• The author shows the Hindu origins of Theravada and the subsequent divergence from Theravada by other sects of Buddhism popular in Asia and Bharat.

The Definitional Contexts: Theravāda and the Ontology of the Elders

The Definitions of Theravāda and Theravādin

The designation Theravāda (Pāli: thera, "elders," plus vāda, "doctrine or saying") superficially translates as the "Doctrine of the Elders." Yet for those within the Indian doxographical tradition, this name primarily signifies its foundational claim: to be the direct descendant of the Sthaviravāda (Sanskrit: Sthaviravāda or Sthaviranikāya), the school that claimed to maintain the integrity of the original teachings (Dhamma) and discipline (Vinaya) following the early schisms within the Buddhist Sangha.

This claim informs Theravāda’s philosophical conservatism, distinguishing it from later Mahāyāna developments. It must be mentioned in passing that current scholarship does not use the term Mahāyāna since it implies that other ‘vehicles’ of Buddhism are lesser than Mahāyāna. We use it here since this essay’s audience might be more comfortable with some of these traditional terms.  

The term Theravāda was not always a primary self-designation, sometimes appearing in early Pāli commentaries institutionally as Mahāvihāravāsin ("Dweller in the Great Monastery"), referring to its geographical base in Sri Lanka. Nevertheless, the essence of the name conveys the school's insistence upon the continuous, unadulterated transmission of the original teaching. The scriptural bedrock is the Pāli Canon, or Tipiṭaka (Pāli: ti, "three," plus piṭaka, "baskets"), generally accepted as the oldest surviving, complete record of the historical Buddha’s instructions. 

This tripartite canon—the Vinaya Piṭaka, the Sutta Piṭaka, and the Abhidhamma Piṭaka—underscores Theravada’s fundamental dogmatism regarding both doctrine (pariyatti) and discipline (vinaya). The core soteriological goal for the Theravādin is the attainment of Arahantship, culminating in Nibbāna (Sanskrit: Nirvāṇa), defined as the ultimate cessation of suffering. The essence of the path is understood by the Buddha’s own term for the religion:

धम्मविनय

Dhaṃma-vinaya - "the doctrine and discipline"

The final, irreversible end of the cycle of rebirth (saṃsāra) is represented by the liberated state following the Arahant’s death, known as the "Nirvāṇa without remainder":

अनूपधिशेषनिर्वाण

Anupadishésha-nirvāṇa — "Nirvāṇa without remainder" 

The entire path is directed towards this liberation:

विमोक्ष

Vimokṣa - "liberation"

Abhidhamma Realism and Own-Nature (Svabhāva)

The philosophy of Theravāda is most profoundly expressed in the scholasticism of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka. The Abhidhamma is interpreted as a precise (nippariyāya), definitive (paramattha) analysis of the Dhamma, consciously contrasting with the merely conventional (samvṛti) presentation in the Sūtras. This system provides an objective, impersonal ontology, demanding training in higher wisdom: अधिप्रज्ञाशिक्षा /Adhiprañyā-shikṣā or, "training in a/the higher wisdom".

Dhammas and Svabhāva

The core project of the Abhidhamma is the exhaustive analysis of ultimate constituents, known as dhammas—the momentary building blocks of existence demonstrating the absence of a permanent Self (anattā). The commentarial tradition defined the dhamma as “that which bears its own-nature," utilizing the Pāli term Sabhāva: सभाव/Sabhāva - "own-nature or intrinsic characteristic.” 

This assertion that ultimate constituents possess a fixed, definable intrinsic nature (sabhāva), even if momentary (khaṇa), establishes an undeniable philosophical realism within Theravāda scholasticism, maintaining that the phenomenal world exists objectively outside the perceiver. This real existence is often referred to by the Sanskrit term  द्रव्यसत् / Dravyasat (the thing that exists as a substance or real entity).

This realist stance also leads to the assertion of the direct, instantaneous realization of truth (saccābhisamaya), a position argued in the Kathāvatthu, rejecting the sequential realization (anupūrvābhisamaya) upheld by the Sarvāstivāda school. Without entering into the Kathāvatthu’s interpretation by Buddhist scholars, suffice to say that in spite of its various negations, it remains a contested text. 

The Necessity of Ontological Realism for Ethical Continuity

The commitment to dhammas possessing sabhāva is a structural necessity for maintaining the ethical system of Kamma while avoiding the extreme view of nihilism (ucchedavāda), which denies causal efficacy.  The philosophical defense is articulated in the general principle of conditioned co-arising (paṭicca-samuppāda):

इमस्मिं सति इदं होति; इमस्सुप्पादा इदं उप्पज्जति

Imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti; Imassup-pādā idaṃ uppajjati

When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises

This required defense of ontological coherence demonstrates a profound alignment with the core project of the āstika (orthodox) Hindu schools, which universally sought reliable metaphysical structures to support Karma and Mokṣa. Theravāda’s insistence on sabhāva maintains a realism structurally cognate to orthodox Indian thought, distinguishing it sharply from the radical anti-realism of later Mahāyāna schools.

The Hindu Archetype: Renunciation, Asceticism, and Ontological Desire

The Sannyāsa Paradigm: Vairāgya as Soteriological Drive

The congruence between Theravāda Buddhism and classical Hindu traditions is rooted in their shared diagnosis of the human condition and the universal solution of dispassion.

In the Theravāda path, liberation requires the cultivation of definitive dispassion (virāga), a turning away from phenomenal attachment, described as disillusionment (nibbidā). This term is the direct philosophical and etymological cognate of the Sanskrit Vairāgya, the cornerstone of the Sannyāsa paradigm. The Sannyāsa ideal demands freedom from lust, desires, and egoism to achieve Mokṣa—the “unchanging state in which there is no trace of grief” (Holt 2018, p. 27) — which is only possible through complete renunciation. The goal is the structural elimination of the volitional impulse of desire.

Desire and Destiny as Shared Cosmological Engine

Both traditions share the cosmological premise that metaphysical desire is the engine of saṃsāra. In Theravāda, craving (taṇhā) is the origin of suffering, leading to "renewed being" (ponobhavikā):

तण्हा यंनिदं पोनोभविका नन्दीरागसहगता तत्रतत्राभिनन्दिनी

Taṇhā yaṃnidaṃ ponobhavikā nandīrāgasahagatā tatratatrābhinandinī

It is this craving that leads to renewed being, accompanied by delight and attachment, seeking delight now here, now there.

This cosmological role of desire (kāma) is powerfully echoed in the Upanishadic philosophy of Karma. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad affirms the direct causal link between desire, will (kratu), action (karma), and final destiny:

यथाकामो भवति तत्क्रतुर् भवति, यत्क्रतुर् भवति तत्कर्म कुरुते, यत्कर्म कुरुते तदभिसंपद्यते

Yathākāmo bhavati tatkratur bhavati, yatkratur bhavati tatkarma kurute, yatkarma kurute tadabhisaṃpadyate

You are what your deep, driving desire is. As your desire is, so is your will. As your will is, so is your deed. As your deed is, so is your destiny.

The pursuit of akāmatā (desirelessness) renders the Theravāda path a refinement of a pre-existing Hindu imperative toward vairāgya. The Vairāgya Śataka (Hundred Verses on Renunciation) emphasizes the inherent transience necessitating this:

वैराग्यं क्षणभङ्गुरं जगद् इदं क्षुद्रसुखास्पदं

vairāgyaṃ kṣaṇabhaṅguraṃ jagad idaṃ kṣudrasukhāspadaṃ

dispassion [is necessary, as] this world is momentary, the abode of trivial pleasures.

The distinction between the monastic renunciant (pravrajyā) and the householder (gahaṭṭha) in the Vinaya is thus structurally analogous to the sannyāsa ideal contrasted with worldly duties in Vaishnavism, confirming the parallel spiritual paths within the Indic context.

The Ontology of the Self, Panikkar's Silence, and the Problem of Anattā

The formal doctrinal separation lies in Anattā, or non-self, which denies a permanent Ātman. The claim demands careful methodological consideration. The contributions of Raimundo Panikkar and Richard Gombrich are central to dissolving the apparent philosophical contradiction between Anattā and Ātman by shifting the analysis from metaphysical dogma to salvific function.

Gombrich argues that Anattā is not an ontological denial but a practical strategy (upāya), instructing the practitioner to reject the psycho-physical aggregates (khandhas) as "not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" (Gombrich 2005). This approach frames the teaching as a therapeutic tool for generating non-attachment (virāga), rather than a cosmological claim about non-existence. This methodological interpretation by Gombrich ensures that the discussion remains grounded in the psychological praxis shared across Indian asceticism.

Panikkar, through his analysis of the Buddha's unanswered questions (avyākṛta), provides the philosophical justification for this functional approach.14

The Buddha's strategic silence on ultimate metaphysical matters is interpreted by Panikkar as a recognition of the inherent inadequacy of language (prapañca) to express ultimate reality (tathatā) (Panikkar 1989). Panikkar argues that the Buddha’s path is directed toward a "mortal leap to reality" that transcends the duality of conceptual thought, thereby achieving a state structurally cognate to the Advaitic realization of the unconditioned ground of existence, Brahman, defined as: सत्-चित्-आनन्द/Sat-Chit-Ananda/Existence, Consciousness, Bliss.

The Anattā  teaching thus performs the deconstructive work necessary to clear the ground for realizing the unconditioned state (Nibbāna), achieving the same non-dual goal affirmed by Advaita, differentiated only by rhetorical posture (via negativa vs. via positiva). The Theravāda position, secured by its conservative ontological realism in the Abhidhamma, maintains the causal necessity required by the entire Hindu philosophical tradition.

Praxis as Continuity: Meditation, Asceticism, and the Bronkhorst Critique

The Jñāna and Dhyāna Continuum: Structural Homology

The argument for the ontological continuity of Theravāda is compellingly demonstrated by its spiritual technology—the Jhāna (Pāli) or Dhyāna (Sanskrit) system—which is an iteration of Hindu ascetic praxis. The Buddha's Middle Way, while rejecting extreme self-mortification, is a refinement of the pre-existing Indian ascetic technology of tapas (ascetic heat or self-discipline). 

The ultimate aim is the generation of inner spiritual energy: तपस्/ Tapas/austere spiritual practices, ascetic heat, or self-discipline. The four stages of meditative absorption (rūpajjhānas) are central to cultivating liberating wisdom (paññā). These stages demonstrate a profound structural homology with the Samprajñāta Samādhi states of Classical Yoga, as detailed in Patañjali’s Yoga Sūtras. The key factors of the first Jhāna mirror the Yoga system's stages involving:

Initial Thought: वितर्क/Vitarka

Sustained Thought: विचार/Vicāra

Bliss/Joy: आनन्द/Ānanda

This systematic, ascending contemplative structure akin to the Catholic ‘scala mysticism’ confirms that the Buddhist system adopted and refined a widespread pan-Indian psychological technology of self-mastery (vaśitā).

Vipassanā and Mindfulness as Ascetical Inheritances

The central practices of modern Theravāda, Vipassanā (insight) and Sati (mindfulness) are the culmination of this internalized ascetic methodology.

Vipassanā or, penetrative insight into existence, is a demanding internal focus corresponding precisely to the ultimate purpose of yoga in the Hindu context: the acquisition of discriminating insight (viveka-khyāti) or correct knowledge (jñāna). 

The underlying goal is the elimination of subtle impressions or latent tendencies (Vāsanā) that bind consciousness to rebirth. The systematic exertion of Vipassanā directs intense mental tapas onto the roots of delusion, an operation functionally indistinguishable from the Hindu Yogin's objective: the disciplined application of transformative knowledge (jñāna) to liberate the spirit from ignorance (avidyā). Thus, modern Vipassanā is ontologically rooted in Hindu ascetical praxis. Guruji S N Goenka wrote, “Laudable references to Vipassana are given in the Ṛg Veda.”

Rebuttal of Johannes Bronkhorst and the Greater Magadha Thesis

The intellectual challenge posed by Johannes Bronkhorst, who argued that early Buddhism originated in a distinct, non-Vedic Greater Magadha culture is fundamentally challenged by the evidence of a unified Indian philosophical doxography.

Doxography as Dialogue: Indian doxography (siddhānta) demonstrates systematic philosophical confrontation between Buddhist masters (like Bhāviveka) and non-Buddhist schools (Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Mīmāṃsā, Sāṃkhya, Yoga). This intellectual contention confirms a shared arena where the parameters of truth (pramāṇa) were mutually negotiated (Bouthillette 2020).

Bhāviveka’s Engagement: The Madhyamaka philosopher Bhāviveka (c. 500–570 CE) systematically addressed non-Buddhist views in his Madhyamakahṛdayakārikā (MHK). He rigorously refuted the Mīmāṃsā worldview, which valued ritual acts (karma) above liberating knowledge (jñāna), a position Bhāviveka condemned by labelling the Mīmāṃsakas the "shameless ones" (anapatrapa) who reviled knowledge (Bouthillette 2020, p. 111). This is one of the rare instances that the exact page number is provided in this essay since this idea is entirely Bouthillette’s. For the sake of easy online reading, citations of websites and exact paginations are excluded. These will appear when this essay is published in a book form. 

Shared Polemical Requirements: The pervasive critique of the Hindu Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika assertion of an eternal creator deity (Īśvara) confirms that early Buddhism operated within a single philosophical substrate, where logical argumentation (yukti) was necessary to assert the authority of the Buddha (Jackson 1993).

Hindu Elements in Contemporary Theravāda Cultures

The institutional history of Theravāda in Asia confirms its identity as a culturally adaptive iteration that incorporated surrounding Indic cultural and ritual systems.

Kingship and Brahmanical Legitimation: In Theravāda states, Brahmanical practices were closely associated with the legitimation of kingship (Sanskrit: Rājan). For instance, the major Sri Lankan national festival, the ‘Kandy Esala Perahara’, which celebrates the sacred Tooth Relic, historically includes the insignia and rituals of Hindu deities such as Viṣṇu and Kataragama, illustrating the integration of the two traditions in state ritual. The structure of the Mahārāja retained Hindu influence, demonstrating the "synthetic religion" of the polity. 

Ritual and Cultic Syncretism: Southeast Asian Theravāda often practices a "synthetic religion" that incorporates Hindu elements. This is seen in the ritualistic propitiation of Deities (Devatā), such as the worship of Ganesha (Thai: Phra Phikanet), with offerings derived from the Hindu system (Holt 2018, p. 210). The monastics, while adhering to the Vinaya which rejects: शीलव्रतपरामर्श (Śīlavrataparāmarśa — attachment to rites and rituals). Sentence incomplete

Lord Indra Temple on Sukumwit Street, Bangkok. 2009. 

The core monastic discipline of renunciation (pravrajyā), or "going forth," remains entirely aligned with the fundamental Hindu sannyāsa ideal, confirming the deep structure of the discipline is rooted in the common Indian ascetic project.

Doxography of Divergence: Theravāda and the Non-Hindu Vehicles

The case for Theravāda’s ontological kinship with Hinduism is strengthened by its fundamental opposition to the later, metaphysically radical Buddhist schools. The schism between Theravāda and Mahāyāna hinges on ontology: Theravāda’s scholastic realism is opposed to Mahāyāna’s philosophical anti-realism.

Dhammas versus Śūnyatā

Theravāda insists that phenomena (dhammas) possess an inherent, momentary reality (sabhāva). The Madhyamaka school (Nāgārjuna being its greatest propounder), in direct refutation, developed emptiness (śūnyatā), asserting that all phenomena are devoid of intrinsic existence: निःस्वभाव/niḥsvabhāva/devoid of intrinsic nature.

Nāgārjuna systematically deconstructs all ontological categories, concluding that there is no distinction between the conditioned and the unconditioned, famously stating in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā:

न संसारस्य निर्वाणात् किं चिद् अस्ति विशेषणम्

na saṃsārasya nirvāṇāt kiṃcid asti viśeṣaṇam

There is not the slightest difference between saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa.” (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā XXV)

This radical anti-realism dismantles the objective moral universe crucial to Theravāda's realism.

Yogācāra and Subjective Idealism

Theravāda also rejects the subjective idealism of the Yogācāra School (Vijñānavāda), whose central doctrine is "representation-only" (vijñaptimātra): the only existence of consciousness. This idealism influenced Yogācāra to posit the ālayavijñānaor "storehouse consciousness," and the kliṣṭamanas, or "afflicted mind," which mistakenly generates the false notion of a self (Ātman). Theravāda rejects these proto-Self models in favor of the instantaneous ‘linking consciousness’ (paṭisandhiviññāna), confirming its systematic adherence to external realism.

Doxographical Necessity: Theravāda and the Mahāyāna Vehicles

The necessity of contrasting Theravāda with other schools, such as Zen, Nichiren, and Vajrayāna, is rooted in the Indian tradition of doxography (siddhānta). In the Indian context, philosophical schools systematically define their superior position by classifying and refuting the tenets of other schools (Bouthillette 2020). To argue for Theravāda’s ontological link to Hinduism, it is essential to show that Theravāda maintains foundational positions antithetical to other Buddhist lineages.

Zen (Chan) and Anti-Scholasticism: Zen (Chan) developed as an anti-scholastic tradition, favoring sudden awakening (kenshō) and discouraging reliance on written texts, famously articulated in the phrase: "not dependent on words and letters". This is antithetical to the Theravāda insistence on pariyatti (the rigorous learning of the canonical tradition) and the scholasticism of Abhidhamma as the foundation for the path.

Nichiren (Doxographical Contrast): Nichiren Buddhism (Japan) is esp. chosen for this comparison because its core theological claim represents the most radical philosophical departure from Theravāda.

Nichiren defines its entire tradition through the exclusive and supreme authority of the Mahāyāna Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra (Lotus Sūtra) and the chanting of the daimoku (title). Since Theravāda rejects the authenticity of all Mahāyāna sūtras as the word of the Buddha, Nichiren’s choice of a single, later Mahāyāna text creates the clearest, most rigid doxographical boundary against which the conservative scriptural fidelity of Theravāda is defined (Holt 2018, p. 381).

Vajrayāna and Tantric Ritualism: Vajrayāna (the "Diamond Vehicle") uses specialized methods (mantranaya) centered on elaborate ritual, initiation (abhiṣeka), and deity visualization for swift Buddhahood. The path adheres to the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, a monastic code distinct from the Theravāda Pātimokkha.

Furthermore, its focus on practices involving the creation of a meditative object involving the embrace and equipoise with a contemplated goddess is explicitly absent in the Jhāna system of Theravāda (Wayman 1980, p. 145). These ritualistic and metaphysical innovations fundamentally deviate from the austere, non-ritualistic path of the Theravāda Elders.

Reaffirming the Hindu Basis of the Elders' Doctrine

The Ontological Overlap of Dharma and Svabhāva

This philosophical and doxographical analysis establishes the structural and functional homology between the core elements of Theravāda Buddhism and the classical Hindu traditions of Sannyāsa and Yoga.

The claim that Theravāda is an iteration of Hindu practice is grounded in both philosophical and pragmatic continuity. Theravāda’s distinction relies primarily on (1) Ethical Orthopraxy (the Vinaya and Arahant path) and (2) Rhetorical Negation (Anattā), which functions as a salvific strategy (to foster virāga) rather than a radical ontological doctrine, a point affirmed by scholars like Gombrich.

The enduring philosophical link lies in Theravāda's commitment to philosophical realism; the scholastic insistence that dhammas possess sabhāva (inherent characteristic) in the Abhidhamma. This realism is essential to maintain the efficacy of Kamma and the path to Nibbāna which is a structural requirement shared by the Indian āstika traditions. The practices of Jhāna are functionally derived from Hindu Dhyāna and Tapas, meaning that the contemporary: विपस्सना and सति (mindfulness or memory) are, in their deepest methodological and purificatory roots, contemporary expressions of Hindu ascetical practices.

The Neo-Buddhist Dilemma: Ethical Rejection of Ontological Roots

The modern tendency of "Neo-Buddhist" movements, particularly the Navayāna (New Way) founded by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (1891–1956) to excise Buddhism from its Indian intellectual history serves as an illustrative act of severance. Ambedkar's embrace of Buddhism, along with nearly half a million followers in 1956, was a strategic, ethical act of resistance against the Hindu caste system. 

Navayāna explicitly questioned metaphysical elements such as karma, rebirth, and Nirvāṇa. According to Ambedkar, these were the shared cosmological apparatus used in Hindu society to sanction inequality. Then from the perspective of Theravāda to which Ambedkar at least normatively converted from Hinduism, his Buddhism is very different from Theravāda; Ambedkar’s Buddhism then according to the Buddhist canon at large, remains just an ethical gesture fuelled by the need of social reforms. This is antithetical to core Buddhist beliefs as discussed above.

Dukkha (suffering) was reinterpreted not merely as a universal psychological condition, but as a consequence of systemic social and economic injustice. The Dhamma was redefined as a moral and ethical path rooted in social justice, rather than a system of complex scholastic or ritual requirements. The deliberate effort by Navayāna to strip away the ontological core, which forms the complex metaphysical framework that grounds classical Theravāda within the philosophical continuum of India, illustrates, by negation, the enduring continuity of that Hindu basis.

The historical and philosophical evidence strongly suggests that Theravāda Buddhism, in its foundational realism, ascetic praxis, and contemplative methodology, is, in its essence, ontologically Hindu.

The author is a theologian. To read all article by author

Select Bibliography

As has been mentioned within the essay, the author has removed most citations for the ease of reading. All online citations are completely removed. Only a few books in print citations are provided for interested scholars.

1. Bhartṛhari. Vairāgya Śatakam: Or the Hundred Verses on Renunciation. Translated by Swami Madhavananda. Kolkata: Advaita Ashrama, 2010.

2. Bouthillette, Karl-Stéphan. Dialogue and Doxography in Indian Philosophy: Points of View in Buddhist, Jaina, and Advaita Vedanta Traditions. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2020. 

3. Bronkhorst, Johannes. Language and Reality: On an Episode in Indian Thought. Volume 36 of Brill's Indological Library. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2011.

4. Buswell, Robert E. Jr., and Donald S. Lopez Jr. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014.

5. Gombrich, Richard. How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings. Second edition. London: Routledge, 2005.

6. Holt, John Clifford. Theravāda Traditions: Buddhist Ritual Cultures in Contemporary Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2018. 

7. Jackson, Roger R. Translator. Is Enlightenment Possible? Dharmakīrti and Rgyal Tshab Rje on Knowledge, Rebirth, No-Self and Liberation. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1993.

8. Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu and Bhikkhu Bodhi, translators. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikāya. Boston, MA: Wisdom Publications, 1995. 

9. Olivelle, Patrick. Ascetic Ideals and the Hindu World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

10. Panikkar, Raimundo. The Silence of God: The Answer of the Buddha. Translated by Robert R. Barr. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1989.

11. Tola, Fernando, and Carmen Dragonetti. Being as Consciousness: Yogācāra Philosophy of Buddhism. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2004.

12. Wayman, Alex. Introduction to the Buddhist Tantric Systems. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1980.

13. Webster, David. The Philosophy of Desire in the Buddhist Pali Canon. London and New York: Routledge, 2006.

Therwada New Year is celebrated in April. In 2025 it was on April 13.

Also read

1. Samkhya and Buddhism

2. A SAKTA Critique of the VAJRAYANA Conception of Tantra

3. What is Thervada Buddhism

4. How Hindu and Buddhist are intertwined in Thailand, Cambodia and Japan