샹까라의 불교 비판에서 비판대상인 불교는 필멸론으로서 불교 전체를 지시하기 때문에, 그가 여러 불교 학파들의 주장을 구별하지 않은 채로 비판하는 것은 크게 문제시되지 않는다. 불교 학파들의 다양성에도 불구하고, 샹까라의 입장에서 불교란, 단지 베단따와 대립적인 하나의 이단적 체계에 지나지 않기 때문이다. 그리고 그의 비판은 불교를 왜곡하고 있다는 한계를 가지고 있지만, 분명히 그 한계 이상의 것을 암시하고 있다.샹까라가 불교를 비판하는 목적은 다른 입장을 부정함과 동시에 자기 입장을 확립하는 것이다. 바꾸어 말해서, 불교의 무가치성을 집중적으로 증명하면 할수록 베단따의 우월성은 자동적으로 증명된다. 샹까라가 불교를 비판하는 데 사용한 방법(전략)을 ‘자기 척도의 대입’, ‘단순한 정형화’, ‘상식에의 호소’라고 일컬을 수 있다. 그 가운데 앞의 2가지는, 샹까라가 베단따와 불교의 형이상학·인식론을 고도의 대비 전략을 통해 드러냄으로써 그 양립 불가성을 극대화시켜 보여주고자 하는 방법들이다. 그리고 그는 ‘상식에의 호소’라는 방법을 통해 불교 사상이 인간(인도인)의 보편적 경험과 일치하지 않음을 보여준다. 샹까라는 불교를 마치 모든 체계들 가운데 가장 무시해야만 하는 체계인 양 간주한다. 결국 이러한 사실로부터, 그의 불교 비판은 당대에 쇠퇴하기 시작한 불교의 위상과 부흥하기 시작한 베단따의 위상을 상징적으로 보여준다고 할 수 있다. 그의 불교 비판은 불교의 멸망과 직접적 인과관계를 가지지 않지만, 인도라는 토양에서 불교에 대한 베단따의 사상적 우위를 천명한 중요한 사상사적 사건이다.

So far as Buddhism in Śaṅkara's critique of Buddhism stands for the whole Buddhist system which could be entirely called ‘nihilism’, the fact that Śaṅkara criticizes Buddhist sects without distinguishing their respective doctrines is out of the question. For although there are various Buddhist sects, from the point of view of Śaṅkara, Buddhism is just one heretical School opposing to Vedānta. Besides, it is an undeniable fact that his critique of Buddhism has lots of the limits, and yet it is more than what it superficially purports. The purpose of Śaṅkara's critique of Buddhism consists in two ways; one is the negation of other's views, and the other is the establishment of his own view. To put it in another way, whatever he proves the valuelessness of Buddhism, that proof automatically verifies superiority of Vedānta to Buddhism. The methods that Śaṅkara employes in his critique would be called ‘substitution of his own criterion’, ‘simplified standardization on another's view’, ‘appealing to common sense’. The first two is the method by which he shows the inconsistency of metaphysics as well as epistemology between Vedānta and Buddhism by means of highly comparative strategy. And through the third method he shows that Buddhist thought would never be in agreement with universal human experience. Śaṅkara treats Buddhism as if it is most disregardable system among all Indian philosophical systems. Accordingly it could be said that his critique symbolically presents the phase of Buddhism which is declining and that of Vedānta which is reviving in his age. Although his critique has no direct relation to the downfall of Buddhism, it is a very important ideologic-historic matter that elucidates the predominance of Vedāntic thought over Buddhist thought in Indian soil.

So far as Buddhism in Śaṅkara's critique of Buddhism stands for the whole Buddhist system which could be entirely called ‘nihilism’, the fact that Śaṅkara criticizes Buddhist sects without distinguishing their respective doctrines is out of the question. For although there are various Buddhist sects, from the point of view of Śaṅkara, Buddhism is just one heretical School opposing to Vedānta. Besides, it is an undeniable fact that his critique of Buddhism has lots of the limits, and yet it is more than what it superficially purports. The purpose of Śaṅkara's critique of Buddhism consists in two ways; one is the negation of other's views, and the other is the establishment of his own view. To put it in another way, whatever he proves the valuelessness of Buddhism, that proof automatically verifies superiority of Vedānta to Buddhism. The methods that Śaṅkara employes in his critique would be called ‘substitution of his own criterion’, ‘simplified standardization on another's view’, ‘appealing to common sense’. The first two is the method by which he shows the inconsistency of metaphysics as well as epistemology between Vedānta and Buddhism by means of highly comparative strategy. And through the third method he shows that Buddhist thought would never be in agreement with universal human experience. Śaṅkara treats Buddhism as if it is most disregardable system among all Indian philosophical systems. Accordingly it could be said that his critique symbolically presents the phase of Buddhism which is declining and that of Vedānta which is reviving in his age. Although his critique has no direct relation to the downfall of Buddhism, it is a very important ideologic-historic matter that elucidates the predominance of Vedāntic thought over Buddhist thought in Indian soil.

Sankara, Vednta, Buddhism, Critique, Thought