Among the richest philosophical traditions in human history, the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism and the Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism have long stood as towering articulations of non-duality. Both traditions aim to lead the practitioner toward liberation through the realization of ultimate truth. Yet their paths, while converging in some experiential sense, diverge sharply in metaphysical commitments.

To put it simply, Madhyamaka tells us that everything is empty; Advaita Vedanta says that everything is one. At first glance, these may sound similar. Upon closer inspection, they articulate fundamentally different understandings of reality.

Advaita Vedanta, most prominently expounded by Adi Shankaracharya, asserts that the true self (Atman) is identical with Brahman, the sole, unchanging, eternal reality. Everything else—our everyday experience of objects, individuality, and even the body-mind complex—is Maya, an illusion born of ignorance. For Advaita, liberation (moksha) lies in recognizing that the individual self is not separate from the infinite consciousness of Brahman. This is a positive metaphysical affirmation: there is an ultimate ground of reality, and it is consciousness itself.

For example, imagine a clay pot. According to Advaita, while we see many pots with different forms, all are ultimately made of clay. The forms are temporary illusions; the clay is real. Similarly, our individual selves and experiences are temporary and illusory; the one eternal consciousness (Brahman) is the real substratum.

In contrast, the Madhyamaka school, associated most directly with Nagarjuna and later the Prasangika tradition of Chandrakirti, denies that anything—including consciousness—possesses intrinsic, independent existence. Instead, it upholds the doctrine of śūnyatā (emptiness), which is the insight that all phenomena exist only in dependence on other conditions and not from their own side. Even emptiness itself is empty. There is no ultimate substance or ground, not even an infinite consciousness. Liberation, for Madhyamaka, is seeing that every claim to ultimate essence—even the claim that there is an ultimate essence—is to be let go.

To illustrate, think of a chariot. When you look for the essence of the chariot—is it the wheels? The axle? The seat?—you find that none alone make up the chariot. The chariot is a designation we give to the collection of parts in a particular arrangement. Likewise, Madhyamaka says the self and all things are merely conceptual designations with no independent reality.

The nature of the self is a stark point of divergence. Advaita maintains that the self, properly understood, is real and identical to Brahman. Madhyamaka, on the other hand, follows the Buddhist doctrine of anatman, or no-self. The self is merely a designation upon a stream of mental and physical events. When seen through wisdom, the self is recognized as a conceptual fabrication.

Their methods reflect these differences. Advaita employs philosophical inquiry and scriptural teachings to strip away false identification with the body and mind, revealing the self as consciousness. It is a process of negation (neti neti, not this, not that) leading to a positive realization of unity. Madhyamaka uses rigorous deconstructive reasoning to dismantle all views, showing that none hold up under scrutiny. The goal is not to uncover a hidden essence but to dissolve the very tendency to grasp at essences.

Despite their philosophical divergence, both traditions agree that ordinary perception and belief are steeped in illusion. Both call into question the solidity of the self and the world. Yet one does so to affirm an underlying unity, the other to demonstrate the radical absence of any ground whatsoever.

In Advaita, the world is an illusion because Brahman is real. In Madhyamaka, the world is illusion because nothing has intrinsic reality. The first points toward a real behind the veil; the second points out that the veil is the illusion.

Interestingly, these views often intersect in practice. The non-dual experience reported by sages in both traditions—an experience of unity, peace, and dissolution of ego—can appear quite similar. Yet the frameworks they offer for understanding that experience remain distinct.

In the end, one might say that Advaita seeks to dissolve the illusion to reveal the real, while Madhyamaka dissolves the illusion to reveal the illusion as all there is. Both challenge us to awaken from our habitual ways of seeing. One through the affirmation of consciousness as ground, the other through the relinquishment of all grounds.

Understanding these two traditions not only deepens our appreciation of Indian philosophy but also opens up rich pathways for reflecting on the nature of reality, self, and liberation. Whether one leans toward the elegance of unity or the radical clarity of emptiness, both offer profound tools for seeing through the illusions that bind us.