Buddhism and Advaitam

[Nanda Kumar]

For the past few days we've been seeing comparisons on Advaitam and
Buddhism. Though my knowledge on Advaitam is next to nothing and
Buddhism, zilch, I venture to make a few observations (true to my style!)!

A religion like Hinduism didn't crop out all of a sudden. It's a product of
millinieums of civilization. It evolved out of the experience and thought of
the people. Even those studies and sciences which don't directly deal
with religion and which form a significant part of the six schools of Indian
philosophy contributed to the creation of Sanatana Dharma. So a school
like Advaitam has a strong base on which it was built.

But Buddhism is for the most part the creation of Gauthama Buddha.
Gauthama himself was a Hindu prince and was schooled with the Hindu
school of thought. But it's said that he was at odds with the caste
system and didn't agree with the Untouchablity which was in practice.
So he sought a more flexible religion and philosophy which would be
applicable to the common man too.  Could such a disagreement been
interpreted as anti-Vedic? But even if he was truly anti-Vedic there's no
way one can refute the Vedic influence in his philosophy, because
without that even Buddha wouldn't have a base. So can even Buddhism
actually be called a Hindu school of thought rather than a seperate
religion? And that might account for the great similarity between
Advaitam and Buddhism.

And on the contradiction in ideas about the Absolute, isn't it the final
stage, the samadhi? Advaitam and Buddism are  paths to reach that goal.
Once somebody reaches that state, wouldn't definitions like Advaitam
and Buddhism might be insignificant?