Ultimate reality — Buddhism

What the specification asks for

Paper 1, Section 1, 1.5 (Buddhism). Assessed on AO1 (knowledge and understanding) and AO2 (analysis and evaluation), weighted equally. Incandio is aligned to this specification. It is not published by, endorsed by or affiliated with Pearson, and it reproduces none of Pearson's indicative content — the point numbers are given so you can check every unit against your own copy.

1 · Understand it

A man is shot with an arrow. A doctor arrives, and the man refuses treatment until somebody tells him who fired it, what wood the shaft was made from, and which village the archer came from. He dies asking. That story is in the Buddhist texts, and it is the Buddha's answer to being asked whether there is a God — not that there is not, but that you are bleeding, and this is not the question to be asking first.

What it means

Read the specification's wording carefully here, because it is unusually precise: Buddhist teachings about ultimate reality, AND attitudes to whether questions about the existence of God are important. It is asking two things, and the second is the interesting one.

Buddhism has no creator God and no being on whom the universe depends. But it does not reach that by argument and then announce it — the Buddha set a group of metaphysical questions aside as avyakata, the undeclared, on the grounds that answering them does not remove suffering. That is not agnosticism about something he thought important. It is a judgement about what is urgent, which is a different and stranger position.

What Buddhism does have as an ultimate is nibbana: the unconditioned, the cessation of craving, hatred and delusion. It is described mostly by what it is not, and the tradition explicitly refuses to call it annihilation. Dhamma is the other candidate — both the teaching and the way things are, and one of the Three Refuges.

One complication has to be stated or the picture is wrong. Buddhist cosmology contains devas — gods, celestial beings. They exist. They are also impermanent, caught in the cycle like everybody else, and they created nothing. So Buddhism is not straightforwardly atheistic; it is non-theistic, which is a narrower claim and a more accurate one.

And here the traditions genuinely differ, which is rare on this section. Theravada emphasises nibbana as cessation and is cautious about describing it positively. Mahayana develops sunyata — the emptiness of all phenomena — and some schools speak of Buddha-nature present in every being. Pure Land directs devotion to Amida Buddha and aspiration to rebirth in the Pure Land, which in FORM resembles theistic devotion even though the doctrine remains non-theistic.

Why believers hold it

The reasoning is therapeutic rather than philosophical, and once you see that, the whole position holds together. Buddhism presents itself as a treatment for a condition. A treatment is judged by whether it works. The metaphysical questions are real questions with real answers — the Buddha does not say they are meaningless — and answering them does nothing about the arrow.

So the silence is a claim about relevance, not about knowability. That is worth stating precisely, because the two get confused constantly. An agnostic says: nobody can know. Buddhism says: this can be left, and here is what cannot.

There is a cost to the position and the honest answer names it. Setting the question aside is only fully coherent if the answer is no. If God exists, the question is the most important there is, and declining to ask it would be a catastrophic misjudgement rather than a wise triage. Which is why Buddhism functions in practice as a non-theistic religion whatever its formal silence — and why an examiner will reward a learner who notices the tension instead of smoothing it over.

Where it comes from

• The Pali Canon — the Buddha's first sermon — The Four Noble Truths; Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (Samyutta Nikaya 56:11) (translated)

  Dukkha; its cause is tanha; it can cease; the Eightfold Path is the way.

  The Buddha's diagnosis: existence is unsatisfactory, craving causes it, the cause can be removed, and there is a method.

  What it is doing here: The arrow makes sense only against this: existence is unsatisfactory, there is a cause and there is a method — so the treatment is available now and the metaphysics can wait.

• Buddhist teaching — The three marks of existence: anicca, anatta, dukkha (translated)

  Anicca — impermanence; anatta — no fixed self; dukkha — unsatisfactoriness.

  Everything changes; there is no permanent, unchanging self; and clinging to what changes produces dissatisfaction.

  What it is doing here: Use it to explain why devas are not an embarrassment to the account — everything conditioned is impermanent, gods included, so their existence never threatens the claim that nothing was created.

• Buddhist scripture — The Tipitaka (Tripitaka): Vinaya, Sutta and Abhidhamma Pitakas (translated)

  The Three Baskets — monastic discipline, discourses, and higher teaching.

  The Pali Canon's three divisions. The Sutta Pitaka contains the Buddha's discourses, including the Dhammapada.

  What it is doing here: Worth citing when you discuss the differences between traditions, since Mahayana accepts a much wider body of sutras — the disagreement about ultimate reality is partly a disagreement about which texts count.

Where it bites

Go into a vihara and watch what happens in front of a buddharupa. Offerings are made — flowers, incense, light — and they are expressions of respect and aspiration rather than petitions to a being who answers. The flowers are chosen because they wilt, which makes the offering a lesson in impermanence rather than a gift. That distinction is the doctrine visible in a room.

The Three Refuges are the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha — a teacher, a teaching and a community, with no deity among them. And meditation is the central practice, which is training rather than communication. A religion whose main activity is not addressed to anybody is the strongest evidence available that the non-theism is real rather than technical.

What people get wrong

People think: Buddhists worship the Buddha as their god.

Actually: The examiners name this exact error. The Buddha is a human being who became awakened. He is not presented as a creator and not as a god who answers prayer — and treating the offerings in a vihara as petitions misreads what is happening in front of you.

People think: Nibbana and moksha are two words for the same thing.

Actually: Both are release from the cycle, and what is released, and into what, is different. Moksha in most Hindu traditions is the atman reaching union with or nearness to Brahman. Nibbana is the ceasing of craving — and anatta means there is no permanent self to be united with anything. The examiner reports record this confusion specifically.

People think: Buddhism is just atheism with meditation.

Actually: It has no creator, and it has devas, rebirth, kamma and an unconditioned goal — none of which an atheist accepts. Calling it atheist also misses the deliberate setting-aside, which is the most distinctive thing about the Buddhist position and the part actually worth marks.

What the examiner expects you to understand

• Answer BOTH halves of the specification wording: what Buddhism teaches about ultimate reality, and its attitude to whether the God question matters. Answers that do only the first lose the more interesting half.
• Do not say the ultimate reality is heaven, and do not say Buddhism has no view of ultimate reality. Nibbana and the unconditioned are the answer.
• This is one of the few units where naming a real division inside the religion is right rather than manufactured — Theravada, Mahayana and Pure Land describe ultimate reality substantially differently, and Pure Land is the case that complicates any flat statement that Buddhism is non-devotional.
• The Grade 9 move is to use the arrow: the Pali texts record the Buddha explaining WHY he declines, so the refusal is itself a teaching about what religion is for. Buddhism is claiming a question can be genuine, unanswered and still not worth pursuing.
• For the extended question — often 'there is only one God' — Buddhism is the strongest single piece of evidence that a religion can be complete without answering the question at all.

2 · Grade 9 Notes

Core belief / issue

The specification's wording here is unusually careful, and it should be followed: Buddhist teachings about ultimate reality AND attitudes to whether questions about the existence of God are important. Buddhism does not answer the God question with a no so much as set it aside — the Buddha declined to answer certain metaphysical questions on the grounds that answering them does not reduce suffering.

Key terminology

Incandio's mark schemes credit the religion's own vocabulary; spelling variants are accepted, a vague paraphrase is not.

Nibbana (also nirvana)

The unconditioned; the cessation of craving and of suffering, and the nearest thing to an ultimate in Buddhism.

Avyakata (also avyakrta, unanswered questions)

The undeclared or unanswered questions the Buddha set aside as unhelpful.

Dhamma (also dharma)

The teaching, and also the way things are; one of the Three Refuges.

Devas (also deva)

Gods or celestial beings; they exist in Buddhist cosmology, are impermanent, and are not creators.

Sunyata (also shunyata)

Emptiness; the Mahayana teaching that all phenomena lack inherent existence.

What Buddhism teaches

• shared — There is no creator God in Buddhism, and no being on whom the universe depends.
• shared — The Buddha declined to answer certain metaphysical questions, on the grounds that answers to them do not remove suffering.
• shared — Nibbana is the unconditioned and is described mostly by what it is not — the cessation of craving, hatred and delusion.
• divided — The traditions describe ultimate reality differently, and the differences are substantial rather than verbal.
  • Theravada — Emphasises nibbana as the cessation of the conditioned and is cautious about describing it positively.
  • Mahayana — Develops sunyata — the emptiness of all phenomena — and in some schools speaks of Buddha-nature present in all beings.
  • Pure Land — Directs devotion to Amida Buddha and aspiration to rebirth in the Pure Land, which functions devotionally in a way other traditions do not.

Why it teaches this

The reasoning is therapeutic. The Buddha's famous image is of a man shot with an arrow who refuses treatment until he knows who fired it: the metaphysical questions are real questions and answering them does nothing about the arrow. So Buddhism's silence about God is not agnosticism about a matter it considers important — it is a judgement that the question is not the urgent one, which is a different and more interesting position.

Sources of authority

• The Pali Canon — the Buddha's first sermon — The Four Noble Truths; Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (Samyutta Nikaya 56:11) (translated)

  Dukkha; its cause is tanha; it can cease; the Eightfold Path is the way.

  The Buddha's diagnosis: existence is unsatisfactory, craving causes it, the cause can be removed, and there is a method.

  How to use it: It is a diagnosis and a treatment rather than a set of beliefs, which is why Buddhism can answer the problem of suffering without needing a God to defend.

  What it does not settle: It explains suffering's cause without invoking evil or judgement, so it does not answer the theodicy question — it dissolves it. Say that rather than forcing it into a Christian frame.

• Buddhist scripture — The Tipitaka (Tripitaka): Vinaya, Sutta and Abhidhamma Pitakas (translated)

  The Three Baskets — monastic discipline, discourses, and higher teaching.

  The Pali Canon's three divisions. The Sutta Pitaka contains the Buddha's discourses, including the Dhammapada.

  How to use it: Because the canon includes a whole basket of monastic rules, Buddhist authority is as much about how the community lives as about what it believes.

  What it does not settle: Mahayana traditions accept a much wider body of sutras, so 'the Buddhist scriptures' is not one closed list.

• Buddhist teaching — The Noble Eightfold Path; grouped as sila, samadhi and prajna (translated)

  Right view, intention, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness and concentration.

  The fourth Noble Truth in practice, grouped into ethics (sila), meditation (samadhi) and wisdom (prajna).

  How to use it: It is a path rather than a creed, so the Buddhist answer to 'what is the purpose of life?' is a practice and not a proposition.

  What it does not settle: Emphasis differs sharply between Theravada, Zen and Pure Land practice.

• Buddhist teaching — The three marks of existence: anicca, anatta, dukkha (translated)

  Anicca — impermanence; anatta — no fixed self; dukkha — unsatisfactoriness.

  Everything changes; there is no permanent, unchanging self; and clinging to what changes produces dissatisfaction.

  How to use it: Anatta is what makes Buddhism's answer on the soul genuinely different from every other religion on this specification, and it is the concept most often got wrong.

  What it does not settle: Anatta does NOT mean there is nothing at all, and rebirth without a permanent self is the hard part. A learner who writes 'Buddhists believe the soul is reborn' has contradicted anatta.

Different interpretations

• The unanswered questions read as agnosticism and read as a rejection of the question's usefulness; the second is closer to the sources and it is the more defensible reading.
• Devas read as gods and read as impermanent beings within the cycle; they are the second, so Buddhism is not atheistic in a simple sense and is definitely not theistic.
• Nibbana read as annihilation and read as the cessation of the conditions producing suffering; the tradition rejects the first explicitly and the Buddha refused both extremes.

Differences within Buddhism

All traditions agree there is no creator God. They differ substantially in how ultimate reality is described and in how devotional the practice is, and Pure Land is the case that most complicates any simple statement that Buddhism is non-theistic.

• Theravada — Nibbana as cessation; devotion directed to the Buddha as teacher rather than saviour.
• Mahayana — Sunyata and, in some schools, Buddha-nature; bodhisattvas function as objects of devotion.
• Pure Land — Devotion to Amida and aspiration to the Pure Land, which resembles theistic devotion in form though not in doctrine.

Application to the issue

It shows in what happens in a vihara: offerings before a buddharupa are made as expressions of respect and aspiration rather than as petitions to a being who answers; in the Three Refuges, which are the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha rather than a deity; and in meditation as the central practice, which is training rather than communication.

Arguments supporting

• Setting the God question aside is more honest than answering it either way. — The question is not one anybody has settled, and the suffering it was supposed to explain remains either way. (buddhism)
  Answered by: If God exists, the question is the most important there is, so declining to ask it is only reasonable if the answer is no.
• A religion without a creator avoids the problem of evil entirely. — There is no omnipotent benevolence to reconcile with suffering. (shared)
  Answered by: It avoids one problem and takes on another: it must explain why the cycle exists at all, and it declines to.

Arguments challenging

• A religion should answer the question of what is ultimately real. — That is what distinguishes religion from ethics or psychology. (christianity)
  Answered by: Buddhism does answer it — with nibbana and the unconditioned — but declines the specific question about a creator, which is not the same as having no answer.
• Pure Land devotion shows Buddhism becomes theistic in practice. — Amida is petitioned and relied upon. (non-religious)
  Answered by: Amida is not held to be a creator and the doctrine remains non-theistic, though the observation that practice and doctrine diverge here is a fair one.

Secular / non-religious perspective

Atheists hold there is no God and that ultimate reality is the physical universe. Many find Buddhism congenial because it makes no creator claim, and secular Buddhist movements adopt the practices without rebirth. Humanists would say the Buddha's therapeutic reason for setting the question aside is sound, and that the honest conclusion is simply that there is no God.

Examinable throughout Paper 1. Nothing here earns a mark on Paper 2.

Evaluation

The hinge: Whether declining to answer a question is a position or an evasion. Buddhism's stance stands or falls on that, and it can be argued either way.

Defensible conclusions

• Setting the question aside is a genuine position rather than an evasion, because it rests on a claim about what is urgent rather than about what is unknowable.
• It is only fully coherent if the answer is no, which is why Buddhism functions as a non-theistic religion whatever its formal silence.
• Buddhism shows that a religion can be complete without answering the God question, which is the strongest thing this unit contributes to a debate about monotheism.

Not defensible

• Saying Buddhists worship the Buddha as their god — the examiners name this exact error.
• Saying the ultimate reality in Buddhism is heaven, or that Buddhism simply has no view of ultimate reality.

Exam use

• Identify · 3 marks — Three Buddhist beliefs about ultimate reality. Short phrases only.
• Outline · 4 marks — Two developed. 'Buddhists do not believe in a creator God (1) — and the Buddha set the question aside because answering it does not end suffering (1).'
• Explain · 6 marks — Explain Buddhist beliefs about ultimate reality: nibbana, the unanswered questions, the status of devas, and the differences between traditions.
• Evaluate · 12 marks — 'There is only one God.' Buddhism is the strongest evidence that a religion can be complete without answering the question at all.

Common mistakes

• Saying Buddhists worship the Buddha as a god.
• Treating nibbana as heaven, or as the same as moksha.
• Describing Buddhism as simply atheist, which misses the deliberate setting-aside.

“Buddhists worship the Buddha as their god.” — The Buddha is a human being who became awakened. Buddhist teaching does not present him as a creator or as a god who answers prayer.

Write instead: Buddhists show reverence to the Buddha as teacher and example — bowing, offerings, and taking refuge — without regarding him as a god. Offerings before a Buddha rupa express gratitude and aspiration, not petition. Devotional practice is real and extensive, especially in Mahayana and Pure Land Buddhism where Amitabha is the object of profound devotion. 'Buddhists do not worship' is an over-correction; 'the Buddha is not a god' is the accurate claim.

“The ultimate reality is heaven — the place believers go after they die.” — Ultimate reality is what is most fundamentally real — God, Brahman, Nirvana. Heaven is a destination within a religion's picture of the afterlife, not the ground of everything.

Write instead: Ultimate reality is what a religion holds to be finally real and the source of everything else: God for Christians, Muslims, Jews and Sikhs; Brahman for many Hindus; and for many Buddhists, no creator God at all. Some Buddhists do speak of Nirvana or Buddha-nature as an ultimate reality; others hold that the question is not useful. Both are creditable if attributed. (Named in the 2025 examiner report for Paper 1.)

“Moksha and nirvana are two words for the same thing.” — Both are release from the cycle of rebirth, and what is released and into what differs. Moksha in most Hindu traditions is the atman's union with, or nearness to, Brahman. Nibbana is the ceasing of craving — and anatta means there is no permanent self to be united with anything.

Write instead: Moksha (Hinduism) is liberation of the atman from samsara. Nibbana/nirvana (Buddhism) is the extinguishing of craving and the end of rebirth, without a permanent self. Mukti (Sikhism) is liberation through God's grace and merging with God. The three traditions share the vocabulary of release and disagree about the metaphysics. Naming that disagreement is a Level 4 move; blurring it costs accuracy marks.

Grade 9 insight

The Buddha's refusal to answer the metaphysical questions is not silence — the Pali texts record him explaining WHY he refuses, with the image of a man shot by an arrow who will not be treated until he knows who fired it. A Level 4 answer uses that: the refusal is itself a teaching about what religion is for. Buddhism is claiming that a question can be genuine, unanswered and still not worth pursuing, which is a stranger and more radical position than either belief or unbelief.

Carry on through Buddhism

• Previous unit: 1.4 · Free will, determinism and predestination
• Next unit: 1.6 · Belief, uncertainty and unbelief
• Ultimate reality in the other religions: Christianity · Hinduism · Islam · Judaism · Sikhism
• All of Buddhism · Incandio Religious Studies · The 4RS1 specification