A Comparative Study of the Evolution of Sects in Buddhism and Brahmanism-Hinduism
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research entitled aimed to: 1) study the historical development of sects in Buddhism, 2) examine the evolution of sects in Brahmanism-Hinduism, and 3) compare the sectarian developments in both religions. This study employed documentary research methodology by analyzing data collected from the Buddhist Tripitaka, Brahmanical-Hindu scriptures, related academic documents, and previous research studies through descriptive analysis. The findings revealed that 1) the emergence of sects in Buddhism resulted from social and historical transformations, doctrinal disagreements concerning the Dhamma and Vinaya, as well as cultural and political influences. These factors contributed to the formation of major sects such as Theravada, Mahāsāṃghika, and later Mahāyāna traditions. Despite doctrinal and practical differences, these sects continue to share fundamental Buddhist teachings, particularly the Four Noble Truths and Dependent Origination. 2) In contrast, Brahmanism-Hinduism evolved from the beliefs of the Aryan people into the Brahmanical and Hindu religious systems without a single central founder. Its openness to diverse scriptures and beliefs led to the emergence of major sects, including Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, Śāktism and Smārtism, reflecting a distinct characteristic of religious pluralism. 3) The comparative analysis demonstrated that both religions developed sects due to differences in beliefs, interpretations of teachings, and socio-cultural contexts. However, Buddhism developed sectarian divisions in a more systematic manner under the monastic institution, whereas Brahmanism-Hinduism exhibited greater flexibility and inclusiveness toward doctrinal diversity. The evolution of sects in both religions reflects dynamic interactions among social, cultural, and religious factors, which have contributed significantly to religious adaptation and continuity across historical periods.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- The published article is copyrighted by the MCU Journal of Buddhist Studies Review.
- Any text that appears in an article that has been published in a journal. It is the responsibility of the article author. And those comments are not considered the views and responsibilities of the editorial team of the MCU Buddhist Review Journal.
References
ธนิต อยู่โพธิ์. (2511). อุดมคติอันแตกต่างกันระหว่างพระพุทธศาสนาฝ่ายหินยานกับฝ่ายมหายาน. กรุงเทพฯ: ห้างหุ้นส่วนจำกัด 34.
ประยงค์ แสนบุราณ. (2548). พระพุทธศาสนามหายาน. กรุงเทพฯ: โอเดียนสโตร์.
พระพรหมคุณาภรณ์ (ป.อ.ปยุตฺโต). (2553). กาลานุกรมพระพุทธศาสนาในอารยธรรมโลก. กรุงเทพฯ: สหธรรมิก.
พระพรหมคุณาภรณ์ (ป.อ.ปยุตฺโต). (2554). พจนานุกรมพุทธศาสน์ ฉบับประมวลศัพท์. (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 16). กรุงเทพฯ: สหธรรมิก.
มหาจุฬาลงกรณราชวิทยาลัย. (2539). พระไตรปิฎกภาษาไทย ฉบับมหาจุฬาลงกรณราชวิทยาลัย.กรุงเทพฯ: มหาจุฬาลงกรณราชวิทยาลัย.
สุชีพ ปุญญานุภาพ. (2539). พระไตรปิฎกฉบับสำหรับประชาชน. (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 16). กรุงเทพฯ: มหามกุฏราชวิทยาลัย.
Basham, A. L. (1989). The wonder that was India. Rupa & Co.
Easwaran, E. (2007). The Bhagavad Gita. (2nd ed.). Nilgiri Press.
Eggeling, J. (Trans.). (1900). The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. (Sacred Books of the East, Vols. 12, 26, 41, 43, 44). Oxford University Press.
Flood, G. D. (1996). An introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press.
Griffith, R. T. H. (Trans.). (1896). The hymns of the Rigveda. E. J. Lazarus.
Lipner, J. J. (2009). Hindus: Their religious beliefs and practices. (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Lundskow, G. (2008). The sociology of religion: A substantive and transdisciplinary approach. SAGE.
Nelson, L. (2007). Introductory dictionary of theology and religious studies. Liturgical Press.
Radhakrishnan, S. (1996). The principal Upanishads. HarperCollins.
Whitney, W. D. (Trans.). (1905). Atharva-Veda Samhita (Vols. 1–2). Harvard University Press.