By Zia H Shah MD

Introduction

In the spirit of interfaith dialogue and mutual seeking of truth, we invite Buddhist readers to explore the Qur’an – Islam’s holy scripture – as a text rich in universal ethical and philosophical themes. Although Islam and Buddhism differ fundamentally in theology (for instance, Islam’s core is belief in one personal God, whereas classical Buddhism does not affirm a creator god ​islambuddhism.com), they nonetheless share many values and concerns. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has noted that Muslims, by worshipping a compassionate and merciful God, are “offering complete submission to the ideal of universal compassion,” paralleling the Buddha’s teaching to live in a compassionate, ethical way ​islambuddhism.com. Building on such common ground, this invitation will examine how the Qur’an (in M.A.S. Abdel Haleem’s English translation) resonates with key Buddhist ethical and philosophical themes – compassion, non-harming, mindfulness, moral discipline, impermanence, detachment from desire, self-cultivation, and the nature of suffering – while also candidly addressing the profound theological differences regarding God, the soul, and liberation. Throughout, the tone remains scholarly and respectful, aiming to foster understanding and reflection rather than debate. We will also incorporate philosophical and scientific reflections (on the self and the cosmos) to enrich this comparative exploration. In the end, the goal is a call to mutual understanding, a shared commitment to virtue, and an openness to the Qur’anic message as a source of insight and moral guidance alongside Buddhist wisdom.

Shared Ethical and Philosophical Foundations

Despite originating in different cultural and doctrinal contexts, Buddhism and Islam converge on many ethical principles and philosophical insights. The Qur’an repeatedly emphasizes virtues and truths that Buddhists will find familiar. Below, we outline some of these common themes, with Qur’anic verses alongside analogous Buddhist ideas:

• Compassion and Altruism (Karunā and Mettā / Raḥma and Ihsān): Compassion for all beings stands at the heart of both traditions. Just as Buddhism upholds karuṇā (compassion) and mettā (loving-kindness) toward all sentient life, the Qur’an enjoins mercy, kindness, and charity. For example, it praises those who feed the needy purely out of love and expecting nothing in return​qurano.com​quranse.com. In Sūrat al-Insān, the righteous “give food to the poor, the orphan, and the captive, though they love it themselves,” selflessly saying, “We feed you for the sake of God alone: We seek neither recompense nor thanks from you”​qurano.com​quranse.com. This spirit of unconditional benevolence – helping others without desire for reward – resonates with the Bodhisattva ideal of Mahayana Buddhism, wherein one practices generosity (dāna) and compassion for the benefit of all sentient beings. The Dalai Lama himself highlights that “compassion lies at the heart of the teachings of both Islam and Buddhism”​islambuddhism.com. Both the Buddhist Bodhisattva and the Qur’anic believer strive to alleviate suffering in others: one out of enlightened compassion, the other seeking God’s pleasure, yet the ethical outcome – a gentler, more caring world – is the same.
• Non-harming and Moral Restraint (Ahimsā / Avoiding Ẓulm): A central tenet of Buddhism is the principle of ahimsā, non-violence or non-harming, exemplified in the First Precept to abstain from taking life. Islam likewise strongly prohibits unjust harm: the Qur’an condemns ẓulm (wrongdoing, oppression) and upholds the sanctity of life – “do not take life, which God has made sacred, except by right” (Qur’an 6:151). A famous Qur’anic passage even equates the killing of one innocent soul to killing all of humanity​twitter.com (a sentiment in line with the broad compassion for all life found in Buddhism), and saving a life to saving all humanity. Both traditions teach peacemaking and kindness: the Buddha encouraged resolving hatred with love, and the Qur’an calls believers to repel evil with better (41:34). While Buddhism frames non-harming as part of right action and right livelihood, the Qur’an frames it as fulfillment of God’s command to establish justice and mercy on earth. In practice, a devout Buddhist and a devout Muslim are equally moved to refrain from cruelty toward humans or animals. Their moral reasoning differs – one rooted in karma and empathy, the other in divine command and accountability – but the resulting ethic of non-harm is a shared treasure.
• Mindfulness and God-Consciousness (Sati / Taqwā): Both traditions stress mental discipline and awareness of one’s thoughts, intentions, and actions. In Buddhism, sati (mindfulness) is crucial to the Noble Eightfold Path – maintaining constant awareness of reality, impermanence, and one’s mental states to cultivate wisdom and compassion. The Qur’anic concept of taqwā can be seen as a parallel to this mindfulness, though the focus is the awareness of God. Taqwā is an alert, reverent consciousness of the Divine presence that guides one’s behavior. A person of taqwā is ever-mindful of moral choices, knowing that God sees all and that each soul will be held accountable. The Qur’an often praises those “who remember God standing, sitting, and lying on their sides” and who reflect on the creation (3:191). This continual remembrance (dhikr) fosters a mindfulness of a higher order – not only awareness of breath or feelings, but awareness of ultimate Reality (God) in every moment. A Buddhist might note that this practice serves a similar purpose as meditation: to free the mind from negligence and egocentric distractions, inclining it toward compassion, patience, and other virtues. Moreover, Qur’anic khushū‘ (inner humility and focus, especially in prayer) is akin to the concentrated mind in Buddhist meditation. Thus, training the mind is a point of convergence: both the monk cultivating jhāna (meditative absorption) under the Bodhi tree and the Muslim in salah (ritual prayer) seek to discipline the mind, transcend worldly attachments, and nurture insight or reverence. In Islam the awareness centers on God, and in Buddhism on phenomena and mind itself – yet both yield a mind that is calmer, more present, and ethically attuned.
• Moral Discernment and Responsibility: Both Buddhism and Islam affirm that human beings have an inherent capacity to discern right from wrong and are responsible for their choices. The Buddha taught the importance of using one’s wise discernment (paññā) to understand the causes of suffering and to choose wholesome actions. The Qur’an similarly teaches that God has endowed each soul (nafs) with a fundamental moral compass. In a striking verse, the Qur’an swears an oath “by the soul and how He formed it and inspired it [to know] its own rebellion and piety!”​wulfrunasufiassociation.com – indicating that each person is imbued with an intuition of good and evil. It then proclaims, “The one who purifies his soul succeeds and the one who corrupts it fails”​wulfrunasufiassociation.com. This passage (Qur’an 91:7–10) suggests a concept akin to a dharma within – an innate moral law – and insists on individual responsibility to cultivate the good and purify oneself of greed, hatred, and delusion (to use Buddhist terms). Both traditions thus understand life as a moral training ground: Buddhism’s emphasis on intentional action (karma) aligns with Islam’s emphasis on niyyah (intention) and sincere submission to ethical precepts. Every action plants a seed: in Buddhist view, that seed yields future suffering or happiness through karma; in Islamic view, that seed will be weighed by God on the Day of Judgment. In both cases, moral causality is upheld, and humans are called to actively shape their destiny through ethical conduct.
• Impermanence and the Transient World (Anicca / Dunyā): Perhaps the most well-known Buddhist teaching is that all conditioned phenomena are anicca (impermanent) – everything that arises will cease. This recognition underlies the Buddhist path to non-attachment. Interestingly, the Qur’an likewise employs vivid imagery to drive home the fleeting nature of worldly life and its pleasures. For example, Qur’an 57:20 admonishes: “Know that the life of this world is only play and amusement, show, and mutual boasting among you, and rivalry in wealth and children. It is like vegetation after rain: its growth delights the tillers; then it withers, turns yellow, and becomes [dry] stubble.” The verse concludes, “the life of this world is only a deceiving enjoyment”​fawazahmed0.github.io. This poetic metaphor of fresh plants that bloom after rain only to quickly wither mirrors the Buddhist simile of human life as dew drops or a flash of lightning – beautiful but momentary. Likewise, the Qur’an, in Sūrat al-Rūm, urges humans to observe the signs of impermanence in nature: “Among His signs, too, are that He shows you the lightning that terrifies and inspires hope; that He sends water down from the sky to restore the earth to life after death. There truly are signs in this for those who use their reason”​islamawakened.org. The cycle of seasons – lifeless earth revived by rain, then eventually returning to dust – is offered as evidence that worldly conditions are transient and ever-changing. A Buddhist reader can hear echoes of anicca in these Qur’anic descriptions. Both traditions counsel that understanding the transient, unreliable nature of worldly status and possessions is essential to spiritual maturity. Where Buddhism uses this insight to foster non-attachment and ultimately escape saṁsāra, the Qur’an uses it to detach believers from dunyā (worldly illusion) and direct their hope toward akhira (the hereafter), which it presents as the true, lasting reality. Detachment in Islam thus has a different final object (attachment to God and eternity, rather than Nirvana), yet it similarly asks the practitioner to see through the glamour of temporal things. A Buddhist and a Muslim can stand together in a garden in autumn, watching leaves fall, and both be reminded that “all conditioned things are impermanent.” The shared wisdom here is an exhortation to seek something higher than the ephemeral material world – be it Nirvana or nearness to God.
• Desire and Attachment: Both Islam and Buddhism identify unbridled desire as a source of suffering and spiritual failure. The Second Noble Truth in Buddhism pinpoints taṇhā (craving or selfish desire) as the cause of dukkha (suffering). Liberation in Buddhism requires extinguishing these desires (Nirvana literally meaning “blowing out” the flame of craving). The Qur’an, for its part, repeatedly warns against following hawā (base desires or caprices) at the expense of righteousness. In fact, it pointedly asks: “Think of the man who has taken his own passion as a god: are you to be his guardian?”​wulfrunasufiassociation.com, suggesting that those who let their desires rule them fall into idolatry of the self. Restraining egoistic desires is a form of spiritual jihād (struggle) in Islam. The Qur’an promises Paradise to “anyone who feared the meeting with his Lord and restrained himself from base desires”​wulfrunasufiassociation.com. This ethos parallels the Buddhist monastic vows which include celibacy and renunciation of luxury – all aiming to curb sensual craving and ego. While Buddhism frames the fight against desire as part of freeing oneself from saṁsāra, Islam frames it as obedience to God’s will and a test of one’s reverence. In both cases, the human is called to transcend the pull of greed, lust, and selfishness. A disciplined Buddhist meditator and a practicing Muslim fasting during Ramadan share an experience: the intentional denial of selfish desires in order to elevate the soul. Both would agree that succumbing to compulsive desires leads to spiritual downfall, whereas mastering desire is profoundly liberating. Indeed, the purified state of nirvana and the Qur’anic ideal of the tranquil soul (nafs al-muṭmaʾinna) both represent the peace that comes when desire and aversion have been overcome. This is a powerful commonality in practical teaching: the path of moderation, contentment, and self-control is central in both Dharma and Dīn.
• Cultivation of the Self (Personal Development): Buddhism offers a path of personal cultivation through ethics (sīla), meditation (samādhi), and wisdom (paññā), transforming the practitioner’s mind and character from ignorance to enlightenment. Islam likewise offers a path of tazkiyat al-nafs (purification of the soul) through faith, worship, and moral excellence. The Qur’an speaks of the successful ones as those who “purify” their souls​wulfrunasufiassociation.com – a notion not unlike purifying the mind of defilements. Both traditions emphasize practice: it is not mere belief or philosophy, but the living out of virtues that elevates a person. In Qur’an 2:177, often called the “Verse of Righteousness,” true virtue is described in a comprehensive way that a Buddhist could appreciate: it is not formalistic ritual or “turning your faces toward East or West,” but rather sincere faith combined with good works – giving charity to kin, orphans, the needy; freeing those in bondage; keeping one’s pledges; being steadfast in poverty and hardship​archive.nyu.edu​archive.nyu.edu. These are “the ones who have proved themselves true,” says the Qur’an​archive.nyu.edu. One hears in this an echo of the Bodhisattva’s perfections (pāramitās): generosity, truthfulness, patience, etc. Both systems encourage the individual to actively cultivate compassion, honesty, forbearance, and other virtues as the ingredients of salvation or enlightenment. Even the methods can be comparable: for example, Islam advocates regular fasting, which trains patience and restraint much as a Buddhist meditation retreat does. The end goal (the kind of person that emerges) – compassionate, selfless, trustworthy, and calm – is notably similar in both cases. In Islamic spirituality, especially Sufism, there is an idea of polishing the heart’s mirror to reflect the divine light; in Buddhism, polishing the mind to reflect reality without distortion. Both processes require introspection, ethical living, and often guidance from teachers or spiritual community. Thus, a bridge of personal transformation connects the two traditions: a Buddhist and a Muslim, each serious about inner growth, may find that they have more in common with each other than with the more materialistic and egocentric currents of the modern world around them.
• The Reality of Suffering and Its Cause: Buddhism’s starting point is the reality of dukkha – the pervasive unsatisfactoriness or suffering in life – and an analysis of its causes (craving and ignorance). While Islam does not frame its worldview in exactly the same terms, it too acknowledges the reality of suffering and trial as part of the human condition (Qur’an 90:4 states that man is created “in toil and hardship”). Both traditions teach that moral and spiritual factors determine our experience of suffering. In Buddhism, unwholesome actions rooted in greed, hatred, and delusion lead to suffering (by the law of karma), and the cessation of suffering comes from removing those causes. In Islam, suffering in this life can be a test from God or a consequence of sin; ultimately, on the Day of Judgment, each soul’s suffering or bliss will correspond to its deeds and God’s justice or mercy. The Qur’an often explains that trials befall humans so that they may learn humility, patience, and gratitude – qualities which closely parallel the Buddhist virtues of patient endurance (khanti) and equanimity (upekkhā). Both Buddhism and Islam see attachment to the ephemeral world as a source of suffering: Buddhism identifies attachment as a cause of rebirth and ongoing dissatisfaction, while Islam warns that loving worldly life over the remembrance of God leads to distress and loss (Qur’an 20:124). The approaches differ: Buddhism seeks to fundamentally end the cycle of suffering by attaining Nirvana (release from the cycle of rebirth and suffering), whereas Islam seeks to endure and overcome suffering through faith in God, doing good, and hoping for eternal reward in the hereafter. Yet even here, one finds a meeting point in the emphasis on right attitude toward suffering. A practicing Buddhist learns to face suffering with mindful awareness and non-attachment, seeing it as an opportunity for insight. A devout Muslim learns to face suffering with ṣabr (patient perseverance) and tawakkul (trust in God), seeing it as an opportunity for spiritual growth and purification of sins. In both cases, suffering is not meaningless; it is a teacher – either through the impersonal law of karma or through the pedagogy of a compassionate God – pushing the soul toward greater wisdom and compassion. The Qur’an even says “it may be that you dislike something while it is good for you” (2:216), implying that adversity can be a hidden blessing, a concept not far from the Buddhist idea that facing suffering is necessary to overcome it. Both traditions ultimately aim to liberate the human being from the bondage of suffering – Buddhism by eradicating its root causes within, and Islam by connecting the human heart to God’s guidance and promise of justice.

These shared ethical foundations provide a rich basis for dialogue and mutual appreciation. A Buddhist reader can approach the Qur’an and often recognize the moral themes as kin to their own tradition’s teachings. The language and metaphysical framing differ – the Qur’an couches ethics in obedience to a personal God’s will, whereas Buddhism uses the language of Dharma and natural law – but the practical outcomes (compassionate action, restraint from harm, inner cultivation) align closely. This suggests that, as the Dalai Lama observed, our traditions can “come together on shared values while disagreeing on key matters of theology”​islambuddhism.com. In the spirit of ehipassiko (“come and see” in Pali), we encourage Buddhist readers to “come and see” the Qur’an as a text that affirms many of the values they hold dear – a reminder that ethical truth can be universal.

Key Theological Differences and Points of Dialogue

Honoring the commonalities should not come at the cost of obscuring real differences. Buddhism and Islam do diverge on profound questions about ultimate reality, the soul, and liberation. A respectful dialogue acknowledges these distinctions clearly, and then seeks understanding across them. Here we outline a few key differences, together with ways to think about them constructively:

• Ultimate Reality – God’s Existence and Nature: The most obvious difference is the concept of God (tawḥīd in Islam). Islam is unabashedly theistic: it centers on one transcendent yet personal God – Allah – who is the Creator and Lord of all. The Qur’an’s first pillar is that “there is no god but God.” By contrast, Buddhism is generally nontheistic: it does not postulate a creator deity, and classical Buddhist teachings treat questions about a supreme God as either irrelevant to liberation or as speculative. As one summary puts it, “theological core of Islam is belief in one God, while Buddhists don’t believe in God at all”​islambuddhism.com. This is a stark divergence. A Buddhist might view the universe as governed by impersonal law (Dharma), whereas a Muslim sees a personal divine will at work. However, even here there are nuances that invite dialogue. Some Mahayana Buddhist traditions speak of the Dharmakāya or Buddha-nature as an ultimate reality pervading all things – not a creator God, but an ultimate truth or ground of being. Similarly, Islam insists God is utterly One and unique (ahad), beyond full human comprehension; in advanced Islamic theology and mysticism, thinkers have described God in terms that emphasize transcendence (even emptiness of any limiting description) and an ultimate reality underlying phenomena. While Buddhism does not personify that ultimate reality, one could explore whether the experience of communion with the compassionate One (as Muslims feel in prayer) has any analogy to the experience of enlightenment or unity in certain Buddhist meditative states. This is admittedly a challenging bridge to build, but it is an area where philosophical reflection can be fruitful. The dialogue might revolve around questions like: Is the compassionate law of the universe that Buddhism cherishes (expressed as karma and Dharma) analogous in some way to the will of a compassionate God? Can Buddhists appreciate the Muslim devotion to a personal Source of love and moral order, even if Buddhism would describe it in non-theistic terms? On the flip side, can Muslims appreciate the Buddhist caution against clinging even to concepts of God, understanding it as a way to prevent a shallow or anthropomorphic view of the Divine? These questions show that acknowledging the difference – God vs. no-god – can lead to a meaningful exchange about how humans relate to the Ultimate. At the very least, recognizing this difference sets the stage for why the Qur’an offers a theistic vision of ultimate reality that is new to Buddhist ears. The invitation is: suspend disbelief for a moment and consider the possibility that behind the moral truths you cherish, there is a conscious, loving Creator reaching out to be known.
• The Self and the Soul (Ātman/Anattā vs. Nafs): Another deep difference lies in how persons are conceived. Buddhism famously teaches anattā (Pāli; anātman in Sanskrit) – the doctrine of no permanent self. According to Buddhism, what we call a “person” is just a changing aggregation of physical and mental components (the five skandhas); there is no eternal soul or fixed essence underneath. This is a cornerstone of Buddhist insight, intended to undercut attachment to an “I” or “mine.” Islam, on the other hand, affirms the existence of an enduring personal soul (nafs or rūḥ) created by God. Each human soul in Islam is individual, precious, and responsible before God, destined for an eternal life in the hereafter. The Qur’an describes God “breathing of His spirit” into man (Qur’an 15:29), indicating a special soul substance. Thus, the continuity of an individual self is fundamental in Islam (through this life, after death, into resurrection), whereas Buddhism denies any unchanging individual essence that transmigrates (what continues in rebirth is a causal continuity, not a soul). In Buddhist terms, Islam might be seen as espousing something akin to the Hindu ātman theory (though Islam does not call it ātman, and it posits a created soul, not a divine Self). Buddhist philosophers historically would label Islam’s view as a form of śāśvata-dṛṣṭi (eternalism) – the belief in an eternal soul – which Buddhism rejects​reddit.com​buddhanet.net. Muslims, in turn, consider the soul the very locus of moral agency and the subject of salvation or damnation. How can we bridge this gap in understanding? One approach is to appreciate what each view is concerned about. The Buddhist anattā doctrine is ultimately a strategy to eliminate egoism; it does not mean Buddhists deny the experiential reality of a person who suffers or practices, rather it denies a fixed, independent ego. Interestingly, the Qur’an also has a nuanced view of the self: while affirming a soul, it does not encourage egoism – in fact, it urges the soul to “lower its ego” and surrender to God. In Sufi traditions, practitioners even speak of fanā’ (annihilation of the ego) in the love of God, which in practice sounds not unlike a dissolution of the selfish self. Moreover, Buddhism’s no-soul teaching does accept a stream of consciousness that carries karmic tendencies across lifetimes, so it’s not utter nihilism about personhood. Meanwhile, a Muslim might point out that the Qur’anic soul is not a static entity – it grows, can be purified or corrupted, and is defined ultimately by its relationship with God. Both traditions, then, are deeply interested in the purification of this dynamic stream of being – they diverge on its metaphysical status, but converge on the need to overcome the illusion of a separate, selfish self. A Buddhist might reflect: even if one does not literally believe in a “soul,” the Qur’anic language of saving one’s soul could be interpreted in Buddhist-friendly terms as saving one’s mind-stream from ignorance and suffering. Conversely, a Muslim might reflect: the Buddhist denial of a permanent ego could be understood as an extreme way of expressing humility and dependence on something greater than the self (which, in Islam, would be dependence on God). Certainly, from an academic standpoint, Buddhism denies the existence of any unchanging, eternal soul created by a God​buddhanet.net, whereas Islam decisively asserts it. This is a non-negotiable doctrinal difference. But in dialogue, each side can still discuss the nature of the self and what constitutes liberation of the self in rich terms. The Qur’an’s view that humans have a fitra (innate nature) that is good and oriented toward God might be compared to the Mahayana Buddhist idea that all beings have Buddha-nature (an innate potential for awakening). Both suggest something fundamentally good at our core – for Islam it is placed by God, for Buddhism it is our true nature once ignorance is removed. Exploring these ideas can lead to a deeper appreciation of how identity and liberation are understood across the two traditions, even if agreement on the “soul” concept itself isn’t reached.
• The Goal: Nirvana vs. Paradise (Nibbāna vs. Jannah): With differing views of self and ultimate reality, it is natural that the envisioned spiritual goal of each path differs. In Buddhism, the highest goal is Nirvana – the extinguishing of suffering and rebirth. Nirvana is not a “place” like a heaven; it is a liberated state beyond all birth and death, often described in apophatic terms (what it is not) or as ultimate peace. In Islam, the ultimate reward for the righteous is Paradise (Jannah) – an eternal abode in the presence of God, full of joy, knowledge, and closeness to the Divine. Islam also posits an eternal Hell for those who utterly reject goodness, whereas Buddhism has no eternal damnation (hells in Buddhism are intense but impermanent states). One might summarize: “Reincarnation, hells, or ultimate Nirvana” in Buddhism versus “eternal life in heaven (paradise) or hell” in Islam​diffen.com. The contrast between Nirvana and heaven is quite marked: Nirvana is a state of cessation (cessation of craving, of ignorance, and consequently of the self as we know it), whereas Islamic paradise is a state of fulfillment – the fulfillment of the soul’s deepest, purest desires in the proximity of God. A Buddhist might view the Islamic heaven as still within saṁsāra (since individuals enjoy pleasures and personal continuity), while a Muslim might view Nirvana as a kind of oblivion (which to them might seem less appealing than a loving communion with God). However, this difference again opens areas for reflection. For example, advanced Buddhist thinkers sometimes describe Nirvana in positive terms as the Absolute or Amata (the Deathless), even as a kind of ultimate reality or truth. Could this be analogous in some way to the Muslim understanding of eternal life in God’s presence (since God is eternal and the source of all peace)? Both Nirvana and Jannah are described as supreme bliss – for the Buddhist, bliss of complete liberation; for the Muslim, bliss of nearness to the Most Merciful. Each tradition warns that ordinary worldly happiness is false or impermanent, and points followers to a transcendent happiness. It is also notable that both traditions hold that achieving the ultimate goal ends the cycle of suffering: in Buddhism, the arahant who attains Nirvana is not reborn into suffering; in Islam, the soul that reaches Paradise is no longer tried by pain or moral struggle, it has “made it home” to peace. There is even a conceptual parallel in that both Nirvana and Islamic salvation ultimately involve a deliverance from the cycle of human frailty – one via dissolving the self, the other via perfecting the self through God’s grace. For the purposes of dialogue, it might be fruitful to discuss what does liberation mean to you? For a Buddhist, liberation is primarily ethical and psychological – freedom from greed, aversion, delusion. For a Muslim, liberation is also moral and spiritual – freedom from sin and the weight of divine judgment – but it is consummated in a relational experience (being in the presence of the Creator). The Qur’an promises the saved will experience God’s good pleasure and even the beatific vision of God (as per some interpretations of 75:22-23). This is a joy beyond sensory pleasure – akin perhaps to the bliss of Nirvana which is beyond ordinary sense pleasure. In short, the soteriological narratives differ: Buddhist enlightenment vs. Islamic salvation. Recognizing this, a Buddhist reader is invited to contemplate the Qur’an’s offer of eternal conscious joy with an open mind (not as a mere “heaven of sense pleasures,” which would indeed be inferior to Nirvana, but as a profound union with the Divine Goodness, which Islam holds to be the greatest possible fulfillment of the soul). Likewise, Muslims can learn from Buddhism’s focus on here-and-now liberation from mental fetters, appreciating the meticulous psychological insight Buddhism brings to the process of overcoming suffering.
• Karma and Divine Justice – The Basis of Moral Order: Both traditions assert that ethical behavior matters greatly, but the explanations for why good is rewarded and evil is punished differ. Buddhism employs the impersonal law of karma: intentional actions inevitably bring corresponding results (if not in this life, then in future lives). There is no judge or divine dispenser in pure Buddhist doctrine; rather, the universe itself has a kind of moral equilibrium – do good and good comes back to you, do evil and suffering comes back to you, by a natural law. Islam also believes in moral causality, but firmly situates it in the context of a personal God who is Al-‘Adl (The Just). In Islam, no deed is unseen by God, and ultimately “God is swift in account” (Qur’an 3:19) – meaning that on Judgment Day, God will call every soul to account and give reward or punishment with perfect justice (tempered by His mercy). So where a Buddhist speaks of karma as the impersonal guarantor of moral order, a Muslim speaks of Allah’s justice as the personal guarantor. Is there a way to relate these concepts? Historically, some Buddhist schools personified karma in the figure of King Yama who judges the dead, which is more metaphor than theology. Meanwhile, some Muslim thinkers (like in Islamic philosophy) have considered whether the cause-and-effect we see is simply the habitus God has instilled in creation (so that what we call natural laws are God’s consistent commands in each moment). In a sense, both traditions confront the question: Why do ethical actions lead to fitting outcomes? Buddhism answers with a natural law working invisibly but infallibly (one could almost call it a moral Dharma principle). Islam answers with a Divine lawgiver who never breaks His promise to reward the righteous and punish the wicked (either in this life or the next). Both insist that ultimately no good action is in vain and no evil will escape consequence. This provides a powerful ground for shared ethical confidence: a Buddhist can work for good knowing the law of karma supports that effort; a Muslim can strive for good knowing God’s pleasure awaits. In dialogue, one might even ask: are these two ways of talking about the same reality? When a Muslim says “God is Most Just,” and a Buddhist says “karma is unfailing,” perhaps there is an overlap in the intuition that the universe is morally structured. A Buddhist might not phrase it as a Will, but experiences it as law; a Muslim experiences it as the will of a Lawgiver, but it manifests as law. This difference also means that Buddhism places more emphasis on personal responsibility (since no God will save you – you must save yourself by purifying your mind through your own effort), whereas Islam, while emphasizing personal responsibility, also emphasizes reliance on God’s grace (one’s own efforts are never enough without God’s guidance and forgiveness). In practice, though, both Buddhists and Muslims develop a profound sense of accountability for their actions. The Buddhist reflection “I am the owner of my karma” serves a similar role as the Qur’anic reminder “Each soul is pledged to what it has earned” (74:38). Understanding this difference in framework but similarity in ethical outcome can encourage each side to appreciate how the other motivates moral behavior. It can also lead to conversations about topics like justice for the oppressed: a Buddhist might stress compassionate action now (since karma will work over long eons unseen), whereas a Muslim might stress that even if justice is not achieved now, God will rectify all wrongs in the hereafter. Both perspectives together can inspire work for justice here and now (through compassion) while maintaining hope ultimately (through karma or God’s judgment).

In highlighting these differences, we do not aim to resolve them or gloss them over. Instead, we acknowledge them as areas where Buddhism and Islam offer distinct perspectives on reality. Such frank acknowledgment is a prerequisite for genuine dialogue. It allows Buddhist readers to clearly see where the Qur’an will diverge from their accustomed worldview: notably in its theism, its assertion of a permanent soul, and its promise of a heavenly afterlife. These are profound divergences that no honest comparative study can ignore. Yet, rather than being stumbling blocks, they can be stepping stones to deeper inquiry. We invite Buddhist thinkers to reflect on these differences: How does the idea of a single compassionate Creator challenge or enrich one’s understanding of compassion? What does the notion of an eternal soul say about personal continuity and moral responsibility across time? Could the concept of a final liberative paradise share any emotional or spiritual resonance with the concept of Nirvana, despite doctrinal dissimilarity? By grappling with such questions, one does not betray one’s own tradition; rather, one follows the Buddha’s encouragement to examine things as they are, and one follows the Qur’anic call to reason and reflect. The Qur’an often addresses its readers with invitations to think: “Will you not use your reason?” (2:44) and presents itself as “guidance for those who reflect” (45:20). Engaging differences in belief is part of that reflective process.

Reflections on the Self and the Cosmos – Philosophy and Science

Beyond formal doctrine, both Buddhism and Islam have philosophical traditions that delve into the nature of the self and the cosmos. Engaging these can add another layer to our dialogue. Buddhism’s philosophical inquiries (in Abhidharma, Madhyamaka, etc.) and Islam’s philosophical theology (kalām, falsafa) both wrestle with questions of what truly exists, how causation works, and the nature of consciousness. Here, we highlight a couple of points of intersection where modern philosophical or scientific perspectives might also inform the discussion:

• The Nature of Self: Buddhist analysis, as noted, breaks the self down and finds no independent essence. Intriguingly, modern neuroscience and psychology have come to similar conclusions: there is no single area in the brain one can point to as the “self,” and our sense of identity is more of a constructed narrative that is constantly changing. Some scientists and philosophers, like Bertrand Russell, have even noted that the traditional notion of an immortal soul has “no support from science” and that mind can be seen as a series of occurrences rather than a single continuing thing​buddhanet.net. This echoes the Buddhist no-self view closely. Islam, of course, maintains belief in the soul on theological grounds. Yet Islamic thought is not naive about the complexity of the self: the Qur’an speaks of the nafs in dynamic terms – the commanding self (nafs al-ammāra), the self-reproaching self (nafs al-lawwāma), and the peaceful, fulfilled self (nafs al-muṭmaʾinna). These might be seen as analogous to psychological stages or aspects of the person. A bridge for understanding could be to see that Islam’s concern is not to reify the ego, but to ensure the survival of our moral consciousness under God’s care, whereas Buddhism’s concern is to eliminate clinging to a false notion of self that causes suffering. The two concerns are not polar opposites – they are, perhaps, different answers to the question of how to address the human condition of ego-attachment. A Buddhist may still ask, from a philosophical angle, “What is it that gets resurrected or goes to paradise if there is no fixed self?” and a Muslim can respond that it is the person – an integrated being known and remembered by God – even if we cannot pinpoint a soul particle. Meanwhile, a Muslim might ask a Buddhist, “If there is no self, who attains Nirvana or experiences the fruits of karma?”, to which a Buddhist would answer that such questions use language imperfectly – liberation is the cessation of the illusion of “I,” a freedom rather than a possession of an eternal identity. Both sides might find that language strains when talking about ultimate reality, and that some truths may lie beyond neat conceptualization – an insight both can humbly accept. They might also find common ground in ethics of self-cultivation, as discussed, since regardless of what the self ultimately is, both agree it can be trained, refined, and even transcended in some sense.
• Interdependence and Natural Law in the Cosmos: Buddhism teaches pratītya-samutpāda (dependent origination) – everything arises in interdependence with everything else; nothing exists in isolation. This holistic vision finds a poetic parallel in the Qur’anic concept of signs (āyāt) in creation. The Qur’an constantly points to the interconnected phenomena of nature as signs of divine wisdom: night and day, sun and moon, the water cycle, the growth of plants and provision of food, the diversity of life and languages, etc. For instance, “Another of His signs is the creation of the heavens and earth, and the diversity of your languages and colours”​islamawakened.org, and “Among His signs is that the heavens and the earth stand firm by His command”​islamawakened.org. Such verses convey a sense that the entire cosmos is a unified system sustained by one will. A Buddhist might substitute “by His command” with “by dependent co-arising,” and appreciate the description of a world that is ordered yet constantly changing. Modern science, with its discoveries of ecological interdependence and cosmic fine-tuning, provides a neutral ground to marvel at this order. Both Buddhists and Muslims (as well as scientists of any faith) can stand in awe at, say, the way a rainforest’s health depends on myriad interrelations, or how delicate physical constants allow life to exist in the universe. Buddhism might say this is the wondrous play of conditions; Islam would say it’s the deliberate artistry of God. Either way, there is a shared sense of gratitude and reverence toward nature’s harmony. The Qur’an even says, “He has taught you that which you did not know. His bounty to you is ever great” (4:113), and Buddhism teaches gratitude for the support we constantly receive from the environment and other beings. Moreover, both traditions encourage contemplation of nature as a spiritual practice – Buddhists might do walking meditation in the forest to mindfully observe impermanence and interdependence; Muslims might contemplate the stars and mountains to remember the power and mercy of their Lord. In recent times, this shared reverence can translate into a common ethical cause: caring for the environment. If the natural world is seen as an intricate web of life (Buddhism) or a tapestry of divine signs (Islam), then causing its destruction through greed is a moral transgression in both views. In this way, the philosophical appreciation of an ordered, interdependent cosmos supports a shared ethical imperative to protect life and live simply.
• The Order of Natural Law and Rational Inquiry: Buddhism highly values paññā (wisdom) which often involves seeing the natural law of cause and effect at work. Early Buddhist texts sometimes personify the principle of reality as Dhamma – in one sense, the truth or law that the Buddha realized. Islam values ‘aql (intellect/reason) and views the laws of nature (sunan Allah – the ways of God) as accessible to human understanding. The Islamic golden age produced many scientists and philosophers who believed studying the natural world was a way to appreciate God’s wisdom. This ethos of rational inquiry and respect for natural law can resonate with Buddhist empiricism (the Buddha’s encouragement to test things for oneself and see the lawfulness of karma and meditation in one’s experience). Both traditions, in their own way, assert that truth and faith are not blind but are confirmed by understanding the way things work – be it through meditation or scientific observation. A modern Buddhist and a modern Muslim can thus find camaraderie in fields like comparative ethics, psychology of meditation/prayer, or even physics and cosmology, using those as conversation points. For example, quantum physics’ revelation that observers affect outcomes, or that particles are interrelated in non-local ways, can prompt reflection in both a Buddhist and a Muslim about how mysterious and unified reality is beyond surface appearances. Rather than seeing science as a challenge to faith, they can see it as additional insight into the “how” of the laws their religions already acknowledge (whether karmic or divine). This integration of science with spiritual worldview is something both traditions are actively doing in the modern world – Buddhist teachers often dialogue with neuroscientists; Muslim scholars engage with cosmologists and ethicists. The Qur’an’s encouragement to “travel in the earth and observe how He began creation” (29:20) could be interpreted in modern terms as an invitation to scientific discovery, much as Buddhism’s encouragement to investigate phenomena underlies its compatibility with science. In sum, the search for knowledge – outer and inner – is a shared journey. Both Buddhists and Muslims see knowledge (avidyā vs. ‘ilm) as key to liberation/salvation, and ignorance as an obstacle. Thus, in the domain of philosophy and science, the two traditions again find common cause: a conviction that reality is coherent and morally significant, and that the human mind, when properly guided, can discern truth and attain enlightenment or closeness to the Truth (in Islam one of God’s names is Al-Ḥaqq, The Truth).

These philosophical and scientific reflections reinforce our earlier observations. They show that Buddhism and Islam are not stuck in archaic opposition, but are living traditions capable of engaging contemporary thought and each other. A Buddhist reader, grounded in the rational yet reverent ethos of Buddhism, may find it congenial that the Qur’an also invites reasoning and observing the way things are. Conversely, a Muslim reader of Buddhist texts often finds a deep ethical and contemplative wisdom that Islam appreciates. Both traditions ultimately encourage humans to look beyond surface reality – either to find śūnyatā (emptiness of inherent existence) or to find āyāt Allāh (signs of God) – and to live in accordance with the profound truth thereby discovered.

Conclusion: Toward Mutual Understanding and Shared Commitment

In closing, we extend an invitation to our Buddhist friends: come with your compassion, your insight, and your questions, and explore the Qur’an as a mirror that may reflect your own values in new light and as a lamp that may illuminate new paths of thought. This invitation is made in a spirit of respectful curiosity and bridge-building. We have seen that at the ethical level, the Qur’an affirms many truths a Buddhist holds dear – compassion for all beings, the importance of intentions and actions, humility and non-attachment, awareness of the transient nature of life, and the pursuit of inner purity. These form a kind of universal Dharma written in a Semitic, monotheistic idiom. At the same time, the Qur’an presents a grand theistic vision – of a personal Creator, of the soul’s eternal journey, of a final liberation not into impersonal Nirvana but into loving communion with the Divine. We acknowledge that this vision differs from the Buddhist non-theistic worldview. But rather than see that as an impasse, we see it as an opportunity for enriching dialogue. By considering a theistic perspective, Buddhists might find fresh ways to articulate compassion and moral order (as grounded in a cosmic Personhood of compassion), even if only as a thought experiment; and Muslims, by understanding Buddhist insights, might deepen their grasp of concepts like non-attachment and mindfulness in their own faith (as qualities praised in the Qur’an as well).

Ultimately, mutual understanding is the goal – not conversion or syncretism, but understanding. With understanding comes respect, and with respect, peace. In a world where Buddhists and Muslims often live side by side, such as in parts of Asia, it is vital that we highlight our shared human values. Imagine communities where a Buddhist monk and a Muslim imam collaborate to feed the hungry or protect the environment – their theological differences not erased, but united by a shared ethical commitment to alleviate suffering here and now. The Qur’an states: “Help one another in goodness and piety” (5:2). Buddhism teaches the bodhisattva’s vow to save all sentient beings. These are complementary calls. We can work together for the betterment of our world, learning from each other as we do. A Buddhist can appreciate the devotion and love of God that motivates many Muslims to astounding acts of charity and forgiveness; a Muslim can appreciate the calm compassion and non-judgmental openness that Buddhism cultivates towards all creatures. Both can agree that ignorance, hatred, and greed are our common enemies – whether we interpret them as the Three Poisons or as temptations of Satan – and that wisdom, love, and generosity are our common allies.

We conclude with a warm invitation to explore the Qur’an not as a stranger’s scripture, but as a conversation partner. Approach its verses as you might a sutra: with a clear mind and an open heart, testing them in your own experience. You may find verses that startle you with their beauty and moral clarity, and others that puzzle or even disagree with your views – both are opportunities for reflection. Consider reading Qur’an 91:7–10 on the inner knowledge of right and wrong​wulfrunasufiassociation.com, or Qur’an 2:177 on what constitutes true righteousness​archive.nyu.edu​archive.nyu.edu, or Qur’an 76:8–9 on selfless compassion​qurano.com​quranse.com, and see how these speak to you as a Buddhist. You might meditate on the impermanence described in Qur’an 57:20​fawazahmed0.github.io and compare it with the imagery of the Pali Canon. Such exercises do not dilute your practice; they can deepen your appreciation for the universal truths that undergird all genuine paths to goodness. In return, Muslims who engage with Buddhist teachings (like the Four Noble Truths or the Metta Sutta) can likewise find resonances that enrich their understanding of the Qur’an’s message.

In a famous Buddhist text, the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra, the enlightened layman Vimalakīrti emphasizes upāya, skillful means, in teaching the Dharma – adapting the message to the audience for the sake of compassion. One might view the Qur’an, from a Buddhist lens, as a kind of upāya that arose in a particular context to lead people towards ethical and spiritual truth appropriate to them, using the form of monotheism. Whether one believes in its divine origin or not, one can respect it as a profound wellspring of wisdom that has inspired countless people towards virtue.

Let this invitation, then, be a step towards kalyāṇa-mittatā – spiritual friendship – between Buddhists and Muslims. By engaging with each other’s scriptures and philosophies, we do not threaten our identities; we enrich them. In the Qur’an, God tells humanity: “O people, We created you from a single pair… and made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another” (49:13). Knowing one another is the antidote to fear and ignorance. Likewise, the Buddha in the Sigālaka Sutta teaches the value of sincere friendship across differences.

In that spirit, we end with a call to mutual understanding and shared commitment: let us join hands in those universal values we cherish – compassion, honesty, non-harming, mindfulness, and humility – and engage in frank but friendly dialogue about our differences. The Qur’anic message, as we have seen, offers not only guidance for Muslims but a worldview that can speak to all who ponder ethical living and the meaning of existence. As Buddhist readers, you are invited to explore it for spiritual insight and moral guidance on your own terms. If nothing else, it may reaffirm the truths you already know and give you new metaphors and stories to contemplate. At best, it might open a door to a greater understanding of the religious impulse in humanity, including perhaps dimensions of reality that Buddhist doctrine traditionally hasn’t emphasized.

We hope this academic exploration encourages you to pick up the Qur’an with interest and an open mind, and equally hope it encourages Muslims to learn from Buddhist wisdom. In doing so, may we all move closer to the ultimate truths and ethical ideals that liberate the heart from hatred and delusion. As the Qur’an says, “To each community We have sent down a law and a path; if God had willed, He could have made you one community, but He has not done so that He may test you in what He has given you. So compete with one another in good works” (5:48). Let us, Buddhists and Muslims together, compete only in good works, co-operate in goodness, and learn from each other’s treasures. In this way, we honor both the Buddha’s Dharma and Allah’s Qur’an, and we contribute to a more compassionate and wise world for all beings.

Sabbe sattā sukhi hontu – May all beings be happy. As-salāmu ʿalaykum – Peace be upon you.