/lit/ - Literature

>The Mādhyamika, remaining true to the spirit of Buddha and its negative logic has given only negative description of the Absolute and has not indulged in its positive description. Emphasis is laid only on its direct realisation through immediate experience by rising above the thought-categories which falsify it. Gauḍapāda agrees with all this, but following his Upaniṣadic tradition, feels the necessity of making explicit the positive ontological nature of the Absolute by using positive characters also in order to help the aspirants and in order to avoid possible philosophical misconception of the Absolute. Thus admitting that 'neti neti' or via negativa is the best method to describe the indescribable, he admits the necessity of positive description too and uses the positive terms like Brahma, Bhagavān, Īshvara, Deva, vibhu, nitya jñāna, akṣaya and akathya sukha, Oṁkāra, etc., for the Absolute.

>Another vital difference between Gauḍapāda and the Mādhyamika is that Gauḍapāda, following his Upaniṣadic tradition, identifies the Absolute with the foundational Self or Ātmā. The self-contradiction inherent in the thought-categories and the consequent nothingness of the phenomena brought out by the sharp negative dialectic can be realised only by the witnessing Self (sākṣī). Self-contradiction is neither self-revealing nor self-comprehending. It can be understood only in the light of a universal criterion of non-contradiction and by the foundational Self, which is at once eternal self-shining consciousness (nitya svaprakāsha ātma-chaitanya) and self-proved existence (svataḥsiddha) and non-dual ineffable bliss (advaita akhanḍa ānanda).

>Ācharyā Gauḍapāda has proved (in the 2nd and the 3rd chapters) by reasoning and on the basis of scripture that ajātivāda is māyāvāda based on Brahmavāda, that it is spiritual non-dualism which is the central teaching of the Upanisads. Buddha himself took it from the Upaniṣads and the Mādhyamika school developed it in the light of the teaching of Buddha. Gauḍapāda takes it directly from the Upaniṣads and develops it in the light of his Vedāntic tradition. This accounts for the similarities as well as differences between Gauḍapāda and the Mādhyamika and this also establishes the philosophical soundness of Advaita Vedānta over Mādhyamika Buddhism.
- Chandradhar Sharma, The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy, page 151

Damn.. Mādhyamikabros... I don't feel so good anymore, I think I'm going to become a Chadvaitin now