Lal,
You right as per Buddhist tradition. But seeing that this is the General Forum i said to myself why not post this subject. So in the same line of reasoning the following it’s also very interesting (to me…) :
– “The old Upanishads mention both Brahma in the masculine gender deity “Brahmā”, as well as gender neutral “Brahman” as the impersonal world principle.[37]
According to David Kalupahana, the Upanishads do not strictly distinguish between the two.[38] In contrast, Damien Keown and Charles Prebish state the texts do distinctly present both the male deity Brahma and the abstract Brahman, however, in the Upanishads, deity Brahma is only referred to a few times.[39] The Brahman as the eternal, absolute metaphysical reality – along with Atman (self, soul) – is the predominant and frequent teaching in the Upanishads and other Vedic literature of the Upanishadic period,[40][41] so much so that early Hinduism is also referred to as Brahmanism.[42] The Pāli scriptures, which were written centuries after the death of the Buddha, mention Brahma, but there is no unambiguous mention of the gender neuter Brahman concept.[39]
The word Brahma is standardly used in Buddhist suttas to mean “best”, or “supreme”.[47][48] Brahman in the texts of Advaita Vedanta and many other Hindu schools, states Nakamura, is a concrete universal, manifesting itself as phenomenal reality which is not illusory and nondual.[49]
In the earliest Upanishad, the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, the Absolute, which came to be referred to as Brahman, is referred to as “the imperishable”.[50] The Pāli scriptures present a “pernicious view” that is set up as an absolute principle corresponding to Brahman: “O Bhikkhus! At that time Baka, the Brahmā, produced the following pernicious view: ‘It is permanent. It is eternal. It is always existent. It is independent existence. It has the dharma of non-perishing. Truly it is not born, does not become old, does not die, does not disappear, and is not born again. Furthermore, no liberation superior to it exists elsewhere.” The principle expounded here corresponds to the concept of Brahman laid out in the Upanishads. According to this text the Buddha criticized this notion: “Truly the Baka Brahmā is covered with unwisdom.”[51]
The Buddha confined himself to both ordinary empirical sense experience and extrasensory perception enabled by high degrees of mental concentration.[52][53] The Upanishadic scholars, according to Francis X Clooney and other scholars, assert their insights as a combination of intuitive empiricism, experimentalism, and inspired creative perception.”
Please tell me if there is something not correct in the content above concerning the Buddhist side.
Thanks