ad infinitum. When Buddhists talk about
karma, they are normally referring to karma that is 'tainted' with ignorance - karma that
continues to ensure that the being remains in the everlasting cycle of samsara.

To make this more intelligible, one has to account for (un)wholesome actions and
(un)wholesome states and their respective meaning in Buddhism. The former is outlined in
the Noble Eightfold Path. Action springs from volition, which springs from intention,

57
which springs from thought, and so forth. The quality of actions can be described in ethical
terms, simply as either good or bad, or both good and bad, or indifferent.

The Buddha has defined three types of karma that a human being can do: (i) The
karma of words (vachi kamma), (ii) The karma of sarir (bodily karma), and (iii) The
karma done by mind (mano karma). Among the three karmas, the karma of mind or the
intention is the most important of all mental events because it gives direction to the mind,
determining whether we engage with virtuous, non-virtuous, or neutral objects.

An intention is a mental action. It may be expressed through either physical or

verbal actions. Thus, action, or karma, is of two types: the action of intention and the
intended action. The action of intention is the thought or impulse to engage in a physical or
verbal act. The intended action is the physical or verbal expression of our intention. Karma
actually refers to the action of intention but in general usage it includes the intended action
and the seeds that are left in the mind as a result.

There are various grades of ethical qualities. Most people have an intuitive
understanding that enables them to discern between good and bad, although the discerning
ability depends on the person's state of mental development. A wise person at a high level
of mental development can clearly discern mental activities and actions in an ethical
dimension, while a deluded person has difficulties or is even unable to do so.

In Buddhism, karma is not pre-determinism, fatalism or accidentalism, as all these

ideas lead to inaction and destroy motivation and human effort. These ideas undermine the
important concept that a human being can change for the better no matter what his or her
past was, and they are designated as "wrong views" in Buddhism.

(i) Purbbekatahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering, including all
future happiness and suffering, arise from previous karma, and human beings can
exercise no volition to affect future results (past-action determinism).

(ii) Issaranimmanahetuvada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are caused by
the directives of a Supreme Being (theistic determinism).

(iii) Ahetu-appaccaya-vaada: The belief that all happiness and suffering are random,
having no cause.

Karma is continually ripening, but it is also continually being generated by

present actions. Therefore, it is possible to exercise free will to shape future karma. The
58
Buddha asserts effort and motivation as the crucial factors in deciding the ethical value of
these various teachings on karma.

Buddhists try to cultivate good karma and avoid bad. However, the aim of
Buddhism is to escape the cycle of rebirth altogether, not simply to acquire good karma
and so to be born into a more pleasant state. These states, while preferable to human life,
are impermanent: even gods eventually die.

Karma is not an external force. It is not a system of punishment or reward dealt

out by a god. The concept is more accurately understood as a natural law which is similar
to gravity. Buddhists believe that we are in control of our ultimate fates. The problem is
that most of us are ignorant of this, which causes suffering. Buddhists suggest us to take
conscious control of our behaviours.

Karma implies that a person is inherently accountable for everything that is

happening to him. This implies that whether he experiences happiness or misery all
depends on his actions. Karma encompasses all actions, and not just those perceived by the
public. Even thinking badly about another person has its consequences.

In Buddhism, although the past has some influence on the present, the present also
is shaped by the actions of the present. A famous Theravada Bhikkhu Thanissaro explains
the theory of karma in Buddhism in this way—

...instead of promoting resigned powerlessness, the early Buddhist notion of karma

focused on the liberating potential of what the mind is doing with every moment.
Who you are — what you come from — is not anywhere near as important as the
mind's motives for what it is doing right now. Even though the past may account
for many of the inequalities we see in life, our measure as human beings is not the
hand we've been dealt, for that hand can change at any moment. We take our own
measure by how well we play the hand we've got.8

The function of karma and causation is explained by the principle of Dependent

Origination (pratityasamuppada) in Buddhism. It is considered as one of the scientific and
excellent theories of explanation of the Buddha which makes his teaching more scientific
than any other religions. Dependent Origination consists of twelve links or chains. They
are—
avijja ignorance
sanskara mental formations
59
vigyana consciousness
nama-rupa mind and matter
sadayatana six sense organs
sparsa contact
vedana sensation
trsna desire
upadana grasping
bhava becoming
jati, jara, byadhi, birth, old age, disease, death maranam

The first two links, ignorance (avijja) and mental formations (samskara), relate
how the past actions in a person‘s previous lives affect this present situation. Ignorance
concerns the defilements that a person had in the past. Mental formations represent the
karma resulting from the good and bad actions of a person in the past that determine many
aspects of his present life. The think link, consciousness (vigyana), represents the
consciousness that enters a mother‘s womb at the beginning of a person‘s present life. The
other aggregates are also present in very subtle forms at this moment, but since
consciousness is the dominant aggregate, it is used to represent this stage in a person‘s life.
The fourth link, name and form (namarupa), corresponds to the fetus growing in the
mother‘s womb and the development of its body and mind. The completion of the fetus‘s
sense organs corresponds to the fifth link, the six sense organs (sadayatana). The child
from birth until one or two years of age is equated with the sixth link, contact (sparsa)
between sense organ and object. The sense organs, objects, and consciousness are all
present, but the infant still cannot properly discriminate between suffering and pleasure.
The stage at which a child is able to differentiate between suffering and pleasure but does
not yet have any sexual desires corresponds to the seventh link, sensation (vedana). The
emergence of sexual lust corresponds to the eighth link, desire (trsna). Striving for fame
and fortune is represented by the ninth link, grasping (upadana). A person thus
accumulates karma that will bear fruit in the future. This state corresponds to the tenth
link, becoming (bhava).

The links of desire and grasping in the present are similar to the link of ignorance
of the past, since all result in the formation of karma. In a similar way the link of becoming
in the present is similar to the link of mental formations in the past, since both can be

60
equated with karma. The third through the tenth links are all explained as referring to a
person‘s life. The five links from consciousness to sensation are called the five fruits of the
present, which were caused by actions of the past. The three links of desire, grasping, and
becoming are called the three present causes, which will bear fruit in the future.

A person‘s future birth is determined by the three present causes. Future births are
represented by the eleventh link, birth (jati). Thus, jati is similar to consciousness at the
moment of conception in the present life, in other words to the third link, consciousness.
The result of future birth is old age and death (jaramarana), the twelfth link. It corresponds
to the links of name and form through sensation in the present life.

When the twelve links are distributed among three lifetimes, two links concern
past causes, five links present effects, three links present causes, and two links future
effects. The cycle of cause and effect is repeated twice. Consequently this explanation is
referred to as ‗the two cycles of cause and effect over the three time periods.9

Ignorance, desire, and clinging are all defilements (klesa). The karma arising from
these defilements is represented by the links of mental formations and becoming. The
phenomena arising from karma are represented by the remaining links, from consciousness
to sensation and birth, old age, and death. Thus phenomena arise from karma. Later, those
same phenomena serve as the basis for additional karma. The twelve links of Dependent
Origination thus illustrate how existence can be characterized as endless cycles of
defilement, karma, and phenomena. Moreover, since phenomena are characterized by
suffering, these cycles may also be characterized as defilement, karma, and suffering. In
this manner, twelve links may be explained as an illustration of karmic cause and effect.

In Buddhism, karma is supposed to be a seed. They say that an action (karma)

results in the form of 'ripening' (Vipaka), and fruit ('Phal') which are attributes of a seed.
The movement of beings, between birth and rebirth, is not a haphazard process. Rather it is
governed and ordained by the law of nature. All kinds of beings are born in accordance
with the nature and quality of their (past) karmas, and they are offshoots of their actions.
Violent and hateful acts tend to lead to rebirth in a hell, acts of confusion and delusion will
lead to a rebirth as an animal, and acts of greed tend a person to be reborn as a ghost. A
person's actions (karma) mould their consciousness, making them into a kind of person so
that, when they die, their outer form tends to match the type of a nature that has been
developed.
61
Actions and results have correlations. If a person's bad actions are not so serious
as to lead him to a lower birth, they affect, invariably, the nature of a human rebirth. For
instance, stinginess leads to poverty, injuring other beings leads to repeated ailments, and
anger leads to being ugly--the later aspect being extension of the process by which an
angry person gradually develops ugly features during the course of his present life. It is
solely due to the actions of their past lives that some people are ugly, ill or poor. Therefore,
they must not think and blame for their present fate. They should think and act positively
and in good ways for the good results in future.

Generous, kind, benevolent acts and moral restraints tend us to get birth again as
human beings. If we attain meditative calmness of Gyan ('Jhana' in Pali), we will have a
rebirth in heaven. All intentional actions, whether good or bad, matter a lot, because they
leave a trace on the mind (of a person), which ultimately relates to future results.

People should not dwell mentally on a bad karma. Whether deliberately or

accidentally it is done, it is a bad act. To contain and suppress it and not energise it is a
noble/good karma. If a person resolves neither to conceive nor translate a bad karma into
action, it will dilute the bad karmic results. A skilful action is 'Punya' (auspicious) or
fortunate, because it purifies the mind and, then, leads it to good fortune in the future. An
unskilful action is 'Apunya' or 'Papa' (evil), ill-fortune, or inauspicious. Since beneficial
results do not outflow from it, hence it is infertile. 10

Punya is a good merit. It also implies 'deserving'. Any act of giving, even with
expectation of something in return, or expecting the Karmic results, is a purer motive. It is
of no use to say, whether a gift is big or small, but if it gives joy, and supports a holy way
of life, it is worth merit for where there is a joyful heart, no gift is small. Merit-sharing is
simply a way of spreading the Karmic benefits of good deeds to others, as a gesture of
goodwill.

There is no known beginning to the cycle of rebirths and the world, as there is no
conceivable beginning of this world (Samsara). The cycle of rebirth involves countless
lives over vast stretches of time. Buddhists believe that every birth or rebirth is occasioned
by a prior cause and no being is an exception to it.

Human life is precious. It is a marvelous opportunity for spiritual growth.

Therefore, they suggest, it should be used wisely. Life must not be frittered away, because
it may be cut short, at any time, by death. The law of karma is believed to be dynamic,
62
fluid and flexible, because it is neither rigid nor mechanical.

A moral life is not necessarily followed immediately by a good rebirth, if a strong

evil action of past life has not yet brought its results, or a dying person regrets having done
good. Similarly an immoral life is not followed necessarily by a bad rebirth, as the
appropriate results will come in time, so it says.11

Thus, in short, karma has relationship with cause and effect combination. Birth
and rebirth are affected from karma of past and present.

Critical Comparison regarding the concepts of Karma in Hinduism and Buddhism

Hinduism involves role of God. Buddhism does not involve the role of God.
Karma in Hinduism differs from Buddhism on the basis of the same. Notably, unlike
Buddhists and Jains who believe that Karma, as natural law, on its own, joins the soul
when it reincarnates and comes to fruition, Hindus believe in the role of God for linking
karma to the person. But this difference is only superficial. The very first verse of
Dhammapada and the gathas of Upanishads and Vedas clearly indicate that the essence of
these two religions regarding karma is the same. Upanishad speaks—

Accordingly as one behaves so does he become. The doer of good becomes good,
the doer of evil becomes evil. One becomes virtuous by virtuous actions. Others
become bad by bad actions.12

The next passage in the same verse identifies desire as the root cause of all human
activity –

Others however say that a person consists of desires. As is his desire, so is his
will. As is his will so is the deed he does. Whatever deed he does that he attains.13

Dhammapada also speaks the same lines on the nature of karma—

Experiences are preceded by mind, led by mind, produced by mind. If one speaks
or acts with an impure mind, suffering follows even as the cart-wheel follows the
hoof of the ox (drawing the cart).

Experiences are preceded by mind, led by mind, and produced by mind. If one
speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness follows like a shadow that never
departs.14

Thus, certain philosophical viewpoints may term "destiny" or "fate" but that is in
actuality, according to the laws of karma, the simple and neutral working out of karma.
Many people compare karma to a moral banking system, which are very similar to a credit
and debit of good and bad. However, this view falls short of the idea that any sort of
63
karma, whether we term it 'good' or 'bad', binds us in recurring cause and effect. In order to
attain supreme consciousness, to escape the cycle of life, death, and rebirth and the knot of
karma, one must altogether transcend karma. This method of transcendence is variously
dealt with in many streams of not only Hinduism and Buddhism, but also in other faiths
and philosophical systems.

Karma is needed as long as single trace of impurity exists within a soul or Atman,
right from first manifestation to last. The effort of every soul or Atman remains reducing
dross impurities within. It is only through complex process of karma that every soul or
Atman gains more purity as one proceeds ahead in cosmic cycle of life. This philosophy of
Karma is vividly expressed in Gita as well—

He whose all undertakings are devoid of desires, whose actions are burnt in
the fire of knowledge, he is declared as a scholar by the wise.

Renouncing all attachment to the fruits of his actions, ever satisfied, without
seeking shelter or protection, depending upon nothing, he certainly does
nothing though he is engaged in actions. 15

Lord Buddha also believed that Trshna is the main cause of one‘s karma. If one
does not renounce trshna, one cannot be liberated.

Shri K. Thirugna Sambantha, in the section of Karma in his outline of Saivism,

explains the concept of Karma in Hinduism by distinguishing its concept from that of the
Buddhist and Jain religions which do not require an external Being like God as being
necessary for it. In their beliefs, he notes that Karma, as a natural law, and like a calf,
among a large number of cows, goes and finds its mother for obtaining the milk, also finds
the related person and comes to fruition. However, he further argues that Hindus, on the
other hand, would find flaw with this theory and would criticize it by noting that Karma,
unlike the calf, is an unintelligent entity. Hence, Karma cannot go and find out the related
person by itself. Shri Sambantha then concludes by noting that an intelligent Supreme
Being with perfect wisdom and power, (e.g. Shiva, in Shaivism, for example.) is necessary
to make Karma to join the related person. In such sense, God is the Divine Accountant.

Swami Sivananda, in his commentary synthesizing Vedanta views on the Brahma

Sutras, also reiterates the same views. In his commentary,16 of Brahma Sutras, Sivananda
notes that Karma is insentient and short-lived, and ceases to exist as soon as it is done.
Hence, he points out that Karma cannot therefore bestow the fruits of actions at a future
date according to one's merit. Furthermore, Sivananda notes that one cannot argue that

64
Karma generates apurva, or punya, which gives fruit. Since apurva is non-sentient, it
cannot act unless moved by an intelligent Being, i.e., God. Hence, it cannot independently
bestow rewards and punishments.

Notes and References:

1. Landon, A. E. (2003). Reincarnation Magazine, January 1917 to December 1918.
Body, Mind and Spirit, US: Kessinger Publishing.

2. Ibid.
3. Padhi, Bibhu and Minakshi Padhi (1998). Indian Philosophy and Religion, New
Delhi: DK Printworld, p212.
4. Lockyer, Lianne. (2009). Angelic Karma, UK, Arthur House.

5. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Chapter 4, Brahmana 4, Verse 10.

6. Bhagavad-Gita Ch 4: Verse 23 and 24.

7. Carus, Paul. (2012). The Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path, UK, Jazzybee
Verlag.

8. Thanissaro, Bhikkhu (1974). What the Buddha Taught?, Grove ress: Bankok,
9. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Chapter 4, Brahmana 4, Verse 5.

10. Sharma, Anurag. (2002). Thus Spake Buddha. New Delhi: Diamond Pocket Books
Pvt. Ltd.

11. Ibid.
12. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Chapter 4, Brahmana 4, Verse 5.

13. Ibid verse 6.

14. Dhammapada, Yamaka Vagga V 1-2.

15. Bhagavad-Gita Ch4:19-20.

16. Swami Shivananda, Phaladhikaranam, Sutras 38-41.

65
Concept of Moksha in Hinduism and Buddhism
Section - 4

Concept of Moksha in Hinduism

In every religion, the concept of moksha, nirvana or liberation is very importantly

mentioned. All religions have a basic concept of liberation. But the notion of liberation is
different in different religions. In Hinduism, the present life is considered to be the result
of many lifetimes of past desires, karmas and the results of those karmas. The results of
these previous karmas are unfolding at every moment. Some karma is mature and bearing
fruit at the present moment, other karmas are laying as "seed" waiting to mature at a future
time. All that we have done in the past creates who we are in the present and all that we do
in the present is creating who we will be in the future. In this way, there is great cycle of
desire, action (karma) and reaction that drives the wheel of life. As a result, all beings are
forced to remain within this world in order to experience the fruit of their desires and
actions (karmas).

Desire and actions (karmas) are said to be the source of reincarnation. Beings
continue to "rotate" through endless lifetimes in this physical world. Sometimes in heaven
(nice places), sometimes in the middle regions (medium places) and sometimes in hellish
realms. This rotation through endless lifetimes is the process of reincarnation called
samsara in Sanskrit. The ultimate goal of life in Hinduism is to break this cycle of
reincarnation, to escape samsara. Breaking this cycle is done through the process of yoga,
and freedom or liberation from the cycle of rebirth is called moksha.

From spiritual point of view, real achievement of life is not money. nor material
luxury. Neither is it sexual nor eating pleasure. It is neither intellectual, business nor
political power, nor any other of the instinctive, nor intellectual needs. These are natural
pursuits in human life, to be sure, but our divine aim on this earth must be to personally
realize our identity in and with God. Identifying ourselves with God is called
enlightenment, Self-Realization, God-Realization and Nirvikalpa Samadhi. After many
lifetimes of wisely controlling the creation of karma and resolving past karmas, the soul is
fully matured in the knowledge of these divine laws and then there is the highest use of
them. Through the practice of yoga, the Hindu bursts into God's superconscious Mind, the
experience of bliss, all-knowingness, perfect silence. His intellect is transmuted, and he

66
soars into the Absolute Reality of God. He is a jnani, a knower of the Known. When the
jnani is stable in repeating his realization of the Absolute, there is no longer a need for
physical birth, because all lessons have been learned, all karmas fulfilled and Godness is
his natural mind state.

That individual soul is then naturally liberated, freed from the cycle of birth, death
and rebirth in the earth. After moksha, our soul continues its evolution in the inner worlds,
eventually to merge back into its origin and that origin is God, the Primal Soul. In
Hinduism, the terms moksha, nirvana and mukti (liberation) are used synonymously to
describe release or freedom from the cycles of birth and death (samsara). Moksha is a
process and not a state of being. In the Hindu definition, moksha is not something to be
experienced or realized, but rather attained upon God-realization. The liberated soul or
atman finally enters the abode of God, the kingdom of God. The ultimate goal of every
life, for all human beings, is to reach the stage of moksha (salvation).

Every Hindu hopes to attain moksha. But he or she knows well that it will not
necessarily come in this present life. Hindus know this and do not delude themselves that
this life is the last. Seeking and attaining profound spiritual realizations, they nevertheless
know that there is much to be accomplished on earth and that only mature, God-Realized,
souls attain moksha.

God may seem distant and remote as the experience of our self-created karmas
cloud our mind. Yet, in reality, the Supreme Being is always closer to us than the beat of
our heart. His mind pervades the totality of our karmic experience in lifetimes. As karma is
God's cosmic law of cause and effect, dharma is God's law of Being, including the pattern
of Hindu religiousness. Through following dharma and controlling thought, word and
deed, karma is harnessed and wisely created. We become the master, the knowing creator,
not a helpless victim. Through being consistent in our religiousness, following the yamas
and niyamas (Hindu restraints and observances), performing the pancha nitya karmas (five
constant duties), seeing God everywhere and in everyone, our past karma will soften. We
may experience the karma indirectly through seeing someone else going through a
situation that we intuitively know was a karma we also were to face. But because of devout
religiousness, we may experience it vicariously or in lesser intensity. For example, a
physical karma may manifest as a mental experience or a realistic dream. An emotional
karmic storm may just barely touch our mind before dying out.

67
According to the scriptures, the discipline of unattached action (Nishkama Karma)
can lead to salvation of the soul. So they recommend that one should remain detached
while carrying out his duties in life. As Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad-Gita: "To the
man thinking about the objects (of the senses) arises attachment towards them; from
attachment, arises longing; and from longing arises anger. From anger comes delusion; and
from delusion loss of memory; from loss of memory, the ruin of discrimination; and on the
ruin of discrimination, he perishes".

Hindus believe that the soul passes through a cycle of successive lives (samsara)
and its next incarnation is always dependent on how the previous life was lived (karma). In
a lifetime people build up karma, both good and bad, based on their actions within that
lifetime. This karma affects their future lives and existences. People must take
responsibility for their actions either within this life time or the next. Death is a key part of
this cycle and is treated with specific importance. Death is the last samsara (cycle of life)
referred to as the 'last sacrifice'.

Moksha is the end of the death and rebirth cycle. It is classed as the fourth and
ultimate artha (goal) of life. It is the transcendence of all arthas. It is achieved by
overcoming ignorance and desires. It is a paradox in the sense that overcoming desires also
includes overcoming the desire for moksha itself. It can be achieved both in this life and
after death. In simple words, moksha or Nirvana is deliverance in Hinduism from the cycle
of birth and death with the intervening periods of stay in heaven and hell according to a
person's good and bad deeds. This happens when the person has no bad deeds in his/her
account. Hindus believe that all people are governed by this rule, Hindus as well as those
who are not. Acting according to 'dharma' adds to the good deeds and cancels bad deeds.
'Dharma' is fulfillment of one's duties and responsibilities and engaging in righteous action.

Hinduism discusses various states and types of moksha attained by various means
like bhakti, yoga etc. Especially eight stages or types of moksha are defined in various
texts.

1. Salokya Mukti

In salokya-mukti, the departed soul goes to ishta-loka (the abode of the Personal
God, such as the abode of Vishnu), and stays there blissfully enjoying His presence. A
person who has gone through rigorous ethical and moral disciplines followed by right

68
knowledge, right action, non-attachment, and devotional meditation on the Personal God
(Vishnu), becomes fit for release or moksha through Ishwara's loving grace.

2. Samipya or Sannidhya Mukti

In samipya or sannidhya-mukti the departed soul enjoys the bliss of extreme

proximity to the Personal God. A person who has gone through rigorous ethical and moral
disciplines followed by right knowledge, right action, non-attachment, and devotional
meditation on the Personal God (Vishnu), becomes fit for release or moksha through
Ishwara's loving grace.

3. Sarupya Mukti

In sarupya-mukti the departed soul acquires the form of the Personal God and
enjoys intense bliss.

4. Sayujya Mukti

In sayujya-mukti, the departed soul becomes blissfully absorbed in the Personal

God. A person who has gone through rigorous ethical and moral disciplines followed by
right knowledge, right action, non-attachment, and devotional meditation on the Personal
God (Vishnu), becomes fit for release or moksha through Ishwara's loving grace. Sayujya
Mukti is of two kinds as described in Shri Chaitanya Charitamrita:

(i) Brahma Sayujya – One is to merge in the Brahman or Brahmajyoti

which is the spiritual effulgence from the body of the Lord. Here the soul
exists simply as a spiritual spark experiencing brahmananda that is
freedom from the material cycle of birth and death.

(ii) Ishvara Sayujya – One is to merge into the body of the Lord directly like
Shishupala's soul and is considered even more ghastly by the devotees.
Because when we merge in the impersonal effulgence of the Lord, some
great devotees can come there and save us and make us qualified to go to
the Vaikuntha planets to directly serve the Lord. But when the soul
merges in the body of the Lord, the soul is doomed to never achieve
direct devotional service to the Lord.

69
5. Krama mukti or Avantara Mukti

Krama mukti or avantara mukti means liberation through stages. A person who
has intensely meditated on Saguna Brahman using the sacred sound symbol Aum or other
prescribed methods of meditation goes to Brahma-loka after death. There he attains the
knowledge of Nirguna Brahman. When the entire universe is dissolved at the end of the
kalpa, he becomes one with Brahman and is not born again. This is called krama-mukti or
avantara-mukti.

6. Vishishtadvaita Moksha

Those who believe in this school believe that moksha means living blissfully in
vaikuntha, which is the realm of the Personal God after the death of the devotee. A person
who has attained moksha lives blissfully in vaikuntha in a spiritual body in the presence of
God. He/she acquires many divine powers such as omniscience, etc., but unlike God he/she
cannot create, sustain or dissolve the world. In spite of the exalted state, the devotee has to
remain subservient to God. They also believe that Karma Yoga and Jnana Yoga are only
aids to Bhakti Yoga. One can be liberated from the bondage of samsara only through God's
grace. They suggest that Bhakti Yoga practices are the only means of obtaining divine
grace.

7. Purva- Mimamsa Mukti

Devotees achieve moksha through the right performance of rituals as prescribed

by the Vedas. Some suggest that the liberated soul goes to heaven (after death) and enjoys
heavenly bliss forever. Others suggest that moksha is a state devoid of the possibility of
rebirth. You are free from pain and suffering. They do not consider moksha as a state of
heavenly bliss.

8. Apavarga Mukti

Liberation or Apavarga is a separation from all qualities. Liberation is a state

beyond pleasure, happiness, pain, or any experience whatsoever. It is achieved by
cultivating ethical virtues and acquiring the right knowledge of reality. After liberation,
there is no rebirth.

Moksha is described in the following ways in various schools of Hinduism:

70
1. Jivan Mukti/ Videha Mukti in Advaita School

Some Hindus, especially those who follow the Advaita School of Philosophy,
believe that one can have liberation from samsara even when alive. According to them, a
spiritual aspirant has to first go through various moral and ethical practices, worship
(upasana) of the Personal God, etc. These observances gradually purify his mind and make
it ready for intense meditation on the Impersonal Divine Reality (Nirguna Brahman).

The intense meditation enables the devotees to attain a condition known as

atmajnana or the knowledge of inner Divine Self. Atmajnana destroys the ignorance
(avidya) that covers the knowledge of the reality. As soon as his ignorance is annihilated,
the person will be released and becomes a jivanmukta (one who has had jivanmukti).

After attaining jivanmukti a person can no longer think of himself or herself as an

embodied being. The body and the rest of the world appears illusory to a jivanmukta. The
illusory body will continue to exist as long as the prarabdha karma lasts. When the
prarabdha is exhausted and the illusory body dies, the jivanmukta attains his disembodied
release called videha-mukti.

2. Sadyomukti

Sadyomukti means "immediate release." Sandyomukti is another way of getting

moksha for those who believe in jivanmukti. According to this view, a jivanmukta may
totally lose interest in his illusory body immediately after attaining jivanmukti. As a result,
his body drops off in a matter of days causing his sadyomukti.

It is also possible that after attaining atmajnana, these liberated souls can no
longer identify with their bodies, which along with the rest of the world have become
illusory and unreal. So for them, their bodies are not really there and thus they attain
sadyomukti.

3. Kaivalya Moksha in Sankhya School

This form of moksha is suggested by the Sankhya School of Philosophy of

Hinduism. They suggest that the soul or the spirit is purusha (pure consciousness), and the
body-mind complex is an evolved form of unconscious primordial matter known as
prakriti. Prakriti functions by borrowing consciousness from purusha.

71
Purusha gets tied down or bonded by aviveka - purusha's false identification with
prakriti and its evolved products like mind, body, etc. Such false identification is caused by
purusha's ignorance. While in bondage, purusha suffers mental and physical pain because
of its false identification with the mind-body complex.

In order to get rid of the false identification and consequent pain and suffering,
purusha must acquire the knowledge known as viveka-jnana. When purusha learns viveka-
jnana, it realizes that as spirit it is completely different and distinct from prakriti and the
associated mind-body system. When this happens, the devotees will experience the
complete cessation of suffering and pain. Thus viveka-jnana causes purusha's moksha by
disentangling purusha from prakriti.

There are five kinds of mukti or liberation described in the Shrimad Bhagavatam:
salokya-sarshti-samipya-sarupyaikatvam apy uta
diyamanam na grihnanti vina mat-sevanam janah1
Srimad-Bhagavatam

Sri Kapiladeva said, O My dear Mother! Despite being offered the five types of
liberation known as salokya, samipya, sarupya, sarshti, and ekatva, My pure devotees don‘t accept
them. They only accept My transcendental loving service. 2

Advaita school of Vedanta literally means 'not two' or 'not dual', and whose major
thinker was Shankara. The group of texts discussed in most detail is the Upanishads, and
the varied ways in which that text deals with the links between brahman and the individual
soul, and the former's links with the universe. The term 'non-dual' is based on the idea that
reality is one and not to be differentiated. This reality is brahman, divine power,
knowledge of which leads to moksha or liberation. The crucial notion here is of a hierarchy
of levels of viewing reality. Brahman is available to a degree at each level of reality, but
really it exists without any attributes at all. The common idea that we are separated from
reality is due to human ignorance, maya or avidya, the illusions that persist as a result of
our apparent individuality. One of the ways of cementing us in this ignorance is by trying
to escape from it, since such effort means action, and action implies the acquisition of
karmic traces (karma) and merely deepens bondage.

One view offered by Advaita was that brahman is both identical and different
from the individual soul and the world. In itself it is entirely one, but within that unity
resides the ability to comprehend an infinite variety. This is plausible if one sees creation
72
as not the production of entirely new things, but rather the instantiation of aspects that
already exist within the brahman. One of the interesting implications of this view is that it
suggests a dual strategy to liberation, which is going to be neither entirely through
following one's moral and religious obligations, nor through acquiring knowledge, but in
some combination of the two. The former strategy helps to bring about detachment from
the influences of the world, while the latter encourages acknowledgement of the oneness of
reality, and so leads to the ending of ignorance.

The progress of this attempted solution was brought to an end by Shankara, who
argued that all it does is to restate the original problem without contributing to its solution.
How can one thing encompass both similarity and dissimilarity? These are contradictory
concepts and claiming that they both characterize the same subject is to involve oneself in
self-contradiction. Shankara agrees that whatever the Upanishads say must be true, but that
the references made to the diversity of reality are not an account of what is deeper reality.
All diversity is in itself an illusion. On the other hand, it does not follow that the world
itself is unreal, since it constitutes a stream of appearances which do depend on a principle
of reality.

We need to distinguish between two sorts of unreality, one where an object is

mistaken for something that it is not, and this is different from the case where we take
ordinary experience to be ultimate reality, which it is not when compared with the one
principle of reality, Brahman, itself. The individual self is not illusory in the first sense,
since it is Brahman appearing to us in a particular way, in the only way that would make
sense to us given our physical and mental constitution. Seeing Brahman in this way leads
to errors about its real nature, but none the less it gives us a glimpse of that real nature.
What we need to do is to work from where we are to gain a deeper idea of where the self
genuinely originates. We have to make a distinction between the status of the self and the
world, for while the latter may be illusory, the former is not similarly illusory, since if it
were, there would be no prospect of the liberation of the self. 3

The doctrine then is that Brahman is the one reality which manifests itself in two
ways, one as the world and another as the individual self. The former manifestation is an
illusory aspect of Brahman, while the latter is brahman itself, although under the distorting
aspect of the illusory universe. We should not see this link between Brahman and the
world as causal, since causal relations only obtain between empirical phenomena. Physical

73
change means that one thing becomes part of something else, but is not entirely destroyed,
nor is the new thing entirely new, since it came about through the causal efficacy of
something else, which remains part of the new thing. Although the universe is maya and so
unreal, it is not incomprehensible . By contrast with the Sankhya-Yoga metaphysics, the
principle of the material is not real. It is not unreal either, since it is influenced by reality,
and there is no point in looking to matter itself as the ground of the physical universe. On
the other hand, it obviously has a part to play in such an explanation, but not an ultimate
role. The ultimate ground is of course Brahman. When we deny the reality of the world, all
that we are doing is denying its reality apart from its origins in brahma. The latter in itself
does not change, but without it there would be no experience of physical change. The
position is even more complicated than might immediately appear to be the case in that
Brahman is really neither simple nor diverse, but is entirely without features. 4

Sankara identified the consciousness with Brahman, reality. What we normally

think of as consciousness is merely an effect of it, though, and the 'I' that lies at the basis of
experience is in itself beyond apprehension. On the Advaita approach, this brahman or
atman is the basic self of everything, and is the same for everything. As a result of
ignorance, we tend to identify the self with objects in the world of matter, and we do not
appreciate how distinct the real self is. It is easy for us to think that the empirical self
which we can observe through and in our experience is the real self, but this is an error. We
can appreciate the nature of the error by considering that the empirical self cannot
understand itself, since there is always an aspect of self that remains outside the object of
knowledge. This transcendental self is immediate, since if it were to be an object of
consciousness itself an infinite regress would be created. Consciousness in itself is there all
the time, and is not in the objects of that consciousness. Consciousness is completely
independent, and does not need another consciousness to function, nor does its operation
require the object of consciousness.

The analogy of consciousness with light was often drawn, since light is not
dependent on the objects illuminated by it, as compared with those objects themselves.
Objects can only be noticed if they are lit up, as it were, while light itself requires nothing
to light it up, since it is itself the basis for illumination. The Advaita and Vishishtadvaita
schools both accept that the self manifests itself at the source of our knowledge, but they
differ on its precise nature. According to the former, the transcendental self is equivalent to

74
consciousness, while for the latter the self is an immortal and individual knowing subject.
Vishishtadvaita argues that the self cannot just be consciousness, since consciousness
requires something to be conscious. Consciousness also has to have an object it can be
directed at, and this is a lower form of consciousness that exists at the level of karma. Once
we achieve liberation, this sort of consciousness disappears into the transcendental
consciousness and we are left with a soul that knows itself and is concerned with nothing
else.5

In the Vedas, idea about Moksa is hardly clear. Heaven, a place of eternal pleasure
and rejoice, is the highest good of life. It is in the Upanisads that we first get an idea about
Moksa. Here sometimes Moksa is understood as an identity of self with the Brahman, the
ultimate reality, and sometimes as likeness of the self with God. The Brhadaranyaka
Upanisad describes the state of Moksa thus: "As a man in the embrace of his beloved wife
knows nothing without or within, so the person when in the embrace of the Intelligent self
knows nothing without or within. That, verily, is his form in which his desire is fulfilled, in
which the self is his desire, in which he is without desire, free from any sorrow."
Gaudapada in his Karika on Mandukya Upnisad gives an account of Moksa which is more
thoroughly a state of absorption into the universal nature of Brahman: "As on the
destruction of the jar etc. the ether enclosed in the jar etc. merges with the akasa, even so
the individual merges into the universal spirit." But the Mandukya itself says at another
place that by liberation the soul attains likeness with the Divine.6

Concept of Moksha in Buddhism

Regarding to Moksa as the ultimate destiny, Buddhism is generally recognised as
having a negative concept of Moksa. Buddhism terms liberation as Nirvana which literally
means `cooling down' or `blowing out'. The meaning itself shows that Nirvana is basically
a negative concept. The blowing out (or cooling down) means here the blowing out (or
cooling down) of the fire of passions. It is well-known that according to Buddhism it is the
passions which are the root cause of bondage or suffering. So when the passions are blown
out, liberation is attained. With the cooling down of passions, actions cease bearing fruits
and consequently the cycle of birth and death stops. And that is really the complete
cessation of suffering, which is the true nature of Nirvana. But according to some, Nirvana
is not merely a negative state. They point out that when the fire of passions cools down, it
is quite natural that a state of perfect peace and equanimity will be achieved and this is a
75
positive achievement. Not only that, some quite unambiguously believe that Nirvana
brings positive bliss. Nibbanam paramam sukham, says the Dhammapada. This state of
happiness is unique, which cannot be described in words. 7

Nirvana is a compound of the prefix ni[r]- (ni, nis, nih) which means "out, away
from, without", and the root va[na] (in Pali vati) which can be translated as "blowing" as in
"blowing of the wind".8 Nirvana is the state of being free from suffering. It is blowing out
the fires of greed, hatred, and delusion. The Lord Buddha says that ignorance (avijja) is the
main cause of suffering. It is by cutting avijja by the sword of wisdom a person truly
attains Nibbana. The Buddha said—

When you have learned this, to be freed from the bond of existence you must cut
down ignorance with all your efforts, for it is the root of pain. Then, set free from
the bonds of the prison-house of existence, you will possess as Arhats natures
perfectly pure. You shall attain Nirvana.9

Nirvana is perhaps the most mysterious concept in Buddhism. The Lord Buddha
himself has denied the positive definition of Nirvana as it is impossible to put in the words.
No senses can feel or comprehend it. The only way to understand Nirvana is insight
meditation. Ven. Dhammapiya correctly says, ―No single expression in any language can
fully cover the true meaning of Nibbanic experience without practice. The mere
interpretations sometimes mislead readers to absorb different meanings.‖ Trying to explain
nirvana is somewhat like trying to explain the taste of sugar to one who has never tasted it,
or trying to explain a color to one who is and was born blind. It is difficult, if not
impossible. Nirvana is beyond words, logic and reasoning. It is easier and safer to speak of
what Nirvana is not. It isn‘t nothingness or annihilation of self, because the dharma teaches
there is no self to be annihilated.

What is that motivates a person for moksha? The final reason why worldly
success cannot satisfy us completely is that its achievements are ephemeral. Wealth, fame,
and power do not survive bodily death—―You can‘t take it with you,‖ as we routinely say.
And since we cannot, this keeps these things from satisfying us wholly, for we are
creatures who can envision eternity and must instinctively rue by contrast the brief
purchase on time that worldly success commands. Life holds other possibilities. To see
what these are we must return to the question of what people want. Thus far, Hinduism and
Buddhism both would say, we have been answering this question too superficially.

76
Pleasure, success, and duty are never humanity‘s ultimate goals. At best they are means
that we assume will take us in the direction of what we really want. What we really want
are things that lie at a deeper level. Only the ultimate salvation could be the answer.

In our attempt to explain it, we use words which have limited meanings. It isn‘t
heaven; it isn‘t purgatory, and it isn‘t the end. Nirvana is the Absolute Reality, which is
realized through the highest mental training and wisdom. It is beyond the reach of the
spoken or written word.

Immediately after the realization of Nirvana and Buddhahood, the Buddha

explains to his five disciples in these words—

It occurred to me, monks that this dhamma I have realized is deep, hard to see,
hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, beyond mere reasoning, subtle and
intelligible to the wise. . . Hard, too, is it to see this calming of all conditioned
things, the giving up of all substance of becoming, the extinction of craving,
dispassion, cessation, Nibbana. And if I were to teach the dhamma and others were
not to understand me that would be weariness, a vexation for me.‖

The Buddha described Nirvana as the perfect peace of the state of mind that is
free from craving, anger and other afflictive states (kilesas). The subject is at peace with
the world, has compassion for all and gives up obsessions and fixations. This peace is
achieved when the existing volitional formations (samskaras) are pacified, and the
conditions for the production of new ones are eradicated. In Nibbana the root causes of
craving and aversion has been extinguished such that one is no longer subject to human
suffering (dukkha) or further states of rebirths in samsara. In simple words, Nirvana in
Buddhism means "state beyond sorrows," or a "state of freedom from cyclic existence."

Nirvana in Buddhism is a state of living in which mind is free from any wrong
thoughts as anger, lust or worldly desires. Thus, Nirvana is a mode of living in which mind
and soul are found in complete peace and solitude. In Buddhism, Nirvana is described as
‗deathless‘. Nirvana is not a state of physical or worldly happiness; rather it is spiritual
happiness which is consistent and immortal.

By the means of meditation, the Buddha realized the wisdom that accompanies
enlightenment. Traditionally, he is said to have realized enlightenment through the
cultivation of the Four Trances and the Threefold Studies Enlightenment, however, is not
equivalent to the Four Trances or Stages of Meditation. The definition of Buddhist
77
enlightenment as ―seeing things as they actually are‖ suggests the dynamic nature of
Buddhist meditation. The mind was considered to have an innate wisdom. Because its
basic nature involved thought, when the mind was quieted and focused and concentration
strengthened, then superior form of wisdom would naturally be manifested. Both Buddhist
meditation and yoga were means of producing wisdom, but since they employed different
methods of concentration, the resultant wisdom probably differed. The wisdom produced
from Enlightenment which was realized through Buddhist meditation was described as
‗seeing the Dharma.‘

The Buddha had his progress through more profound meditative states as he
passed through the Four Trances. These were probably the natural results of his many
years of training. This temperament seems to have been suited to meditation from the time
he was young, and the training he received from his early teachers Arada and Udraka. The
term dhyana has been used since the early Upanisads with the meaning of meditation10, but
the Four Trances should probably be regarded as a new meditation system developed by
the Buddhists. The four trances were as a whole a dynamic way of concentrating the mind.
The wisdom received through the trances was not a mystical form of intuition. Rather, it
allowed a person to see things as they actually were (are) in a rational and free manner.
With that wisdom, the practitioner could know truth and firmly adhere to that truth. When
he could not be shaken or moved from that truth, be bear, pain, or passions, he would
realize enlightenment. Because the mind was free from the fetters of defilements and
passions, this state was called ‗emancipation‘ or ‗salvation‘ (vimoksha, vimukti). Some
scholars have described salvation as freedom of the mind from afflictions and nirvana as
peace.

The teaching of the four stages of enlightenment is a central factor in the early
Buddhist schools, and also in the surviving Theravada school of Buddhism. An ordinary
person, or puthujjana (both Pali and Sanskrit: prithujana), is trapped in the endless
changes of samsara. Doing good or evil as influenced by his desires and aversions, an
ordinary person is born in higher or lower states of being (heavens or hells) according to
their karmas (actions). One who follows the Buddhist path and experiences the truth to the
extent of cutting of a number of the ten mental fetters (Pali: samyojana), becomes an ariya
puggala, a "noble person" who will surely become an Arahant in the near future (within
seven lives).

78
The four stages of enlightenment in Buddhism are the four degrees of approaching
to full enlightenment as an Arahant which a person can attain in this life. The four stages
are:

i. Sotapanna
The first stage is that of Sotapanna (Pali and Sanskrit: Srotapanna). Literally it
means "one who enters (apadyate) the stream (sotas)." The stream is the Noble
Eightfold Path regarded as the highest Dharma. The stream-enterer is also said to
have "opened the eye of the Dharma" (dhammacakkhu, Sanskrit: dharmacaksus).
A stream-enterer is guaranteed enlightenment after no more than seven successive
rebirths, and possibly in fewer. The stream-enterer can also be sure that he will
not be reborn in any of the unhappy states or rebirths (an animal, a preta, or in
hell). He will only be reborn as a human being, or in a heaven. The stream-enterer
must have an intuitive grasp of Buddhist doctrine (sammaditthi, "right view"), has
complete confidence or Saddha in the Three Jewels of Buddha, Dhamma, and
Sangha, and has good moral behaviour (Sila).

ii. Sakadagami
The second stage is that of the Sakadaagami. Literally it means "one who once
comes (agacchati)". The once-returner will return to the human world only one
more time. He will get nirvana in that life.

iii. Anagami
The third stage is that of the Anagami. Literally it means "one who does not (an-)
come (agacchati)". The non-returner does not come back into human existence, or
any lower world, after death. Instead, he is reborn in one of the worlds of the
Rupadhatu called the Shuddhavasa worlds, or "Pure Abodes". Here he will attain
Nirvana (Pali: Nibbana). Some of them are reborn a second time in a higher
world of the Pure Abodes, but in no case are born into a lower state. An Anagami
abandons the five lower fetters that bind the mind to the cycle of rebirth. An
Anagami is thus partially enlightened. He is on the way to perfect and complete
Enlightenment.

iv. Arahant
The fourth stage is that of Arahant. The person is a fully enlightened human being
who has abandoned all fetters. The person, upon decease (Sanskrit: Parinirvana,
79
Pali: Parinibbana), will not be reborn in any world because he has wholly
abandoned samsara.

The Pali Canon of Buddhism contains many perspectives on nirvana. For one, it
is linked to seeing the empty nature of phenomena. It is also presented as a radical
reordering of consciousness and unleashing of awareness. Scholar Herbert Guenther states
that with nirvana "the ideal personality, the true human being" becomes reality.11

Various Mahayana schools differ much in the interpretation of Nirvana from

Theravada. Mahayanists believed that the ‗parinibbana‘ of the Buddha did not result in the
total extinction of his ‗samsara‘. Rather he entered the ‗apratisthita-nirvana‘ in which he
continued to work for the salvation of all beings who were suffering in ‗samsara‘. This
means the Buddha would have retained one or more of the ‗skandas‘ after ‗parinibbana‘.
The assumption that the Buddha could continue to exist after ‗parinibbana‘ in an existence
that consists of the ‗skandas‘ is contradicted from the traditional teachings of the Buddha
who said that suffering resides in ‗skandas‘. There cannot be any suffering after getting
Nirvana. This envisages the total extinction of ‗samsaric skandas‘.

That‘s why Theravada Buddhists do not accept the Mahayana theory of Nirvana.
This Mahayana theory of Nirvana is linked to their ‗Sunyata‘ (emptiness) theory which is
not acceptable to Theravada Buddhists. The word ‗sunya‘ is used in Theravada Buddhism
with a different meaning to that of Mahayana, particularly the viewpoint of the
Madyamikas. The Chula-sunyata Sutra of the Majjima Nikaya deals with the significance
of the term ‗sunya‘ and its connection with the notion of ‗Nirvana‘. In this sutra, the
Buddha teaches that the cessation of suffering depends on the cessation of being and
becoming. There is a passage in this sutra which describes emptiness (‗sunyata‘) with an
analogy of the forest. It is clear that the world is empty of self or what belongs to a self.
For the Theravada Buddhists, this did not mean that the world itself was unreal or literally
void, but that there is no self or soul in a person or sentient being. This is the ‗sunyata‘
theory in Theravada and this is totally different from that of ‗Mahayana‘.

The Mahayanists rejected this interpretation of emptiness (‗sunya‘) or to be

precise that it did not go far enough. According to their thoughts, even the constituent
elements known as ‗Dhammas‘ are unreal and void. As mentioned above, this idea could
be traced back to the very early Mahayana texts like ‗Asta-sahasrika-prajna-paramita‘
which states that all Dhammas are unoriginated and non-existent. Although the notion of
80
emptiness is significant in most versions of Buddhism, it is crucial to Mahayana
Buddhism. The argument goes that everything is without a nature, and so is empty.
Nirvana or enlightenment is also empty, since it is realized through the acquisition of an
empty consciousness. If everything is empty, both the material world and the perfect
world, then we are also empty from an essential point of view, and we each share in this
quality of being sunya or empty.

The Mahayana uses this as an argument that the Buddha nature is in everyone,
because everyone shares emptiness. If the Buddha nature is empty, it is the same sort of
emptiness in everyone. How can we attain an understanding of emptiness, especially when
we are to engage in a process that in itself is far from empty, but involves a great deal of
theory and argument which is designed to help us to appreciate the emptiness of
everything? The answer is that the words of the teaching are distinct from the teaching
itself, and the words can lead us close to the point where we have to rely on ourselves and
our experiences alone, to blend with the emptiness of the essence of the world which is the
source of our own emptiness.

The Madhyamaka school emphasized the emptiness of the key ideas of

philosophy, such as the self, causality, motion, time, karma, and even nirvana and the
Buddha. It seems likely that the stress on emptiness was designed to oppose the views of
the Abhidharma school which often implies that there is some reality in the basic
categories of the universe, and of course it might be used to counter all the 'orthodox'
Hindu notions of what essentially exists. Nagarjuna and his followers thought that
compromising on the notion of reality was going against the principles of Buddhism. After
all, they argue that to appreciate the emptiness of everything is the same as absolute
knowledge, and the objective of religion itself. As one might expect, the doctrine of
emptiness came in for a lot of criticism, which Nagarjuna tries to rebut in his works. For
example, it was argued that if everything is empty, then the thesis that everything is empty
is itself empty, and so has no force. On the other hand, if the thesis is not empty, then it is
not the case that everything is empty. If everything can be negated, then so can the thesis
presented by Nagarjuna. Many similar objections are directed against him, some linked to
the problems of self-referentiality and others questioning the accuracy with which the
thesis fits in with Buddhist principles. His general reply is that it is important to distinguish

81
between relative and absolute reality. Everything, he argues, is absolutely empty, but
relatively real, since we have evidence for the latter from our experience.

Nagarjuna accepts that in absolute terms all arguments are empty, but on the
relative level it is acceptable to use them to show that one cannot stay at that level if one is
going to make progress. There is a nice medical analogy which points out that if medicine
is used to cure an illness, the medicine itself must also leave the system after having
carried out its restorative function. The doctrine of emptiness-- should be used to cure
ourselves of belief in the absolute reality of what we experience, and then it also should be
expunged from our conceptual system, in just the same way that the Buddha after
enlightenment was reluctant to speak and teach any more. The paradoxical strategy of
claiming that everything is empty is none the less impossible to state, since it is self-
refuting. But its supporters have a point in arguing that, although the argument cannot be
proposed, it could still be valid, although not once stated. In any case, one could always
hold the emptiness doctrine as applying to the nature of reality, but not as describing our
experience of the material world.

According to the Mahayana tradition, we should distinguish between the form of

nirvana achieved by someone like a monk, and the form of enlightenment available to
everyone as shown by the Buddha and the bodhisattvas. There is a general Mahayana
confidence that enlightenment is widely available, and can be achieved within one person's
lifetime. This is often accompanied by a theory that all beings have the Buddha nature, or
even are Buddhas. This approach was taken to its logical conclusion in China by Chan
(Zen), who argued that we are all Buddhas and all can achieve enlightenment suddenly.
That is, we all have the Buddha nature, and we can use it to adopt the correct attitude to the
nature of reality, and once we do this we can break with samsara and immediately become
enlightened.

According to Yogachara Buddhism, enlightenment can be achieved if we transfer

unenlightened mental impulses away from ourselves through the following of religious
practices. There are various approaches to how enlightenment may be realized; some
arguing that what is required is gradual progress through many lives, while Zen thinkers
are in favour of sudden enlightenment, since only the present really exists. But their theory
was more complex than this, and they also emphasized the importance for enlightenment
of appropriate deeds. The point that Zen masters made was that everyone had the Buddha

82
nature in the sense that everyone had it potentially. Everyone may at one time be the slave
of illusion, but since they all innately possess the Buddha nature, they can in principle and
in practice throw off this ignorance and acquire enlightenment.

The Madhyamaka school interprets enlightenment slightly differently, in that it

tries to wean us away from our attachment to concepts, which it sees as a form of craving
or desire. Of course, the route to doing away with concepts is through the use of concepts,
and so this form of Buddhism is fond of self-subversive riddles and stories. Concepts only
work at one level, and at a higher level of truth we have to transcend concepts if we are to
achieve enlightenment. This form of enlightenment can never be expressed in language,
which means that language can only take one part of the way to enlightenment. The final
step has to be something that one does after receiving hints, in the form of paradoxical
slogans and possibly even jokes.

The key advantage Vajrayana Buddhism claims to provide is an accelerated path

to enlightenment. Nirvana is sometimes described as complete and perfect sanity. In
Vajrayana this is achieved through use of tantra techniques, which are practical aids to
spiritual development, and esoteric transmission. Earlier schools might provide insight
meditation as ways to achieve nirvana. For the Vajrayaists, the technique of meditation is
slow and only helpful in achieving to the stage of Arahatship and not to become the
Buddha. So they call it the lower wheel (Hinayana). Vajrayana techniques make full
enlightenment or Buddhahood possible in a much shorter timeframe, perhaps in a single
lifetime. Vajrayana Buddhists do not claim that Theravada or Mahayana practices are in
any way invalid, only that they represent slower paths. It should also be noted that the goal
of the Mahayana and Vajrayana is the attainment of Buddhahood, whereas the goal for
Theravada practice is liberation from the cycle of rebirth in Nirvana. Vajrayana relies on
various tantric techniques for the realization of Nirvana which is different from the
Theravadins spiritual insight practice of Vipassana.

Critical Comparison regarding the concepts of Moksha in Hinduism and

Buddhism

Notion of Death in Hinduism and Buddhism

While discussing the concept of moksha in Hinduism and Buddhism, obviously, it

is very important to understand the notion of death in these two religions. In Hindu

83
philosophy, death is described in a number of different ways. According to the Bhagavad-
Gita, those selves that have managed to free themselves join Krishna, yet remain distinct
from him. Selves that are not freed are reborn repeatedly, until liberation is finally
achieved, although there is a self that is not touched by this involvement in samsara, the
cycle of birth and rebirth. There are two ways of looking at the self, atman or the self that
is in contact with brahman, absolute reality, and jiva, or the temporal aspect of this
unchangeable self. Death is really of little consequence, it is going to take place many
times within the cycle of change, and the more that the person can disregard it the more
likely he or she is to transcend the cycle eventually and attain moksha or escape. Of course,
the materialists such as the Lokayata have few problems in discussing death, which is
merely a rearrangement of the material parts of the human being, leading to the dissolution
of the person. 12

There are many differences; one of the main differences between the role of death
in Buddhist philosophy and that in Hinduism is that in the former there is no eternal self
that continues through many changes of the material aspect of the person. On the other
hand, Buddhist thinkers certainly do not want to argue that nothing remains after death.
What lasts is karma, the consequences of our actions and the actions of others, and what
we should do to try to escape from this process is to abandon our trust in the reality of the
world and the existence of a real single self. We seem to remember aspects of our past
lives, but these are not really aspects of our past lives, but combinations of moments that
took place to something linked loosely with whom we are now. Death is not very
significant in that it is going to lead to the dissolution of the particular combinations of
impulses and motives and replace these with another combination within a new form. If
enlightenment is achieved, then death is a significant event, since it stops the whole
process of rebirth. Death is always a significant event in the round of rebirth, since it is the
point of transition from one body to another, but it has no importance in itself. The Buddha
compares the body and the mind to a clay pot and the oil in it. When it is thrown into a
pool of water, the pot breaks up and disintegrates, but the oil rises to the surface. The body
is only the container of the chitta or mind, and the fact that we die is merely a reflection of
the truth that everything that is created will come to an end.

Buddha says that, in every moment of our life, we are dying. The I of that moment
dies, never to be reborn. Yet despite the fact that in this sense my life consists of nothing

84
but funerals, I do not conceive of myself as dying each moment, for I do not equate myself
with my individual moments. I endure through them—experiencing them, without being
identical with any of them in its singularity. Hinduism carries this notion a step further. It
posits an extensive self that lives successive lives in the way a single life lives successive
moments.

A story from the life of Sankara is very much illustrative in explaining the advaita
philosophy of Sankara. According to tradition, Sankara met his guru Govinda at the
‗tender age‘ of eight and under the following circumstances. As the child knocked at the
door of the great master [the reply from inside was], ‗Who art thou?‘Little Shankar replied,
‗Thou!‘The teacher recognized the disciple and opened the door.

This traditional story is illustrative of the main thrust of Sankara‘s advaita: non-
difference (avaitavada), or stated in the positive, identity. To the question ‗Who are you?‘
Sankara‘s answer is the simple but devastating, ‗I am you‘. Here, the aspirant‘s question
once again must be ‗How can that be?‘ The non-dual statement of identity proclaimed by
the young Sankara is consistent with the Upanisadic insistence on the unity of reality
(brahman) and the identity of self (atman) with reality. In the mature Sankara teaching this
powerful identification becomes absolute and serves to form the cornerstone of his non-
dualist Vedanta.13

Reality (brahman) is by nature non-originated and undifferentiated, ‗One without

a second‘. Atman, by its very nature, is, according to Advaita teachings, identical with
brahman: ‗This brahman is the self‘. This identity is not produced by any change in the
nature of brahman or atman, for a thing cannot change its nature; hence, to be identical, the
nature of reality (brahman) and the nature of atman must always be the same. (Perhaps it is
better to say that there is only one nature to things, that of brahman.) 14

Rejection of Moksha in Charvaka School

The charvakas, also called Lokayata, or the materialists in Hindu philosophy,

rejected any notion of valid knowledge, so that philosophy, which ―according to the
common Indian view ought to be a discipline of life, ceases here to be even a discipline of
the mind‖.15 The charvaka doctrine is summed by Krishna Mishra in his allegory
Prabodha-chandrodaya—―Lokayata is always the only sastra; in it only perceptual
evidence is authority; the elements are earth, water, fire, and air; wealth and enjoyment are

85
the objects of human existence. Matter can think. There is no other world. Death is the end
of all.‖16

The charvakas outrightly rejects any concept of enlightenment or moksha. Since,

there remains nothing of a being after death, it is futile to talk of mukti. It is not only
useless, but totally a wrong way of living the only life a being enjoys. For them there is no
sufficient proof for the existence of any valid knowledge and hence enlightenment thereof.
Nor is internal perception the means, since you cannot establish that the mind has any
power to act independently towards an external object since all allow that it is dependent
on the external senses…Nor can inference be the means of the knowledge of the universal
proposition, since in the case of this inference we should also require another reference to
establish it, and so on, and hence would arise the fallacy of an ad infinitum retrogression. 17

The only contradiction in Charvaka is the rejection of all sorts of knowledge.

Moksha is the rejection itself that requires a ground or some sort of inference without
which one cannot deny or reject. So, Charvaka doctrine is paradoxical because it cannot
provide any kind of proof for its rejection. The philosophy of non-duality of Advaita
Vedanta has occupied the dominant position in Indian philosophy from the time of
Sankara (c. 7th–8th centuries) to the present day. The Upanisads represent the culmination
of a great shift in Vedic thought from the external, ritualistic worship of brahman to an
internal, subjective quest for and subsequent inner identification with brahman. According
to Upanisadic definitions, brahman admits of no distinctions or divisions (‗One without a
second‘); is both being (One) and knowing (intelligence) and is identical with the self, in
both the objective sense (‗This brahman is the self‘) and the subjective sense (‗I am
brahman‘). Hence, we can know brahman by the realization that That, i.e., brahman, is
what we are.

Although the two religions talk differently regarding the ultimate liberation, but
the essence is the same. This is made clear in Gita by Krishna—

Then his soul is a lamp whose light is steady, for it burns in a shelter where no
winds come.

When the mid is resting in the stillness of the prayer of Yoga, and by the grace of
the spirit sees the spirit and therein finds fulfillment.

Then the seeker knows the joys of eternity: a vision seen by reason far beyond what
senses can see. He abides therein and moves not from truth.18
86
Because his mind does not become restless with desires and also because he does
work without an eye on the result, all his karmas/actions are like offerings to Krishna who
is infinite (i.e. with no end). The soul of such a man is like a steady flame sheltered in the
grace of Krishna. This verse is highly poetic and expresses excellence of devotion. The
Lord Buddha also defined Nirvana as extinguishing of the energy, burning away of all the
samskaras.

The two traditions of Advaita Vedanta of Hindu sage Sankara and Zen Buddhist
philosophy have many similar aspects. According to Advaita and Zen philosophies, reality
is fundamentally unconditioned and non-dual in nature, and that realization of this ‗true
nature‘ of things is the aim and goal of human life. As a corollary to this, both traditions
claim that our ordinary dualistic way of experiencing the world does not give us true or
direct knowledge of ‗the nature of things‘, as our experience of reality is somehow
distorted or filtered by conditions and structures that we falsely identify with reality
itself.19

Both Advaita and Zen claim that spiritual awakening does not involve ‗adding
anything new‘ to the practitioner‘s experience. Both philosophies claim that there is
nothing to be gained from spiritual practice. Nevertheless, both traditions claim that there
is a fundamental non-dual realization as to the ‗nature of things‘, dhamma. In this context,
the Advaita and Zen experiential spiritual quests can be said to be similarly framed. In the
non-dual practice traditions of Advaita Vedanta and Zen Buddhism, engagement with a
spiritual practice represents an ongoing process of applying oneself to a form of inquiry. In
this form of inquiry, fundamental dimensions of what it is to be a human being are claimed
to be revealed. Deconstructive spiritual inquiry in both traditions targets the primary
dualisms of subject and object, cause and effect, and linear conceptions of space and time.

The Advaitin believe that ‗nothing ever happens‘. For them, brahman cannot be
experienced by merging with one polarization of a dichotomous relationship. As the
beginningless and endless non-dual emanation that is the substratum ‗between thought‘,
brahman admits of no shadings or aspects of differentiated oppositions. That is, atman-
brahman-identity is not a realization of identity as opposed to difference, nor is it a
merging with reality as opposed to appearance. For Advaita, atman-brahman-identity is
ever present and ‗just is‘. 20

87
Brahman is all-being with no relationship to the dichotomy of being and non-
being. Sunyata of Mahayana Buddhism is empty non-being that is not dependent on the
dichotomy of non-being and being. Both ‗ultimates‘ are pointed out to students in the
practice situation as being neither this nor that and both this and that. That is, Brahman and
sunyata are not to be dualistically objectified as attainable. Zen practitioners report the
‗emptiness‘ of things and Advaita practitioners report the ‗fullness‘ of things; however, the
experiential point that these insights reveal is that reality has no substantial existence. That
is, reality cannot be reduced to any form of ontological objectification. The paradoxical
‗empty fullness‘ of brahman or the ‗full emptiness‘ of sunyata is experienced without
contradiction. Deconstructive spiritual inquiry in both Zen and Advaita experientially
‗moves‘ practitioners into this ‗space‘ wherein the boundaries and barriers of conceptual
thought and personal dualistic experiencing are felt to be lessened or undone and an
already-present non-dual sense of ‗knowing‘ is disclosed in the actual experiencing of the
practitioner.

It is the aim of religion to lift us from our momentary meaningless existence to the
significance and status of the eternal, to transform the chaos and confusion of life to that
pure and immortal essence which is its ideal possibility. If the human mind so changes
itself as to be perpetually in the glory of the divine light, if the human emotions transform
themselves into the measure and movement of the divine bliss, if human action partakes of
the creativity of the divine life, if the human life shares the purity of the divine essence, if
only we can support this higher life, the long labour of the cosmic process will receive its
crowning justification and the evolution of centuries unfold its profound significance. The
divinizing of the life of man in the individual and the race is the dream of the great
religions. It is the moksha of the Hindus, the nirvana of the Buddhists, the kingdom of
heaven of the Christians.

Moksha is a spiritual realization. The Hindu Dharma says, Man does not live by
bread alone, nor by his work, capital, ambition or power or relation to external nature. He
lives or must live by his life of spirit. Moksha is self-emancipation, the fulfilment of the
spirit in us in the heart of the eternal. This is what gives ultimate satisfaction, and all other
activities are directed to the realization of this end.

Moksha can be apprehended through the practice of yoga. The practice of any one
of the four yogas or disciplines, namely the karma yoga, jnana yoga, raja yoga and the

88
Bhakti yoga, can help us to realize moksha. Both Advaita Vedanta and Bhakti traditions
emphasize the principle of non-duality (non- separation of individual and reality) and
personified worship (god as love) respectively. One can overcome karma by realizing the
self through a nirvikalpa samadhi and attain mukti (freedom) from rebirth. It is also
possible to attain moksha through bhakti or love of the manifestations of Shiva, Vishnu or
Brahma. If a person can attain moksha he can liberate himself from worldly sorrow and
enjoy a state of high consciousness or supreme bliss. In this state he can transcend earthly
phenomena and understand empirical reality such as the concept of time, space, matter,
energy or karma. He can then see all these concepts as maya or illusion. The state of
supreme bliss also leads to a state of nirvana where it is possible to destroy the ego or
nama-rupa and reveal one's true identity. Moksha is therefore not a soteriological goal and
cannot be equated to the concept of salvation as represented in Greek myths or Christian
theology, but dissolution of the ego where even the final goal is annihilated. Moksha in
Buddhism and Hinduism is not just a belief or a concept but a way of life.

Notes and References:

1. Shrimadbhagavad Gita, 3.29.13

2. Ibid.

3. Leaman, Oliver. (1999). Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy. Routledge. p. 5.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Tiwari, K. N. (2007). Classical Indian Ethical Thought, Delhi, Motilal

Banarsidass Publishers Pvt., Ltd.

7. Ibid.

8. Peter Harvey, "The Selfless Mind." Curzon Press 1995, p. 87.

9. Cowell, Buddhist Mahayana Texts, pp. 174–180.

10. Chandogya Upanisad 7. 6. 1.

11. Guenther, (1949), The Problem of the Soul in Early Buddhism, Curt Weller
Verlag, Constanz, pp. 156-157.

89
12. Leaman, Oliver. (1999), Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy, Routledge.

13. Davis, Leesa S. (2010), Advaita Vedanta and Zen Buddhism, UK, Continuum
International Publishing Group.

14. Ibid.

15. Hiriyanna, M. (1993). Outlines of Indian Philosophy, India, Motilal Banaasidass

Publiaction, p. 189.

16. Radhakrishnan, S. (2008). Indian Philosophy, OUP, p. 278-279.

17. Radhakrishnan, S. and Charles A. Moore. (1997). A Source Book in Indian

Philosophy, Princeton University Press, p. 213-231.

18. Srimadvagavad-Gita, (Trans. Juan Mascaro-Rider and Coy), London: p. 74.

19. Davis, Leesa S. (2010). Advaita Vedanta and Zen Buddhism, UK: Continuum
International Publishing Group.

20. Ibid.

90
Chapter Three
Vajrayana School in Nepal

Vajrayana is special area of study within Buddhism. Vajrayana has special features
in Buddhism in Centext of Nepal. There is a caste in Newar community called
Bajracharya. This caste is like Brahamins of Hindu. Some of them are called Sakya too. In
oher words, Sakya and Bajracharya are the priests of Buddhism community who are called
Vikshu. It is interesting to note that boys froms Bajracharya and Sakya community take the
oath of celibacy from early stage of their lives. They are trained to be vikshu and registered
as members of ‗Vihar‘1 (Vihar: temple or prayer centre of Buddhas). Some of them may
come in the worldly life and most of them remain bachelor throughout their lives.

In Nepal, in four places these Vihars are categoried-Kantipur, Lalitpur, Bhaktpur

and Madhyapur Within the Kathmandu Valleys, these Vihars have similarities as well as
differences. It is interesting to note that their is a democratic system in these Vihars for the
selection of the top priest. In Vajrayana, it is called ‗chakreshwar‘. It means to say that the
leader of Buddhism is seniority. Chakreshwar is also called ‗Sanganayak‘. It means to say
that it is a leader of whole group. In Newari language, it is called ‗Thayata‘2 (Leader)
Apart from this, there are regional Buddhist councils of Nepalese Vajrayana who keep on
coordinating among these Vihars. There are eighteen prominent Vihars in Vajrayana in
Nepal which have eighteen Chakreshwars, one head chakreshwar is selected on the basis of
the some criteria of seniority. The most senior Chakreshawar is called in Newari language
– ―De Thyapa‖. De means nation, thaya means leader.

This Vajrayani community has special contribution in the evolution of Buddhism in

Nepal. For example, Vajrayana community has developed the various modes and methods
of tantras and Yogas.

Tantric Buddhism is another aspect of Buddhism. Around 300 A.D., so many

tantric works have come out from Buddhism. Vajrayana also is one of the tantric methods
which describes in very comprehensive way to attain emancipation.

91
As Vajrayana is branch of Mahayana, it incorporates its basic philosophy Permista
Naya (Parmita Path) and Mantra Naya (Mantra Path). These are two aspects of Mahayana
way of Buddhism.

There is no historical proof to determine the exact date when Vajrayana was set up
in Kathmandu. Some inscriptional evidences and refuges give hint of Vajrayana associated
with Kathmandu valley. For example, the title ‗bajracharya‘ which is of upper priest caste
is found in Newar community. This title sounds some association with Vajrayana.

Buddhism is said to have been introduced into Nepal either by Gautam Buddha
himself or by Emperor Ashoka and his daughter Charumati.1 but the Tantric practice was
also introduced in Nepal in its early phage as we find the concept of Mandola, Manjushri,
Malla, and Kalpa. Similarly the erection of Swayombhu Chaitya also possesses the tantric
concept. Moreover, also in the inscription of Licchavi period, the word Vajrayana is found.

Next, the arrival of great Buddhist philosopher Acharya Vasubandhu (4th century)
is another evidence, that we can present, of the presence of tantric Buddhism or at least he
can be considered as the propagator of tantric elements in Nepalese Buddhism.

As a fertile soil of faith and creed, Nepal seems to have attained real prominence as
a strong supporter and propagator of the Buddhist faith (obviously tantric Buddhism) from
the days of King Ansuvarma in the 7th century. He arranged his daughter (Bhrikuti‘s)
marriage to the first powerful King of Tibet, Siron-btsam-sgam.2 She took to Tibet the idol
of Akshobhya along with her.3

The concept of Akshobhya Buddha is already found in the Guhya Samaja Tantras
(2nd and 3rd century) as a central figure.4 This indicates that the cult of tantric Buddhism
was prominent in the Nepalese Buddhist Society in those centuries. In the age of
Sangharakshita (The tantric teacher of 8th and 9th century A.D.) strong ties of religious and
cultural friendship appeared to have developed between these two (Nepal and Tibet)
countries.5

India and Nepal have strong relation on behalf of Buddhist religion. There had
always been an exchange of students and teachers as scholars between Nepal and the
Buddhist universities of Bihar and Bengal. After the fall of the Pala and the Sena dynasty
in Bengal and of the Karnataka dynasty of Tirhut to the successive waves of Muslim
92
invasion between the ninth and fourteenth centuries, tantric teachers of Buddhism other
than Sangharakshita, Padmasambhave in eighth century and Atisa in the eleventh century
came to Nepal and then went to Tibet.6 Buddhist teachings flourished in Nepal with their
contribution.

Most religious doctrines came from the Indian scholars. From the eleventh to the
fourteenth century, Nepal became a testing ground for different systems for a festival of
religious thought and practices imported from India. The influence of Brahminical
reformist movement, led by Sankarcharya of south India, penetrated into Nepal at about
the same time as the esoteric practices of Tantricism based on the earlier Saiva and Sakta
cults and on Buddhist Mahayana formalism. Nepal became not only a focal point where
these divergent religious practices converged, but also a melting pot of different kinds of
religious thoughts and rituals which were transformed into the Nepali version of
Vajrayanas.7

Thus, as a whole can be said that right from 4th century till fourteenth century
Buddhism in the form of Vajrayana flourished in the Valley.

Buddhism in Nepal, especially in Newar society, is living through tantric Buddhist

rituals. The spiritual leaders and the followers are both engaged in religious Buddhist
observances. The seeds of rites and rituals sown by Mahasanghika monks were further
nourished by tantric Buddhists. When Hiuen-Tsang visited Amaravati in 639 A.D., the
place had developed from Mahsanghika community to a flourishing Mahayana centre and
ritualistic worship had become part and parcel of monastic life.8 Fahian‘s account of
chariot festival in Pataliputra and Itsing‘s reference of Monastic rituals in Nalanda (67-695
A.D.) such as worship of Buddha images are the sufficient evidences of Mahasanghika
monastic activities based on rituals.

A series of Buddha and Bodhisattvas were introduced in early Mahayanic period.

In this connection in the wave of Vajrayana, five Buddhas and their consorts and more
subordinate deities were introduced in Vajrayananic scriptures. In course of time, Yogic
practices along with Mantras and Dharm were incorporated by Buddhist monks and
followers according to their calibre and resources. Furthermore, the assurance of liberation
in even one life through Yogic practice attracted more and more followers. Teachers and
disciple tradition of Vajrayana made the practice of the philosophy of Buddhism easier for
93
laity to grasp and follow it. The laymen could not observe the secret and profound yogic
practices. Thus, ritualism of those Yogic processes was introduced which took them
gradually towards emancipation. John Locke (the contemporary specialist of Newar
Buddhism) presents this idea regarding rituals on the basis of Giuseppe Tucci‘s. As the
theory and practice of the Mandala, though it is possible to perform the Sadhana in a bare
cave with little or no rituals, people differ and some are more inclined to ritual as a means
of overcoming their ignorance and the Karmic-effects on their sins. For such people, the
master developed a special class of Tantras- the Kriya Tantras, which are devoted to a
much more complicated liturgy. Even in Kathmandu though the ritual played a subordinate
role, it was a tool or psychological instrument which was used to help them for the
realisation and enlightenment they were seeking.9

In the beginning of the each life cycle rituals and almost all monastic rituals, Guru
Mandala rite is performed. The minute speculation of ‗Guru Mandala‘ confirms to some
extent that the process of this particular ritual presents the thoughts and essence of
Buddhism from very beginning to the latest development of tantric elements.
Predominance of Mahayana Buddhism during the ritual can be speculated so far.

The performance of ‗Guru‘ Mandala rite begins with solemn promises. These
promises are based on confession of sins which are followed by purification of body,
speech and mind. Here not only Mahayanic thought but the primary ethics of Buddhism
which were promulgated by the Buddha himself are revised and presented to make the
people understand the primary steps towards perfect transcendental enlightenment. In this
connection, the desirer who is trying to proceed in the way of enlightenment. He must try
to help first entire being to gain liberation, only then he can attain enlightenment. The
attempt of making entire being free from misery is undoubtedly based on early and later
Mahayanic Scripture10 which is full of compassionate feelings, when the Bodhisattva
wishes to help all creatures to obtain liberation.

The six perfections of Bodhisattva are defined through ritualistic acts. The simple
acts such as purifying and sweeping the place, removing tiny ants, arranging rites,
concentrating on rites and drawing clear lines correspond six perfections. Though these are
simple acts preformed during rituals but make the performer understand the essence of
those perfections gradually.

94
Similarly repetition of universal compassion shows the seed of Mahayana in the
heart of performer. Further introduction of Eight-fold path and observation of Uposadha
are a way of teaching to the followers.

Five Dhyani Buddhas are the manifestations of Lord Buddha. The Lord, having
seated in different Samadhis and having recited the different mantras, transformed himself
in the forms of Tathagatas and placed them as his replicas in the different parts of the
Mandala or magic circle.11 In other Buddhist Tantric Scriptures the five Dhyani Buddhas
represent the five ‗Skandha‘. or elements of which the creation is composed. The entire
world is composed of five Skandhas according to Buddha‘s philosophy. So the basic
concept to the world is also brought through the performances of the rites. Along with
doctrinal aspects of Buddhism, the moral precepts such as importance of ‗Uposadha‘ and
confessions of sins are also reformed during the ‗Guru Mandala‘ rites.

Mandala represents the worship of deities. The diagram of ‗Guru Mandala‘

consists the entire world symbolized by ‗Mt. Meru‘ and the continents plus all the wealth
and glory of entire beings of Universe. The performance offers the Mandala to the deity.
The offering of entire world to the deity may be interpreted in two ways. Primarily it
presents the notion of non-attachment, which is the basic requirement of acquiring Nirvan
and another one is the compassionate at attitude, which makes the offer to give up entire
belonging including himself for the welfare of worldly beings. Mandala is not only the
symbolic representation of the world but at the tantric-yogic levels it represents the human
body.12

During the ‗Pancho-Pachara Puja‘ (Five-fold offering), the lamp is offered to the
deity as a form of knowledge which destroys the net of illusions. As it is found in the
doctrinal aspects of ‗Vijananavada‘, all Dharmas are made up of the substances of
consciousness and the absolute negation of perceiver and the perceived Ultimate reality.

Not only that the voidness of all phenomena is also taught to the Buddhist
followers. So it can be perceived that the entire ‗Guru Manadala rite‘ is a hand book of
Buddhist philosophy. It is concerned with peculiarities of rites and slowly it takes the
observer onwards to the knowledge of Buddhism.

95
Charya in the form of state observances

The practice of Buddhist philosophy in day to day life is charya. The word
‗Charya‘ is derived from the root ‗car‘ which denotes course proceeding behaviour and
conduct. The arduous vows and observances which were promulgated by Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas are exercised by Buddhist practitioner in the Kathmandu valley (Kathmandu).
The definition of charya is presented as with the permission of teacher (Buddhas). To
perform arduous vows, Buddhist normal precepts are observed through various
observances.13

‗Charya‘ has been defined as the performance of some arduous vows with the
permission of the teacher, viz. the Buddhas. Here the Buddhist moral precepts are followed
through a number of observances. These are detailed below.

Astramivrata- Newar Buddhist observes the eighth day of each lunar fortnight
under the name of Astanuvranta. The devotion is offered to Amoghapasa Lokeswara.
Amoghapasa Lokeswara is the Multi armed form of Avalokitesvara. This particular form
was introduced in the valley in late middle ages. The name of the deity itself reveals the
meaning, that is, the Lokeswara with the unerring of unfailing noose.

It is further explained in the Japanese literature as a Lokeswara who leads the

sentient beings to enlightenment with the help of the unfallible noose.14

Though the Buddhist Newar observes these days (obtamivrata) for worldly
purpose, i.e. to wade off evil and for release from prison and great distress, the observation
of eight precepts is exercised by them. Thus the practice of Buddhist philosophy is
exercised by practitioners and upasaka equally.

Vasudharavrata- This observation is performed on the third day of dark fortnight

of the month of Aswin. Vasundhara is supposed to be the wealth Goddess in Buddhism.

Laksa, Chaitya vrata-Making of Hundred thousand chaityas

In Newari language it is known as dyahthyegu, making Gods, for the whole month
of Sravana, the devotees make small clay Chaityas every day. On the final two days they
fast and worship them, and finally take the Chaityas to the nearby river and throw them
into the river.

96
Taravrata- Sattvapuja (Saptvidha nottara Puja) is done for Tara

All the above observations are done for particular world by purposes, by keeping of
precepts, observing purity rules and sometimes even keeping fast. It is very near to the
meaning of Charya. The Buddhist philosophy is exercised through these observances.

One should abandon one‘s possessions along with ego and merit for the welfare of
whole beings, and for that one should protect, purify and enhance those belongings.

The elaborate performances, devotional practices and observances aimed to fulfil

the worldly desire at first were seen against the philosophy of Buddhist but the minute
observation of those practices reveals the actual essence of Buddhist philosophy. This way
the term ‗Charya‘ followed by the Buddhist Newar has real meaning.

Yoga – The practice of Yoga is also prevalent in Newar Buddhist society, but it is
very hard to find out who actually are engaged in tantra yoga. Yoga the word is derived
from the root Yuj, which means to unite. Thus, the etymological meaning of the word will
be uniting. In Yoga Dharshana it is Chittbriti.

Cessation of all mental fluctuation-Nirodh

In Buddhism a prajana (Knowledge) and upaya (means) are united. In the yoga
Tantra, Mandala Circle (of deities) is taken as means, with ecstasy due to, binding, of
female and male deities. This shows devatayoga (Yoga of the deities and produces divine
pride free from ordinary pride) which is the quick path of Buddhahood, that is to say, to
acquire the three kinds of formal body rupakaya, the samboga-kaya and dharmakaya.15

At the level of tantric yoga, the Mandala represents the human body, the continents
situate the person who is offering himself and the seven Jewels correspond the seven limbs
of enlightenment.

According to the information there still exists the practice of Nariyoga, Vayuyoga
and Chandaliyoga among the Newar Buddhists.

97
Anuttara Yoga

It is a diamond lit meditation (Samadhi) where body speech and mind are united. In
Kathmandu, the higher initiations are given in three disciplines to the Vajracharya, Sakya
and Udas too.

These disciplines are Chakra Samvara, Vajravarahi, and Achala. According to my

the information kalchakra initiation was also in prevalence thirty to fifty years before.

The Buddhist Newars are seen more conscious to their religion. So the Vajradhatu
initiation is popular in Newar community. These above mentioned initiations are formal
and open to laity also.

Prevalence of higher initiation among Newar communities is the sign of living

Vajrayana in Nepal.

This is the changed social atmosphere where conversion is on the high speed in
Nepal under the cover of NGO, INGO and different charity missions. Newar community
also finds threatened by this wave. Still the root of Vajrayana community is so strong that
it has maintained its status quite state in Nepal. One of the reason is that it emphasis on
detachment quite contrast to worldly life. It may not be wrong to say that the people in the
modern age are crazy, restless and tense. Therefore, the teachings of Buddhism can only
make us free from these very threatening problems of life.

Notes and References:

1. Shah, Rishikesh : Ancient and Mediaval History of Nepal. P.106

2. Bapat, P.V. : 2500 years of Buddhism. P. 73
3. Cryastal Mirror (1984). Annual of Tibetan Buddhism, copyright (c), Dharm
Publishing. P.240
4. Guhya Samaj Tantra-seems edition. p.5
5. Bapt P.V.: 2500 years of Buddhism. P. 73
6. Shah, Rishikesh, Ancient and Mediaval History of Nepal. P.113
7. Ibid. P.112
8. John. K. Locke KM: 67

98
9. John. K. Locke KM: 72
10. Lankavatarasutra-66/6 edited by Nenjio (Kyato-1923)
11. Guhya Samaj Tantra: Int p.XVIII.
12. John. K. Locke KM: 87
13. Heyavajra Tantra Tita: London Oriental London, 1959.
14. John. K. Locke KM: 184
15. Alex Wayman (1993), The Buddhist Tantras, Motilal Banasidass, p.5.

99
Chapter Four
Religious Symbolism and Rituals in Nepal

Encompassing the Himalayas within its border Nepal nestles between India and
Tibet. It is the geographical areas that are mostly responsible in determining Nepal‘s
religious aura. In the northern sections, where Tibetan influence is dominant, Buddhism in
its Lamaistic tradition is prevalent. In the densly populated southern lowlands which
appears geographically the same with northern India, Hindu saivism dominates. And in the
mid-region of Nepal merging of Buddhism and Hinduism can be seen. Nepal was an
official Hindu State just some periods back. Now it is a secular state. But the influence of
Kingdom is still there. Brahmans have an important influence both on the rulers of Nepal
as well as on the masses of the people.

Tantric Hinduism along with the touches of tantric Buddhism has its dominance.
The religious rituals, art and festivals of Nepal reflect blends of Buddhism, Hinduism and
animism but intellectually, in the ideas and thought patterns of the Nepalese upper social
class, Hindu traditions dominate.

Both Hinduism and Buddhism view salvation as a major purpose of religion; both
consider concentration on non-worldly a chief means of achieving salvation. A basic tenet
of both these religions, is faith in reincarnation-the idea that each person has had previous
lives and will have future lives.

Salvation, the main purpose of life, is not in opposition to the pursuit of knowledge.
Religion and learning are closely interrelated in Hindu tradition. The Brahmin are very
influential in Nepal, directly on religious activities and indirectly on secular instruction.
Intuition and mysticism merged with magic as means of dealing with the universe. Even
the traditional myths of Nepal are expressed in religious and mystical terms. Religious
observances form a major role in the Nepalese calendar.

In order to understand the development of Hinduism and Buddhism in Nepal, it is

necessary to view the treasured past that has been interwoven with myths and real facts in
the history of Nepal.

100
Nepal‘s civilization dates back several thousand years. It is a mixed culture of Indo-
Aryans & Mongoloid peoples. There are certain indigenous tribes like Newaris, Thamangs,
Magars, Gurungs, Tharus and Limbas. Among them some of them looks like Mongoloid
physique, while others are Caucasian in appearance. The name ‗Nepal‘ was found on a
pillar at Allahabad from the Gupta dynasty around fourth century A.D. From that time till
the late 18th century, Nepal was known for Kathmandu valley. There are various types of
invasion, beginning with the Licchavi invasion, three or four centuries after the birth of
Christ which make its culture richer. There are two major influences which are responsible
for Nepal‘s present cultural tradition. One is religion which owes its origin in the Hindu
tradition, with modifications from Mahayana Buddhism, and with political decisions
influenced by the priestly caste. The second in militarism, rooted in the Kshatriya caste
which in mixed with Tantric religions traditions, with power usually seized and held
through armed violence. A Hindu dynasty, known as Mallas, rules Nepal during 13th
century onwards, during which the Nepalese culture specially the arts entered a golden age.

During the 13th & 14th centuries, upper caste Hindus took refuge in the mountains
of Nepal due to Muslim invasion. Among them the Rajputs who used to settle in central
Nepal and by the mid-sixteenth century has overthrown the rule of Gorkha. In 1768
Prithvinarayan Shah conquered the Mallahs of Kathmandu valley. Later the Ranas took the
charge. Jung Bahadur Rana was the founder of a dynasty of Prime Ministers where the
king becomes the religious and ceremonial head. After that there were revolutions by the
royalists and the rule of the Ranas came to an end.

In fact without going into detail if we try to measure the pulse of the Nepalese
people regarding the power structure, it may be seen that the country is ruled and
administered largely by three groups; the Brahman Caste, the Kshatriya caste and the
Newar tribe. Coming back to the religious blend of Nepal, it we try to measure then it will
be clear that historically Nepal is a perfect blend of different religious flavour Buddhism
from India and also from Tibet and animistic fervour have produced in Nepal a unique
amalgam. There are Nepalese who are Buddhists and Nepalese Hindus and both religious
groups contain strong element of Tantrism, a cult with primitive magical and animistic
trends. Both Buddhists and Hindus participate in one another‘s festivals, even they worship
at one another‘s temples.

101
Many Buddhist symbols need to be considered within the culture of the people who
follow it. Therefore, many of the early symbols relate to ancient India and can be found in
Hinduism as well, although possibly with a somewhat different meaning.

The historical Buddha lived around the sixth century BCE, but no Buddhist
artifacts are known from before the third century BCE. In the scriptures, it is mentioned
that the Buddha did occasionally use image like the ‗Wheel of Life‘ to illustracte the
teachings. The first archaelological evidence, mainly of ornamental stone carvings, comes
from the time of the Emperor Asoka (273-232 BCE), who converted to Buddhism and
made it a popular religion in India and beyond.

In the second century BCE, people started to excavate Buddhist monasteries in

rock, creating a large amount of artwork to withstand the ages. Probably the earliest typical
Buddhist monument is the stupa, which was often specially decorated. The first actual
Buddha images appeared around the first century BCE, so until then the artwork was
largely symbolic in nature. But with the advent of Vajrayana in the 6th century, the history
of Buddhism completely turned as it gave more emphasis upon imagination, visualization,
rites and rituals, mandalas and a great collection of symbolic items, as a chief forms of
spiritual practices which still thrives today in Nepal.

The rich and symbolic art of South Asia remains vibrantly alive in the form of
mandalas, thangkas and sculptors. The alliance between the physical emanation and their
inner and hidden spirituals aspects have attracted scores of scholars to examine and
interpret these phenomena.1

The ritual tools, rites and the performer, the art and the artist become one when
their sprit is dissolved into the very act of their performance. That is the true essence of
Buddhist meditation. The various tools and symbols, mantras, mandalas are the mediums
by which the yogi achieves liberation. As Sthaneshor Timalsina says that according to
tantras, the deity and the practioner are identical in their true nature. Tantric art mediated
the ordinary realm of experience in which the artist or practioner remains bound with the
medium and become one.2

Both of these religions Buddhism and Hinduism have influence each other
regarding culturally and philosophically. In this regard Hugo Kreijger says, ―…That both

102
Hindu and Buddhist painthing were executed by artists of a Buddhist persuasion is very
likely the reason that both groups of icons are so similar in conception and composition.‖3

In modern psychology, Freud and Jung have clarified many aspects of the sub-
consciouness in terms of symbolism. In Buddhism, the Buddha too discovered the so
called Anusaya Kilesa in our unconscious mind. In order to access these more hidden and
subtle aspects of our mind, symbols can be very effective in mind transformation.

C.G. Jung defines archetypes as ‗primordial images‘, or archetypal figures that

become activated and then clothed with personally derived emotional feelings. This occurs
when an emotional [or spiritual] situation develops that corresponds to a particular
archetype. For example the ‗Wise Old Man‘, the ‗Divine Child‘, ‗All-Giving Mother‘,
‗Patriachal Father‘, ‗Temptress‘ or ‗Trickster‘- all are symbolic, recurring figures in
dreams, litetrature and religions. When the archetypal level of the collective unconscious is
touched in a situation, there is emotional intensity as well as a tendency for symbolic
expression. Even sacred animals have symbolic meanings. T.C. Majpuria says, ―…These
animal motifs are, thus, lively, varied real and imaginary.‖4

Nepal has been a very fertile land for religious harmony and tolerance. There has
been unique example of Nepal where Hinduism and Buddhism have prospered together. In
Kathmandu, there are many temples where we find the status of Buddha being prayed.
There are many communities in Nepal who follow both these religious. Simultaneously, in
this connection, we can have beautiful examples like Newar communities who follow
Hinduism and Buddhism together. In Nepal we find both the roots of Hinduism and
Buddhism. The main cause of development of Buddhism in Nepal is that the daughter of
this land Bhrikuti was wed-locked with Emperor of China and what Bhrikuti did, was that
she spread the Nepalese values along with Buddhist sermons into vast land.

Hinduism and Buddhism are two main and most important religions in Nepal. Both
of these religions coexist in Nepal. This coexistence can be seen in many syncretic images
like those of Harihara, Lakshmi-Narayana, Budhanila-kantha, Shyambhu, Hanuman, etc.
In truth, both these religions have merged into one another in such a way that it is difficult
to find differences. Buddhism emphasizes the basic character of older and parental faith,
and that is Hinduism. It has become a vision that Buddhism has been born out of
Hinduism. Hinduism is commonly called the Brahmanical religion among academic
103
circles. Both of these have cultural and religious tolerance. The relationship originated and
developed out of the innate spirit of tolerance of one another's common religious
philosophy and this permeates the life of the Nepalese people.

Buddhists and Hindus live together. They understand each other. They worship
each other‘s gods (Buddha, being worshipped as god). They visit temples as well as stupas.
It is, therefore, easy for us to understand the practice of animal sacrifices and the ceremony
of Sraddha performed by the Buddhists living promiscuously among the Hindus. It is also
interesting to realize that the Buddhist texts have Sanskrit language like Prajnaparanuta
and Sadhanamala. Many terms are found in Buddhism from Sanskrit language for
easiness. Pali is the main language of this religion. Pali is the language in the earlier
Buddhist literature.

The Buddhist society is also divided into several castes like the caste communities
of the Hindus. The infusion of Tantricism brought in the practice of animal sacrifices in the
Buddhist fold, bringing it still nearer to Hinduism. It also introduced a sense of equality
among Hindu followers and brought about some relaxation of restrictions in the field of
morals as well as the dismissal of untouchability which was widely prevalent in the
Hinduism.

The cult of Vajrayana marked a synthetic merge between the two sister cults of
Saiva and Buddhist deities. The deities have been mentioned in and across the entire range
of the royal charters, decrees and other documents issued throughout the wide expanse of
history of these two religions. Pratapa Malla and Srinivasa Malla had an agreement and
that was written in a copper plate. The agreement announces eternal friendship between
them and that invokes different deities comprising Taleju, Guheswori, Pasupatinatha,
Karunamaya, Machchhindranatha and Harisiddhi. It encompasses the gods of Buddhists
and Hindus alike.

Similarly, there is another agreement and that is between Yogendra Malla and
Jitamitra Malla. This agreement invokes Pasupatinath, Guheswori, Karunamaya, Garuda-
Narayana of Changu-Narayana, Vajrayogini and Harisiddhi. The coins of Yoga Narendra
Malla mention the names of Karunamaya and Lokanatha, both representing
Machchhindranath. The coins have Buddhist and Hindu deities. The name of Lokanatha,, a
Buddhist deity, occurs on the coins of Yogendra Malla, Vishnu Malla and Tejanarsimha
Malla of I.alitpur. Karunamaya is on some coins of the rulers. The coins of Jaya Prakasha
104
Malla, a historical ruler of Kathmandu, show Pasupatinatha, Guheswori, Taleju and
Kamari.

Cultural and religious tolerance can be observed in some other aspects as well.
Lokanatha and Vajrayogini, though these gods belong primarily to the Buddhist pantheon,
are also worshipped by the Saivities. Though primarily the Buddhists worship in stupas
and chatiyas, they are also visited for the worship and reverence by a large number of
Hindus.

Hindus and Buddhists do not have any barriers between regarding their festivals
and rituals. Getting across the barriers of social and cultural sects and castes, the Hindus
and the Buddhists both have almost a uniform system of rituals and rites. Both perform
yajna and kirtan, being the most important and compulsory part of the rituals, as no
worshipping or ceremony is considered complete without it. Charu, a mixture of grains of
barely, rice, sesame, all soaked in ghee, is put into the fire at the completion of the
construction of a Stupa or a temple. During the Pancha-bali, both Hindus and Buddhists
offer ceremonial sacrifices of goats, buffaloes, pigs, and fowls. Some of the festivals,
rituals and their tools are briefly described here.

Agni is the personification of fire. It is the most sacred and ancient object of
Hindu worship. Agni is fire on earth, lightening in mid-air and sun in the sky or heaven.
Shiva often carries agni in one of his hands, especially in a dancing pose. It is also used as
a weapon of war. Adi-Buddha also appeared from a flame. Agni, or God of fire, can also
issue it from his body.

Shiva and Agni

Akshamala is a rosary made of beads. It is made of Rudraksha (Elaeocarpus) in

105
the Shaivite cult and of Tulasi (Ocimum) in Vaishnava cult. The Hindu creator God
Brahma also carries a rosary in one of his hands. Saraswati, a Hindu and Buddhist
goddess, also carries a rosary in one of her hands. Some Buddhist deities, like
Avalokiteshvara, Prajnaparamita, Bhrikuti, Vasudhara, and other gods and goddesses, also
have a rosary in their hands. The rosary has 108 beads, each of a uniform size, and a
person always holds in the right hand when the beads are counted. When it is not being
used, the akshamala is wrapped round the left wrist like a bracelet. A rosary is made of
wood, seeds, bone, glass, crystal, turquoise, ivory. Mantras (magic formulae) are
enchanted in course of computation. Repetition of the mystic formula or prayers contains
the essence of a formal prayer, which acts as a powerful spell. The formula is in Sanskrit
and is addressed to the deity. Different mantras are enchanted for different deities.
Generally, Tibetan Lamas and laity chant the prayer of 'Om Mani Padme Hum' i.e. I hail
to the jewel in Lotus. It is a prayer of Avalokiteshavara.

Akshamala, or Rosary Akshamala

Ankusha (Goad) is the attribute of several Tantric deities. It consists of small

wooden handle topped by a strong and sharp metal hook. When goad is surmounted by
vajra, it is known as Vajrankush. Arrow (Tir) is a weapon for subduing the demonic force.
It is used with a bow. It is a weapon carried by several deities, especially Kamadeva, God
of love and passion whose bow and arrow are made of flowers. In the epic wars of the
Ramayana and Mahabharata, several types of arrows were used. A Buddhist goddess,
Kurkulla, holds in her principal pair hand a flowery bow charged with an arrow of flowery
lotus. Chakra or Wheel represents the unity of all things and is also symbolic
representation of Sakyamuni himself. Chakra is represented on various monasteries.
Beside the chakra, there are shown two deers which were the first disciples of Buddha
when he delivered his first sermon in Sarnath (India). This symbol is also called in
Tibetan language ridag choekor and is depicted over the main entrance of almost every

106
monastery, especially on Transhilumpo at Shigaste and Jokhang Temple in Lhasa. Vishnu,
one of the Hindu trinity, also holds a chakra in one of his hands. Krishna, incarnation of
Vishnu holds a chakra or wheel as a weapon.

Wheel or Chakra

Conch Shell or Shell is called trumpet of victory and symbolises the spoken
word. Right-handed conch shell is very sacred. In the epic of Mahabharata, conch shell
was blown in the beginning of war was called Panchajanya, i.e. born of five. Sound is
associated with primeval. It represents cohesive part of oneness and origin of elements.
Indra also carries a conch shell called Devadutta. Lotus Flower (Padma) symbolises purity
as the flower grows out of the mud. Similarly salvation can be attained in this world. It is
called Pema in Tibetan language. Lotus is ultimate goal or enlightenment. It points out
that love is free from earthly matters. Umbrella or Chatra is a symbol of early kingship
and world-rule and protection of religion. Several icons are shown having canopy of
umbrella. Gold Fish or Matsya symbolises spiritual liberation just as water permits fish to
lead its activities freely. So Tibetan belief is that the soul of a human being is set free.
Varuna, a Hindu God, rides on a fish. Vishnu had a fish incarnation. Fishes are also sacred
for the Hindus. Fish represents truth and transcendental wisdom. Vase or Kalash
symbolises purity. It is called in Tibetan language as Bhumpa. It represents a repository of
wealth, good health and long life. Hindu Goddess Lakshmi also holds kalash in one of her
hands.

Krishna blowing conch Lotus Umbrella (Chatra) A pair of fish Holy Vase

Banner symbolises victory and fortune. It is called in Tibetan as Gyaltsen. It also

107
symbolises good over evil forces, which hinder the success of noble goals. It also
proclaims victory of good over evil. Tibetans use it in procession. Knot of Eternity, also
called in Tibetan language Palbhen. Symbol of Eternity is law without beginning and end.
It is also called lucky net or brahmajala representing the theories and philosophies of the
universe. Aum (Om) is the symbol of the absolute and this sacred word encompasses the
whole universe and it includes the past, present and future. Om is the essence of all that is
sacred in the Hindu thought. It is chanted in the beginning of meditation, prayer, practice
of yoga, and in fact all the time. It is past, present and future and goes beyond periphery of
time. It is beyond the symbol of Brahman or universal soul. Om is the most potent of all
mantras. It represents the universal knowledge. This eternal world is all: what was, what is
and what shall be and what beyond is in eternity. Om is the mystic syllable of AU-M. It is
venerated both by the Hindus and Buddhists. Devotees regard it very sacred and chant it
only by lips. It is written when all void becomes manifested. Adi-Buddha also proceed
from Om. In the word Aum, Adi-Buddha which is formless and passionless is represented
in Triratna, i.e. Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. The letter AUM is the seed mantra of
Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, i.e. Tri-ratna. Aum is sublime and eve' thing originated from
'
Om'. Most widely known mantra (magic formula) is the prayer 'Om Mani Padme Hum‘.
This prayer is dedicated to Avalokiteshvara.

Banner Endless links or knots of eternity Aum

Axe is an important weapon of war. It is carried by Parshuram, the sixth

incarnation of Vishnu. He descended to fight against Kshatriyas, the warrior caste at the
request of Brahmins. It is also held by ferocious Tantric deities. In Buddhism it symbolizes
the severence of worldly attachments. Sometimes Vajras are also fixed to it. Bell (Ghanta)
represents female aspect and stands for prajna or wisdom. During worship, it is usually
held in left hand while vajra or dorje in right hand. Bell and Vajra are inseparable ritual
objects during worship. Symbolically ringing of tinkling bells during arti (waving of lamp)
is to keep out other noises so that worshipper can concentrate on prayer. Bhumba (Water

108
vase) is used for keeping water. Water is required both in Hinduism and Buddhism in
various religious ceremonies. Holy vase for keeping sacred water is called kalash. It is in
the form of a jar with curved pipe for pouring water out of it. Sometimes, it is ornamented
with semi-precious and precious stones. Holy vase made of metal is known as bhumba.
Water is most important for rituals of both Hindus and Buddhists. Water is colourless,
transparent, odourless, tasteless liquid. It is compound of oxygen and hydrogen (H2o).
Water from sacred rivers and ponds is used for rituals.

On Mani Padme Hum

Bina (Lute) is a stringed musical instrument which is the favourite of Saraswati,

Hindu and Buddhist Goddess of Wisdom, Learning and Arts. In Tibet, Mahasaraswati is
depicted also with vina. Narad, a Hindu saint, always goes about with a lute. Chaitya
represents the Buddhist universe and is a Buddhist sanctuary. It has square or round spires
as steps on the capital. Each one represents a heaven. The uppermost is regarded as the
highest peak of Mt. Sumeru, a mythical mountain when Bodhichitta loses itself in sunya
(nothingness/void). On the four sides are depicted Dhyani Buddhas, i.e. Akshobhya in the
east, Ratnasambhava in the south, Amitabha in the west, and Amoghasiddhi in the north.
Sometimes, Vairochana is also depicted. Otherwise he is considered as centre of the
mandala. In Nepal, they are called Pancha Buddhas or also called Tathagata's shrine and
reliquary. In Tibet, Chaitya is regarded as a receptacle for offerings. It is a solid conical
masonry structure intended as relic-holders. It is erected either in the memory of Buddha
himself or some Tibetan saints. It is a massive hemisphere or solid dome called garbha or
womb enclosing the relics. It is surrounded by elaborate plinths and crowned by a square
capital called toran. The spire is called chudamani of 13 step-like segments which
represent 13 Buddhist heavens. It is surmounted by a bell shaped symbol called kalash or
holy vase. Above it is a tapering pinnacle having a lotus flower, crescent moon, globular
sun and finally surmounted by a tongue-shaped spike representing sacred light or jyoti or
Buddha. In the niche, a small image of Buddha is sometimes placed.

109
Saraswati with Bina Chaitya or Chorten

Chakra (Wheel) symbolises rotation of the world and also represents the wheel of
Dharma (righteousness). Hindu God, Vishnu or Krishna, always carries a chakra or wheel.
It is also used as a weapon. In Buddhism, it symbolises the wheel of law which turns
twelve times or makes three revolutions for each of the four noble truths. It has eight
spokes indicating eight-fold paths of salvation. Chakra is also depicted on the top of the
Tibetan monastery with two deers as disciples. Here chakra also represents the Buddha.
According to the Kundalni Tantra, there are seven chakras of the subtle body. The adapt
meditates on each power centre either in its own right or with the aid of external mandala
yantra. There are seven chakras. The purpose of the Kundalini yoga is its awakening on
which develops super-normal powers. When the coiled serpent kundalini makes its upward
journey, it becomes connected with different chakras and the gradual illumination of each
chakra brings attainment both on physical and mental planes. The first chakra is called
Muladhara chakra situated at the root centre above the anus below the root of the penis.
Above it is Svadhisthana chakra which supports life breath. The third chakra is Manipura
or lotus of the Navel. Next to it is Anahata chakra, which is the centre of the unstruck
sound. The fifth chakra is called Visuddha. It is the centre of great purity situated in the
pharyngeal region. The sixth chakra is named Ajna. It lies between the eyebrows and is
known as the centre of command. The seventh chakra is called Brahmachakra or Sahasara
or lotus of thousand petals. Meditation of these chakras helps one to attain various steps of
realization. The Sahasara chakra is actually the mind, which controls all activities.

Pharsa (Battle Axe) is also called Pa. It is held by ferocious deities of Buddhism.
Symbolised severance or cutting away of worldly attachments. It is a weapon which was
110
held by Parshuram, who exterminated Kashtriyas and help Brahmins. Parshuram was 6 th
incarnation of Vishnu. Dharmadhatu has different meanings in different context. It is also
called Dharma realm or cosmos, universe. It also means mind, realm of truth. According to
the Swayambhu Purana, Swambhu Dharamdhatu, Sunya rupa, etc. are synonyms. It is
depicted in the stupa. Dharmadhatu Jnana is wisdom of all pervasive awareness.
Dhoopdani or Incense Burner is a pot for burning incense in as an offering to both Hindu
and Buddhist deities. It symbolises the fragrance of God's love. Incense is waved before
icon. Dipa ia the light fed with ghee (melted butter) and offered to Hindu and Buddhist
deities. It symbolises dispelling of ignorance and the illumination of mind and knowledge.

Mandala (Tibatan, Kyilokor) is a circular and spherical diagrams for visualization

during religious practices. Mandala is the magic circles or symbolic offsprings. They are
timeless and all-embracing.

Mandala

Mandala is one of the great symbols of human experience. It is the passage from
state to state from material to spiritual. Its centre is eternity. Its periphery is perfection.
There are different kinds of mandalas. Shiva-Shakti Mandala is the most important and
most universal Hinduist mandala. It is also called Sri Yantra. It is a complex arrangement
of triangle and lotus leaves. It expresses the whole motive energy of the universe. It is
delicate balance of male and female principles. Downward position of triangle synthesises
Shakti, the female principle which is active and creative. Shiva is the male principle and
supreme consciousness. It reveals dualism. Kali Mandala is concerned with goddess
Durga. Durga is greatly worshipped in Tantrism. At the centre of the yantra, Kali, the
creative force of world is represented. It symbolises ceaseless cycles of destruction and
renewal. In the mandala, Kali is represented as goddess or Triangle pointing downward.
Buddha Mandala –is a form of mandala that has representation of Buddhism: five
elements, five colours, five objects of senses, the five senses. Deities personified are
111
Vajrasattva as divided into five Buddhas: Vairochana, Akshobhya, Ratansumbhara,
Amitabha and Amoghasiddhi. Each one is associated with a particular colour, personality
and a passion.Vishnu Mandala has Vishnu or one of his incarnations in the centre.

Mandala or Magic circles Shiv-Shakti Mandala Kali Mandala Buddha Mandala Vishnu Mandala

Naga (Tibatan, Lu) is a serpent demigod (mermaids). Gautama‘s throne was

supported by snakes. Buddha was also protected by snakes while meditating. Pustaka is a
book of palm leaves oblong in size or a manuscript which is also oblong. Hindu God
Brahma carries a sacred manuscript, the Vedas, in one of his hands. It is a symbol of
wisdom. In Buddhism, the book represents the Prajnaparamita, a scripture of
transcendental wisdom. This book was supposed to have been given by Buddha to Nagas
for safe keeping till mankind becomes wise enough to understand it and it was recovered
by Nagarjuna, a Buddhist saint, who founded Mahayana school on the basis of its
teachings. In Buddhism, pustaka is the symbol of Manjushri, Prajnaparamita (Name of
another goddess of the same name as that of scripture), Avalokiteshvara, Vasudhara,
Chunda, etc. In some scriptures, a book is shown kept on a lotus flower.

Swastika (Fly-foot cross) is the compound word made of su+asti or that which is
good. Swasti means auspicious, benevolent, a good deed or good wishes. It is considered
auspicious and painted to ward off evil spirit. Its origin goes back to the Vedic limes (4500
- 2500 B.C.) or may be earlier. Seals of swastika symbol have been found in Harappan
exacavation, which dates back about 2000 years. Swastika is a form of Greek cross. Ends
of arms are bent at right angles. Right-handed Swastika moves in clockwise direction. Left
handed swastika moves in counter clockwise direction. Hindus consider left-handed
swastika as evil omen and suggest never to be used. However, in Bon religion of
Buddhism, left-handed swastika is represented. In Hinduism, swastika represents Sun or
Lord Vishnu. In the Puranas, it is mentioned as Sudarshan Chakra or wheel of Lord
Vishnu. It symbolises constant changes in universe. Swastika is also associated with Sun as
it is regarded that its arms represent rays of Sun. Swastika also represents god of fire and
Ganesh. In the Sidahanta Saar, the hubs of swastika represent navel of Vishnu and four
lines as four faces of Brahma. Swastika is worshipped during religious rites. In Hinduism,
112
during Diwali or Tihar, Hindu businessmen open their new account books and decorate it
with swastika symbol and the words Subha Labha i.e. Auspicious profit. Lakshmi, the
goddess of wealth, is also worshipped. Swastika is a symbol of good augury.

Swastika

Trishula (Trident) is also called sula the favourite weapon of Shiva and represents
three functions i.e. creation, protection and destruction. It may also represent three gunas
(qualities) i.e. Sattva (centripetal attraction of existence), Rajas (revolving of tendency
called activity or multiplicity) and Tamas (rhythmic division controlled by time and space).
It is also called Agni, A Vedic god. Hindu ascetics of Shaivite faith also carry it with them
as it is regarded as destroyer of enemies. In Buddhism, it represents Tri Ratna (Three
jewels) i.e. Buddha, Dharma (righteousness) and Sangha (Monastic order) and is carried by
Mahakala, Padma Sambhava, Yellow Tara, Jambhala and Simhanad Avalokiteshvara.

Vajra (Tibatan, Dorje) is a small metallic object also called the Thunderbolt,
which destroys all kinds of ignorance and enemies. It is indestructible. It is a symbol of
Hindu God Indra. In Tantrism, Vajra symbolises male principle when it is held in the right
hand. Bell symbolises the female principle when it is held in the left hand. The interaction
leads to enlightenment. It is believed that Buddhist God got Vajra from Hindu God Indra
and slightly modified by closing the points of darts. Vajra of Hindu gods has three flat
darts, the points of which do not touch like those of Tibetan Vajras. The Tibetan variety is
round and has four darts and the points are closed. Thus, it appears in the form of a lotus
bud. A fifth dart runs through the centre of Vajra. Thus, there are 5 darts. Vajra represents
5 bodies of Dhyani Buddhas. In Vajrayana school of Buddhism, Vajra is the symbol of
lingo or male sex organ.

The word Vajra is also used to designate a school of Buddhism called Vajrayana
or the path or way of Vajra. This sect was the successor of the Mahayana, the great path. In
Tibet all prayers, recitations and invocations are accompanied by several ritual objects,

113
including vajra or dynamite or master cutter which destroys everything and which is a
symbol of boundless power. The double Vajra is the attribute of Bodhisattva
Amoghasiddhi and his consort Tara. Vajra stands for skill or Upaya. Double thunderbolt is
called Vishva Vajra. Sometimes, Vajra is placed vertically on a lotus.

Vajra

Wheel of life refers to the Bhavchakra mudra. It is also the wheel of

transmigration. This type is very common and explains the Buddhist conception of life,
death and birth. The wheel is held by a demon in his clutches. It is symbolic of
impermanence. The depiction in the hub is symbolic of lust, anger, ignorance, and cardinal
sins. In the segments of the wheel different worlds or rebirths are shown. In the outer rims
are shown 2 scenes which represent the various stages through which man passes after
birth. The wheel of life is painted, especially at the entrance of monasteries. It is the
symbol not only of the mystery of evil and stress in life but of the teachings of Buddha. It
is the form of an endless chain which consists of 3 animals, a pig, a red bird and a green
snake swallowing each other's tails. These signify the sins of obstinacy, ignorance, evil
desire and bad feeling. The wheel of Buddhism is divided into 12 pictorial symbols, each
showing a different side of the universal senses.

Yuga is a period in the Hinduism. Hindus do not believe in linear system of time
but they believe in cycles. Cycle of time is divided into 4 periods called yugas : Krita yuga
(Satyuga), Age of Truth (Treta yuga), Dwapar yuga, Kali yuga (Age of darkness).

Gau is a small metal amulet container or prayer box carried by many Tibetan
Buddhists as a portable shrine or altar. The Gau usually contains an image of a personal
deity, a blessed written prayer or a sacred yantra diagram and a small offering of rice. Gaus
may vary considerably in size and shape, depending on the requirements of the owner.
Smaller gaus range in size from 2 cm to 10 cm in diameter are often worn as jewelry and
thus may be made of beaten silver or gold and heavily decorated inside and out with
114
precious stones or carvings. Larger gaus may have a window in front to view the contents
and are generally encased in a protective cloth bag and carried slung over the shoulder.

Gau

A prayer wheel is a cylindrical wheel on a spindle, in which a scroll is placed with

the mantra Om Mani Padme Hum written hundreds, even thousands of times. The wheel is
spun in a clockwise direction (based on the movement of the sun across the sky), allowing
with each revolution the accumulation of as much merit as though all of the mantra
inscriptions were read aloud. Thus the more prayers a wheel holds, the more powerful it is
considered to be. Traditionally, Tibetans and Nepalese use prayer wheels to accumulate
merit and good karma; any accumulated merits that an individual may gather during a
session of use are freely given to all other sentient beings. A prayer wheel should be held
almost upright and spun smoothly and slowly; greater benefit is achieved if the mantra Om
Mani Padme Hum is recited as the wheel is turned.

Prayer Wheel

In Hinduism and Buddhism, funeral rituals have some similarities and differences.
These rituals are in religious tradition. Hindu priests and Buddhist Lamas provide spiritual

115
guidance to the dead on its ultimate journey to the eternal world. They provide elaborate
rituals needed to propitiate gods and deities so that the soul may be given undisturbed
passage by gods to its next destination. In Buddhist funeral ceremony, they convince the
soul that it no longer belongs to this mortal world. They convince that it now needs to get
prepared to travel to the ethereal world. The main aim behind such complex funeral
ceremonies is to ensure that the departed soul doesn't get any difficulties in the netherworld
for lack of proper guidance on way to heavenly destiny.

The Hindus, on the other hand, have a strong belief that the soul must hasten the
departure of soul. They believe that once the person is dead, the soul prepares to depart
immediately on its karmic journey. Therefore, they should cremate the body as soon as
practicable. They think that the soul, otherwise, will linger on to this side of the world.
According to the Hindu customs, the body is taken to the holy grounds and cremated as
soon as possible.

It is customary for the Buddhists to bury their dead, but in some parts of the
world, partly because of lack of burial grounds and partly because of Hindu influence, they
cremate their dead and share the same burning ghat (river bank) with the Hindus. Hindus
consider the bank of a sacred river good and holy for the cremation.

Like the Buddhists, the Hindus follow a large regiment in the disposal of the
body. As the Brahmins chant funereal hymns, the living male member of the deceased
family sets the first fire to the pyre. Unlike the Buddhists, who prefer immediate dispersal
of the ashes over the river, the Hindus collect them in an urn for disposal in a special year-
end ceremony. Besides the rituals, there are varieties of gods and goddesses who are
common to both Hindus and Buddhist.

There is a figure of Mahankal in Kathmandu which is an. emanation of

Akshobhya. The imposition of his figure in miniature on the forehead indicates that. Other
popular deities are Bodhisatwa Lokesvara under the name of Machchhendranatha and
Taleju as a manifestation of Siva-Durga and Buddha Tara.

Hanuman is the great devotee of Rama. He is also included into the fold of
Vajrayana. We can see Hanuman ensconced on an elevated seat in both Buddhist Viharas
and Hindu temples. The Malla rulers adopted the figure of Hanuman for their banner.
They had Hanuman‘s figure installed at the gates to the royal palaces at Kathmandu.

116
Bhaktapur and Lalitpur. Later the name of Hanuman Dhoka was given as in the case of
the old palace at Kathmandu.

Hanuman Bhairava/Hanu Bhairava, consecrated in Patan Museum to protect it

from enemies

Bhairava is a form of Siva. He receives homage from Hindus as well as

Buddhists. He is called Matapode in common parlance. The figure of Bhairava is marked
by a mundamala, which is a garland of human skulls,. The figure has also a snake which is
always with Siva.

Bhimasena is a hero in the Mahabharatha. He is often defied by the Newar traders,

but meanwhile they worship him in the expectation that he could bestow prosperity upon
them in their profession of commerce and trade. Bhimasena has attributes of Siva and these
attributes have been mentioned in the verses of Pratapa Malla. Pratap Malla calls him Siva-
rupa.

Pratapa Malla built a temple for an image of Vasuki. Vasuki was presented in the
form of Narayana or Vishnu. Vasuki as the snake provides with enormous coils a seat for
Vishnu. Snake is worshipped as god on the occasion of Naga-Panchami in the month of
Sravana (July-August). They worship the snake god during the rains of the month. The
worship is done as a propitiatory act, both by Hindus and Buddhists alike.

Buddha is supposed to be 9th incarnation of Vishnu. Buddha came to be regarded

as an incarnation of Vishnu as early as the 6th or 7th century, as also Krishna, who was
recognized as such in the Amarakosha, a work of the 5th century, wherein he was
described as the son of Vasudeva. It was the Bhagavata Purana highlighting the Krishna
cult that first recognized Buddha as an incarnation. This was emphasized by the poet
Jayadeva in his Gita Govindam several centuries later. The belief still holds strongly
117
among people in both Buddhism and Hinduism.

One of the oldest cults that prevail in the Indian subcontinent is that of the Mother
Goddess. She is said to be representing various aspects of the mind such as anger, greed,
envy, arrogance, eavesdropping, chimera and fault-finding, etc. The cult of the Mother
Goddess in the form of Azima or grandmother was universally in vogue in Nepal and
accepted by all. Female deities in Buddhism reflect and represent the aspects of the Matri-
kas of the Brahmanical religion. The role Matrikas in Buddhism is of great importance.
King Pratap Malla mentioned and called in verses Vajrayogini Ambika (mother or
Parvati), and Ugratara Nila-Sarasvati and Ekajata as representatives of Bhagavati herself.
This is also a proof of blending of the two faiths. Without any doubt, this can be held as '
divergently convergent status of these two religions. This spirit underlies and emphasises
the equation of Tulaja with the Bhavani of the Brahmanical faith and Ugratara of the
Buddhist conception.

The goddess Sitala is shown to be presiding over the ailment of small-pox. She is
also called Azima. There is a shrine of hers at premises of the Svayambhu stupa. She is
worshipped by the Buddhists under the name of Hariti. This is very similar adoption like
that of the Siva linga itself as the representative of the Buddha, in the mountainous regions.
The deliberate adoption as well as adaptation is seen in the practice of worshiping the
image of Pasupatinath as Buddha at Deo Patan once a year. To retrace our steps, Sitala is
considered as inauspicious, riding on a donkey and being associated with a broomstick, a
winnowing fan and pitchers. The thin veils which may separate the two deities are waved
away by the adoptive and tolerant spirit of the adherents of both the sects of Hinduism and
Budhism.

The cult of Kumari is celebrated as a festival in Nepal, especially in Kathmandu

and Lalitpur. Both Buddhists and Hindus worship Kumari as a goddess. The practice of
worshipping a living goddess- usually a young girl is very distinct cult of Nepal. A young
girl is chosen with much care. She is marked by auspicious signs and of noble upbringing
and nature. This vogue is still popular among the Hindus. The Bengalis, on occasions of
the Durga Puja, attribute the qualities of Goddess Durga to a young girl and worship her in
living form.

In Nepal, the practice of the worship of Kumari in living form, includes the annual
celebration of a processional festival (Kumari Jatra). This festival was introduced by Jaya
118
Prakasha Malla. It still continues to this day. In this annual autumnal festival, the chariots
of Ganesa and Bhairava proceed that of`Kumari herself. The selection of the living
goddess is, however, confined to the families of Buddhist priests. Nevertheless, both
Hindus and Buddhists pay homage to her as to any other deity.

The Ganesa's function is primarly celebrated as Ganesh is believed to be a

destroyer of evils and obstacles, and bestower of success. Ganesh has been adopted and is
worshipped in this role by both the Hindus and the Buddhists, from their Brahmanical
brethern. His figure is placed at the entrance of monastries and temples. He is variously
depicted with two, four, six, eighteen, or twenty hands, with an increasing number of
attributes. He is fully adopted in the Vajrayana pantheon. He is worshipped and conveyed
by the Sadhanamala, and the cult is known to have travelled as far as China. He is
worshipped in the intermediate region of Tibet. For example, there is a sixteen-handed
figure of Ganesa in a shrine to the south-west corner of Ranipokhari, opposite the north-
west corner of Ratna Park (Kathmandu), accompanied by his spouse Siddhi (success
personified) and that is very distinctive. Ganesh is also the guardian of the Bodhisattva
Kumari and Mahankal alike in Nepal and Tibet.

Another example of blending is in the case of Budhanilakantha (Anantasayana

Vishnu). That is in a village to the north-east of Kathmandu. He gets regard as Nilakantha
Lokesvara by the Buddhists. The name Nilkantha is an attribute of Siva. It is said that he
swallowed poison churned out of the ocean. This deity has, therefore, aspects of Vishnu,
Siva and Lokesvara. The deity receives homage and reverence from the worshippers of the
both religious sects.

In the same way, Gorakhnatha is linked both with Machchendranatha and with
Lokesvara in Lalitpur. Gorakhantha is also involved in the Bisket Jatra of Bhadgaon and of
Vajrayogini in Sankhu. The features of Lokesvara, Tara, Pancha Buddhas, Prajna
Parantita, and Emanations of Sakyamuni and also the trinity gods are placed in the niche
of many monasteries. These all details suggest and confirm the synthetic merge of both
religious sects- Hinduism and Buddhism.

119
Notes and References:

1. Pal, Pratapaditya, (2004). Nepal Old Image, New Insights: Marge Publications,

P-21.

2. Ibid. P-22.

3. Krejiger, Hugo, (1999). Katmandu Valley Painting: London, P-15.

4. Majpuria, Trilok Chandra (1991). Sacred Animals of Nepal and India: M.Devi.

5. Jung C.G. (1956). Symbol of Transformation: Hull, New York.

6. Zimmer, N. (1965). Myth and Symbols in Indian Art ans Civilization: Harper &

Row Publishers, New York.

7. Rawson, Philips. (1978). The Art of Tantra, London: Thames & Hudson.

8. Shakya, Min Bahadur, (1990). Buddhist Iconography: Lotus Res Centre,

Kathmandu.

9. Westropp, H.M. (1975). Ancient Symbol Worship: New York.

10. Yule, M. (1931). Ancient Hindu Symbolism: Calcutta.

120
Chapter Five
Conclusion

S. Radhakrishnan says that "Buddhism, in its origin at least is an offshoot of

Hinduism." Guatama Buddha was himself a Hindu. He was born and brought up as a
Hindu. He lived and left this materialistic world as a Hindu. Thus, all these are enough to
justify that the concepts of Hinduism predates to that of Buddhism. It was during the later
part of the Vedic Era, when Hinduism was on the verge of decline owing to the orthodoxy,
superstitions and staunch practices, prevailing in the religion, when Buddhism with lesser
complexities and rituals was accepted by the people of the Indian subcontinent. Later it
expanded to other parts of the world. We can conclude the thesis with the view that,
despite some differences, these two sects have a lot of things in common.

Both Hinduism and Buddhism emphasize the illusory nature of the world. They
believe that karma (action) keeps people bound to this world and that has important role in
the cycle of births and deaths. The Buddha says that desire is the root cause of suffering
and, if we remove desire from our mind and heart, it results in the cessation of suffering.
The Hindu texts such as the Upanishads and the Bhagavadgita mention that doing actions
prompted by desire and attachment would lead to bondage and suffering. If people perform
actions without desiring the fruit of actions, it would result in liberation. Both religions
believe in the concept of karma, transmigration of souls and the cycle of births and deaths.

Both sects give focus on compassion and non-violence towards all living beings.
Both sects deal with the existence of hells and heavens and also with higher and lower
worlds. Both religious communities present the concepts of the existence of gods or deities
but in different ways. Hindus have thousands of gods but Buddhists have only one god.
Some Buddhists do not think of existence of god. Both sects persuade people for certain
spiritual practices like meditation, concentration, cultivation of certain bhavas or states of
mind. Both religious sects convince people for detachment, or renunciation of worldly life
as a precondition to enter the spiritual life. The Advaita philosophy of Hinduism is very
closer to Buddhism in philosophical thoughts and ritual practices. Both religions have their
own versions of Tantra.

Hinduism has not been founded by any particular prophet. Buddhism was founded
by the Buddha. Hindus have strong trust on the efficacy and supremacy of the Vedas. The
121
Buddhists do not have any belief in the Vedas or for that matter any Hindu scripture.
Buddhists do not mention in their books about the existence of souls and God. Hindus
believe that there is existence of Atman that is the individual soul and Brahman, the
Supreme Creator. Later Hindu scriptures mention the Buddha as an incarnation of
Mahavishnu, one of the gods of Hindu trinity. The Buddhists do not accept any Hindu god.
They do not consider any Hindu god either as equivalent or superior to the Buddha. The
original Buddhism as taught by the Buddha is known as Theravada Buddhism or Hinayana
Buddhism. Followers of this do not worship images of the Buddha nor believe in the
Bodhisattvas.

The Mahayana sect considers the Buddha as the Supreme Soul or the Highest
Being. That soul is similar to the Brahman of Hinduism. They worship him in the form of
images and icons. The Buddhists consider the world to be full of sorrow. They regard
efforts for ending the sorrow as the chief aim of human life. The Hindus consider that there
are four chief aims (arthas) in life which every being should pursue. They are Dharma
(religious duty), artha (wealth or material possessions), kama (desires and passions) and
moksha (salvation.). Hindus also believe in the four ashramas or stages in life. This is not
followed in Buddhism. People can join the Buddhist order any time depending upon their
spiritual preparedness. Buddhists organize themselves into a monastic order (Sangha). The
Buddhist monks live in groups. Hinduism is basically a religion of the individual.
Buddhism believes in the concept of Bodhisattvas. Hinduism does not believe in it.
Buddhism acknowledges the existence of some gods and goddesses of Hindu pantheon, but
give them a rather subordinate status. Buddha, the Sangha and Dhamma are the three
cardinal requirements on the eightfold path in Buddhism. Hinduism offers many choices to
its followers on the path of self-realization. Although both religions believe in karma and
rebirth, they differ in the manner in which they operate and impact the existence of
individual beings.

Buddhists believe in the process of reincarnation based on deeds or actions

(karma) of the present life. Hindus also believe that everyone is a part of an impersonal
world. Therefore, they say, a person's soul gets reincarnated into another body of any
being, based on the deeds or actions (karma) of the present life. He has to work hard for the
salvation by himself. He must not and cannot blame others for the same. The salvation
depends on the good deeds or actions (karma) of a person. In Hinduism also, a person

122
attains salvation as per his own fate and deeds. According to the Hinduism, there are four
paths or four yogas to attain salvation: Karma Yoga-Way of good works, Bhakti Yoga -
Way of love and faith, Jnana Yoga-Way of knowledge, and Raja Yoga-Way of salvation.

Both Buddhism and Hinduism believe that there are many paths to attain
enlightenment/knowledge. For that, both suggest that a person can overcome through his
feelings and desires and control the six conscious senses. Buddhism has a major sect,
'Tantrayana'. This is mainly based upon the tantric practices. Tantric practices are also
prevalent in Hinduism, especially among the worshippers of the Goddess Kali and the god
Shiva. Like Hinduism, the Mahayana Buddhism believes that the original teachings of the
Buddha are from the Hindu practices, including prayers and the concept of God. They even
believe that the Buddha is incarnation of Hindu gods. Mahayana Buddhism also mentions
the concepts of heavens and hells.

The original Buddhist philosophy does not mention any godly figures, though the
later Buddhist sects write about some Godly figures. The Hindu rituals are more complex.
Besides, priests play important role in all Hindu rituals. There are four major sub-sects in
Buddhism, but none of them follow the caste system like Hindus. There are a number of
castes and sub-castes among Hindus. They follow their caste systems rigidly. Buddhism
rejects extreme asceticism that we find in Hinduism. The Buddhists believe in the
teachings of the Lord Buddha and the Buddhist scriptures. Hindus believe in the
supremacy of four Vedas - Rigveda, Samveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda. The Buddhists
do not believe in the stages of life. People can join any of the stages any time depending
upon their spiritual preparedness. The Hindus believe in the four stages of life, also known
as the 'ashramas' - Brahamacharya Ashram or Student life, Grihastha Ashram or family
life, Vanprastha Ashram or the age at which a person leaves all the worldly desire and
home, and Sanyasa Ashram- when a person meditates and awaits for the ultimate truth,
death.

The Buddhists and the Hindus, both sects, cross each other in religious and social
philosophies and practices, with no strife, but in perfect accord. They have a sense of
reverence for the deities of each other. They often worship deities in temples and
monasteries alike, without any ill-feelings. They have the spirit of oneness and unity
prevalent among them is always strengthened by the common participation in the various
123
rituals and festivals. Generally the Buddhists and the Hindus are not distinguishable from
each other.3 They have strong attachment with each other. Hindus and Buddhists live
together in different parts of the world.

The study of religion in the present of the world which is undergoing through the
time of war and violence makes it more relevant than ever. As Dr. Radhakrishnan speaks
on the value of religion.

Religion far from being the source of any struggle and strif is a real bond of union
among human beings. As a matter of fact, religions are a thing which is of
immense value. Any unprejudiced thinker will easily be convinced of the
importance of religion.1

Most of the Buddhist feel themselves as political outcastes. There are antagonistic
feelings among Buddhist versus Hindus, oppressed Dalits versus privileged classes, male
versus female, rich versus poor etc.

The present political scenario threatens the very sovereignty Nepal, in lack of
mutual brotherhood feeling. Here Dr. Parameshwar Yadav speaks more clearly in this
aspect:

… that the present world is afflicted by the malady of crisis of values. There are
corruption, selfusion, terrorism and many such vices. Besides, there are also chaos
and confusion, tension and insecurity in the world. In this background, the
cardinal principles of Hinduism and Buddhism can be of great help. Both
Hinduism and Buddhism stress the ideals of ahimsa, love, compassion,
renunciation, service etc. So, modern man can make life batter and happier if he
tries follow ideals which preached by these two great religions of the world.2

Talking about Hinduism and Buddhism in context of Nepal, we find religion acts
both as a creative force as well as destroying force in the society. When religion was not
properly explained to the mass and practiced with a level of clarity, it brought conflict and
classes among various castes and communities in Nepal, causing Maoist movement and
violence in various forms of life. Again people did realize that religion particularly;
Hinduism and Buddhism are based on compassion and coordination. Society now again
makes its march forward on the road of peace and tranquility. It proves the point that
Buddhism which has been born in Nepalese soil does have capacity to create order, peace,
mutual love and affection. So, if Nepalese understand religions values and tolerance, the

124
present state of anarchy and uncertainy will be wiped out. It would not be wrong to say
that, tolerance, campassion and natural co-existence are the glue that attach and bind the
society together which comes from religions like Hinduism and Buddhism.

Religions in Nepal have always been a guiding force in injecting moral and
spiritual values. Religions in Nepal have been conceptual and ideological foundation of
Nepalese culture. It is due to these resons that religions like Hinduism and Buddhism have
always had influence in Nepalese political life. This nation was unified on the basic of
religious values by the King Prithvi Narayan Shah and his successer never interfered into
the religious life of people, rather they protected religious institutions. When religious
values in Nepal became weaker, at the time anti-social activities like violence and
communal misunderstanding has spread. Therefore, in the context of Nepal we need try to
create public awareness and opinion within Hinduism and Buddhism.

In this post-modern world, significance of Hinduism is increasing basically more in

western world. Hinduism is appreciated for its flexibility and dynamism. In the den of
Hinduism, many other religions like Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism and others have
flourished and prospered. It has maintained a great deal of distance from other state
management. Comparing it to other religions, we find that there has been tussle between
church and government over a long period of time. Similarly, Islamic countries are still
being dictated by ‗Sariyat‘ doctrine of Islam. Christianity and Islam still practice
conversions. Quit contrast to it, Hinduism never encourages nor does it practice
conversion. In this context, Swami Vivekananda, in his historical speech in Chicago has
outlined that the concept of conversion itself stands against spirits of Hinduism. He has
made his point abundantly clear that he did have capacity to convert others but his ‗Guru‘
Swami Ramkrishna Paramhansa is dead against the practice of conversion. Adaptability is
a part of Hinduism. Horizon of Hinduism is very wide. In his famous novel ―A passage of
India‖ E.M. Forster has said that Islam is way of life, whereas Christianity pleads for
universal brotherhood. But Hinduism encompasses both material and spiritual world. It is
focused more on spirituality.

Hinduism says that means and ends both have to be pious. As we notice many
religions under the cover of certain philanthropic institutions like NGO and INGO‘s are
launching towards its programmes in converting the people of other religions. It means that
means is good but end is not good. In this context, we can quote the view of Nobel

125
Laureate T.S. Eliot, in his famous drama ―Murder in the cathedral‖ in which here is a line
saying, ‗The greatest temptation is the last treason, to do the right deed for the wrong
reason. This applies to the point that Hinduism doesn‘t do things for wrong reason.

The concept of Sarva Dharma Sabbhava and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam is the basic
foundation of Hinduism. On the edifice of it, Hinduism has stood for. It further tries to
seek perfection in Human being. On the other hand, Christanity and Islam find human
being as full of flaws and weakness. Human beings are destined to suffer in this world. But
Hinduism adheres the view that people in this world, through the appropriate system can
turn themselves from Nar to Narayan. In other word, human beings have divinity in their
natures and features. In this regard, it is worthy to quote the view of a great Socialist leader
Dr. Rammanohar Lohia who says that ―We can develop the character of Ram, dynamism
of Krinsha and keep mind of Shankar.‖ Through the appropriate systems and chains of life,
Human being can be similar to God. This very divinity character can be only traced in
Hinduism.

Comparing it with Buddhism, we find both similarities and differences. In context

of Nepal, we can find that bond between Hinduism and Buddhism is very strong. Hindus
and Buddhist have regard and respect to each others and both religious groups celebrate
their spiritual activities in sprit of togetherness.Buddhists attack on Brahmanism is based
on caste system. The purpose of Buddhism is to filter the dirt of Hinduism. This is one of
the resons that Hinduism welcomes Buddhism in their way of life and activities. In
―Monastery‖, we find Hindu God and Goddesses are prayed whereas in the temples ―the
idol of Buddha‖ is prayed to. The very significant difference between two religions is that
Hinduism encompasses both attachment and detachment in life whereas Buddhism lays
stress on detachment towards life.

Many philosophers comment that Buddhism leads the life towards rustic life far
away from pleasures of life. Furthermore, they also say if all the people choose the life of
Monk, how can the cycle of civilization run?

In spite of these differences, we notice that both these religions lay emphasis on
credibility of character in Human beings.

The present world faces a great deal of crisis because values and norms of human
beings are very quickly vanishing in this world. If we understand both these religions
properly, we can instill norms and values in valueless society.
126
Notes and References:

1. Radhakrishnan, Dr. S., (1947), ‗Religions and Society‘ (George Allen and Unwin
Ltd., London, P-12.
2. Yadav, Dr. Parameshwar, (2002), ‗Perspectives on Hinduism and Buddhism‘
Yashodha Prakashan, Rajbiraj, P.194.

127
Bibliography

Primary Sources:

Agama Sutta , Digha Nikaya, Sutta Pitaka, ed. J Kassapa, Nalanda, Patna, 1958.

Aitareya Brahmana (Text) ed. Macdonell, Harvard oriental series vol- 5 Cambridge.

Atharvaveda, ed. and trans, into Hindi, Shree Ram Sharma, Vol- 2, Haridvar, 2000.

Anguttra Nikaya. ed., R. Morris and E. Hardly, London, 1985.

Aitareya Brahmana (text) ed. Macdonell, Harvard oriental series, vol-5, Cambridge, 1904.

Agni Puran, poona, Anand ashram, 1957.

Devi Bhagvad Purana. edit Pandit Sri Ram sharma Acharya, Pub. Dr. Chamanlal Goutam
Sanskrit Sansthan, Bareli, 1992.

Dhammacakkhappavatan Sutta, Vinaypitaka Mohavogga, ed, J. Kassapa. Nalanda Patna .

Markandeya Purana (part - I) edit., Aacharya, pandit Sri Ram Sharma, Sanskrit Sanstha
Bareli,1985.

Mahabharata, Tran. Shastri Dutt Ramnarayan (Hindi), vol- 6, Gorakhpur, Gita Press,
2002.

Majjhima Nikaya, ed. Trenekner V. and Chalmer. R, vol-3, London, 1977.

Mahayana Sutra (vol-2), Vaidya P.L., Manjushri Mulakalpa, Rajavyakarana Parivata

Darbhanga , 1964.

Manusmriti, ed. (Hindi), Bhatt, Rameshvar, Delhi, Chowkhamba, Sanskrit Prashthan,

1998.

Nighamtu and Nirukta, edited and trans. Lakshman Sarup, Punjab University, 1927.

Religion of the Rigveda, Grisworld. H.D., Delhi, Motilal Banarasidas, 1994.

128
Ramayana of Balmiki, 3rd ed. R.T.H. Grififth (trans) reprint, Varanasi , Chowkhamba,
1963.

Rigveda Sanhita (The Hymns of the Rigveda) Ralph. T.H. Griffith, Motilal Baranasidas,
Varanasi, 1973.

Srimad Bhagavad Mahapurana, Maharshi Vedvyas Pandit (Trans), Bhattarai, Pandit

Basudev, Sajha Prakashan Kathmandu, 2006.

Satipattana sutta Majihima Nikaya. ed. J. Kassapa, Nalanda Patna, 1957.

Sankhayana Aranyaka. Trans, A.B. Keeth, Oriental Books, New Delhi, 1975.

Satapatha Brahmana, trans. Julius Eggeling vol- 5, Sacred Books of the East, Motilal
Banarasidas, Vanarasi, 1964.

The Bhagavad Gita, George Allen and unwin Ltd., 1963.

Vedanta, Ghate V.S., Poona, 1960.

Vinaya Pitaka, trans, I.B. Horner as the book of discipline, Oxford University Press,
London, 1938-1966.

Secondary sources:

Agarwal M.M., The philosophy of Non attachment the way of Spiritual Freedom in Indian
though, Delhi Motilal Banarashi Dass,1982.

Ambedkar B.R., The Buddha and his Dharma, Nagpur Buddha Bhumi Publication, 1997.

Aurobindo, Shree., A practical Guide to Integral Yoga, Pondichery, 1959.

Beane, W.C., Myth Cult and symbols in Sakta Hinduism, A Study of the Indian Mother
Goddess, Leiden Brill, 1977.

Besant, Annie., Karma, London, Theosophical publishing society, 1985.

Bharadwaj, K.D,. The philosophy of Ramanuja, New Delhi, Sir Sankar Lall Charitable
Trust Society, 1958.

Bhattacharya, Haridas., Karma, Mahabodhi, 1925.

129
Bhattacharya, K.C., Studies in Vedantism. Calcutta. University of Calcutta,1909

Bhattacharya, Prabhaker., Value Orientation and Modern Society, Kolkatta, Teacher‘s

concern, 1996.

Bajracharya, Dr. Naresh., Vajrayana in Nepal, Kathmandu, 2013.

Bishop, Donald H., Indian Thought : An Introduction, New Delhi, Wiley Eastern, 1975.

Cawell, E.B., Buddhist Mahayana Text, Dover publication, 2011.

Collins, Mobel., Light on the path of the Karma, New York, 1964.

Conze, Edward., A short History of Buddhism, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1993.

Coward, Harold. G., Studies on Indian Thought, Delhi, Motilal Banarashidas, 1983.

Creel, Austin. B., Dharma in Hindu Ethics, Calcutta, Firma KLMP Ltd, 1977.

Cal, Kirkpatrick., An Account of Kingdom of Nepal, Publication Series, Delhi, 1975.

Chaudhuri, Nirad. C., Hinduism : A Religion to live, Oxford University press, 1979.

Chattopadhyay, K.P., An Essay on the History of Newara culture, Educational Enterprise

pvt. Ltd, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Dasgupta, S. N., Hindu Mysticism, USA, Wilder publication, 2008.

Davis, Leesa. S., Advaita Vedant and Zen Buddhism, UK Continuum International
publishing group, 2010.

Dasgupta, Surama., Development of Moral philosophy in India, New Delhi, Monoharlal

Publishers, 1994.

Das. R.V., Introduction to Sankara, Calcutta, Punthi Pustak, 1968.

Dermott, James. P., Development in the Early Buddhist concept of Karma, Princton
University Press, 1971.

Dutta, Nalinaksha., Mahayana Buddhisim, Calcutta, Firma KLMP Ltd, 1976.

130
Dutta, Sukumar., Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India, Motilal Banarasidas, Delhi
Varanasi Patna, 1988.

Duneja Prova., Hinduism Scriptures and practices, New Age books, New Delhi, 2014.

Elliot, Sir Charles., Hinduism and Buddhism, Vol- 1 and Vol-2, Routledge and Kegan Paul,
1954.

E.D., Biswanathen., Hindu Dharma, Ke Ho Brother Books Prakashan, Kathmandu, 2016.

Farquhar, Mr. J.N., Modern Religious Moment of India, Oriental Publishers, Delhi-6

Farrow, G.W., and Menon, I., The concealed Essence of the Heyvajra Tantra, Motilal
Banarasi das, Delhi, 1992.

Gandhi, An Autobiography,The story of my Experiments with Truth, Laurier Books limited,

1927.

Greenspan Louis and Stefan Anderson., Russell on religion, New York Routledge, 1999.

Guenther., The problem of the Soul in Early Buddhism, Curt WellerVerlag, Constanz,
1949.

Gavin Flood., An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University, New Delhi, 2004

Ghimeeray Pashupati., Three Dimension of Buddhism, Banghu Bihar, Lalitpur,

Kathmandu, 2013.

Gupta Sushil., The six System of Indian Thought vol-IV, India Ltd, Calcutta,1952.

Hiriyana M., Outlines of Indian Philosophy, India, Motilal Banarasidas, Publication, 1993.

Ions. V., Indian Mythology, London, Paul Hamlyn,1967.

Jung, C.G., Symbol of Transformation, Hull, New York.

Kumar Asok and Keshav Das Girdharilal, A comparative Study of the concept of liberation
in Indian philosophy, Burampur, 1967

Kalghati, T.G., Karma and Rebirth, Ahmedabad, Institute of Indology, 1972.

Kramiriseh. S., The Art of Indian painting and Architecture, London Phaidon, 1954.
131
Krishna. G., The Awakening of Kundalini, New York, E.P. Dutton, 1975.

Krishnamurti. J., The Awakening of Intelligence, New York, Avon Books,1976.

Kunhan. Raja., Some Fundamental problem in Indian Philosophy, New Delhi, 1961.

Kregiger, Hugo., Kathmandu Valley Painting, London, 15.

Leaman Oliver., Key Concept in Eastern Philosophy, Routedge, 1999.

Lal, Asok Kumar., A comparative Study of the concept of Liberation in Indian Philosophy,
New Delhi, 1961.

Ling, T.O., Buddhism and the Mythology of Evil, A study of Theraveda Buddhism, George
Allen and Unwin Ltd., London, 1962.

Locke, John K., Karunamaya, Sahyogi/CNAS prakashan Kathmandu, Nepal.

Lal Chandra and sons., The Sprit of Buddhism, Ansari Road, Dariyaganj, 1999.

Majupuria and Majupuria, God and Goddess, Kathmandu Scholar‘s Nest.

Mitra, Sushil Kumar., The Ethics of Hindus, Calcutta, University of Calcutta, 1963.

Madan, T. N., The Hinduism Omnibus, Oxford University Press, 2003.

Max, Muller F., Sacred books of the East., (tr. From Pali by T.W. Rhys David and
oldenberg) Delhi, 1965.

Majpuria, Trilok Chandra., Sacred Animals and India, M. Devi, 1991.

Nikhilananda., Swami Vivekananda, New York, Ramkrishana Vivekananda centre, 1953.

Nehru, Jawaharlal., An Autobiography, Oxford University Press, 1989.

Padhi Bibhu., Indian Philosophy and Religion, New Delhi, D.K. Print,1980.

Peter, Harvy., The Selfless Mind, Curzon Press, 1995.

Pal, Pratapadiya., Nepal old image, New Insights Marge publications, 2004.

Raines, John., Marx on Religion, USA Temple University Press, 2002.

132
Rajagopalachari, R.C., Hinduism Doctrine and way of Life, Bumbay, Bharatiya Vidya
Bhavan,1959.

Radhakrishanan, S. (Trans)., The Dhammapada, Oxford University press, Madras, 1973.

Roswon, Phillips., The Art of Tantra. London, Thames and Husdon.

Shakya, Min Bahadur., Buddhist Iconography, Lotus Res Centre, Kathmandu.

Sharma, R. N., Philosophy of Religion Delhi, Surjeet Publications, 2012.

Sen, K.M., Hinduism, Penquin Books, 2005.

Sankrityayana, Rahul., Darshan Digdarshan, Kitab Mahal, Allahabad, 1994.

Strop, Hebert., Four Religious of India, A primer Harper and Row, New York, 1968.

Saratchandra, K.A., A Critical Study of Indian Philosophy, Gauhati, Oriental Book Co,
1967.

Schweizer, A., Indian Thought and its Development, New York, Charls and Henry Colt,
1936.

Singh, Balbir., Foundation of Indian Philosophy, New Delhi, Oriental Longmans,1971.

Sirkar, M.N., Hindu Mysticism, London, Kegan Paul, 1934.

Sinha, Jadunath., Outlines of Indian philosophy, Calcutta, New Central Book Agency,
1992.

Stcherbastsky, T., The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana, Varanasi, Bharatiya Vidya

Prakashan,1980.

S. Radhakrishanan., The Hindu View of Life, London, Mandala Press, 1988.

Sharma, Chandradhar., Chronological Summary of History of Indian philosophy, A critical

Survey, New York, Barnes and Noble, 1962.

Smith, Brian K., Canonical Authority and Social classification Veda and Varna in Ancient
Indian Texts. History of Religion, The University of Chicago Press.

Sharma P.R.P., Encyclopaedia of Vedas, New Delhi, 2007.

133
Sinha, Rishikesh. Jain Ajay Kumar., Ancient and Medieval Nepal, Manohar, 1992.

Tiwari, K.N., Comparative Religion, Motilal Banarasi Dass Publishers, Delhi, 2004.

Thanissaro, Bhikkhu., What the Buddha Thought? Groveress, Bangkok, 1974.

Vivekananda, Swami., Speech and Writings of Swami Vivekananda, A comprehensive

Collection, Hard Press, 2012.

Verma, Rajendra., Comparative Religion, Delhi, Bharatiya Book corporation, 1984.

Verma, Bhagvaticharan., Chitralekha (in Hindi) Allahabad, Bharati Bhandar, 1977.

Yadav, Dr. Parmeshwar., Perspectives on Hinduism and Buddhism, Yasodha Prakashan,

Rajbiraj, Nepal, 2002.

Westropp, H.M., Ancient Symbol worship, New York, 1990.

Yule, M., Ancient Hindu Symbolism, Calcutta.

Zachner, R.C., Hinduism, London, Oxford University, 1962.

Zimmer, N., Myth and Symbols in India Art and Civilization, Haper and Row publishers,
New York, 1985.

Journal

Academic View, Tribhuvan University, Teachers Associations Tri-Chandra Campus Unit,

Ghantaghar, Kathmandu, Nepal,Vol-3, April, 2012.

Diwakar S.C., The Philosophy of Karma, Jain Journal, 1973.

Dharshan Drishti, Dharshan Adhyayan Kendra, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Hindu Jagran Nepal, Dr. Upadhya Gobind Sharan, 2014.

International Association of Buddhist Studies, JABS, vol no-2, 1991.

Modern perspectives on Vedanta, Proceeding of the 20th International Congress of

Vedanta. 2011 (Dec 28-31).

134
INDEX

A cittavimutta........................................... 41, 48

Advaita Vedanta ......14, 37, 46, 86, 87, 89, 90 D

Agami karma .............................................. 53
Dependent Origination ......................... 59, 61
Agni .................................... 15, 105, 113, 133
Dhammapada ....................33, 63, 65, 76, 131
Aitreya ........................................................ 34
Dharmadhatu ............................................ 111
akusala ....................................................... 56
dukkha .......................................39, 44, 46, 77
Anagami ..................................................... 79
Anatta ......................25, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45, 46 E
Ankusha.................................................... 106
emptiness.............................45, 80, 81, 82, 88
Apavarga Mukti .......................................... 70
apurva ........................................................ 65 G
Arahant................................................. 78, 79
Gandhi .............................................. 6, 8, 129
Arhats ......................................................... 76
Govinda ...................................................... 85
atman ........... 34, 35, 43, 46, 67, 74, 84, 85, 87
Aurobindo ................................................ 128 H

Avalokiteshvara................ 106, 108, 112, 113 Hinayana ........................................ 4, 83, 122

avijja................................... 41, 46, 59, 60, 76
I
B
Ishvara Sayujya .......................................... 69
Bertrand Russell ........................................... 7 Issaranimmanahetuvada ............................ 58
Bhagavad Gita ....................... 14, 19, 32, 134
Bhakti ....................10, 25, 30, 31, 70, 89, 123 J

Brahma . 12, 14, 16, 17, 29, 31, 34, 56, 64, 69, Jivan Mukti................................................. 71
70, 89, 106, 112
K
Brahmachakra .......................................... 110
brahmajala ............................................... 108 kaivalya ...................................................... 38
Kalash ...................................................... 107
C
Kali Mandala ................................... 111, 112
chakra............................................... 106, 110 Kanada ....................................................... 18
Charvaka ........................................ 38, 85, 86 klesa ........................................................... 61

135
Kriya..................................................... 51, 94 Prarabdha karma ....................................... 52
Kriyamana karma....................................... 54 pratityasamuppada..................................... 59
Kundalini .......................................... 110, 130 Puranas ............................................... 10, 112
Kurkulla.................................................... 106 Purusha .....................................20, 21, 34, 72
kusala ......................................................... 56
S
M
sadasadvilakshana ..................................... 15
Madhyamaka ........................................ 81, 83 Sahasara................................................... 110
Mahayana5, 24, 45, 46, 80, 81, 82, 83, 88, 89, Sakadagami ................................................ 79
92, 93, 94, 95, 101, 112, 113, 122, 123, Samkhya ........................ 12, 16, 20, 21, 22, 54
128, 129, 133 Samsara.....................................10, 12, 18, 62
Mandala ...............4, 94, 95, 97, 111, 112, 132 Sanchita karma .......................................... 52
maya ................................... 35, 38, 72, 74, 89 Sankara ................. 36, 38, 74, 85, 86, 87, 129
mental planes............................................ 110 Sankhya ................................................ 71, 74
Mimamsa Mukti .......................................... 70 Sannidhya Mukti ........................................ 69
Mimansa ......................................... 13, 15, 16 sanskara ..................................................... 59
Moksha . 10, 12, 22, 30, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 75, Sayujya ....................................................... 69
83, 85, 86, 88 Shaivism ..................................................... 64
Muladhara ................................................ 110 Shankara ............................................... 72, 73
Sotapanna................................................... 79
N
Sraddha .................................................... 104
Nagarjuna .................................... 81, 82, 112 Sri Kapiladeva ............................................ 72
nama-rupa .......................... 39, 40, 43, 60, 89 Sudarshan ................................................. 112
Nirvikalpa................................................... 66 sunya ............................................ 46, 80, 109
Nishkama Karma ........................................ 68 Sunyata ................................................. 80, 88
Nyaya.......................................................... 36 Svadhisthana chakra ................................ 110
Swami Vivekananda ..... 5, 6, 8, 125, 131, 132
P
Swastika ........................................... 112, 113
pancakhanda .............................................. 42 Swayambhu Purana ................................. 111
Pancha-bali .............................................. 105
parinibbana ................................................ 80 T

prajna .................................................. 80, 108 tat tvam asi ................................................. 48

Prajnaparamita.................................. 106, 112 Tathagata ...................................... 20, 26, 109
Prakriti ........................................... 20, 21, 71 tathatta ....................................................... 40

136
Theravada ...................46, 59, 78, 80, 83, 122 Vajrasattva ............................................... 112
Trishula .................................................... 113 Vajrayana . 3, 4, 5, 45, 83, 91, 92, 93, 98, 102,
Trshna ........................................................ 64 104, 113, 116, 119, 128
vedana .................................................. 57, 60
U
vibhava ....................................................... 41
upadana ................................................ 57, 60 vimukti ........................................................ 78
Upanishads . 13, 14, 22, 31, 34, 35, 43, 47, 48, Vipaka .................................................. 57, 61
50, 63, 72, 73, 121 Vipassana ............................................... 4, 83
Visuddha................................................... 110
V
Vivekananda................................. 8, 131, 132
vada ............................................................ 16
vairagya...................................................... 53 Y

Vajra ......................................... 108, 113, 114 Yogachara .................................................. 82

Vajrankush ............................................... 106

137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144