 Buddhist versions of atomism differ from Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika versions on the status of the wholes composed of atoms, with the former treating composites as mere aggregates, the latter regarding them as distinct entities in their own right (Sarkar 2021). The Buddhist emphasis on the transitory nature of material reality was part of the motivation for their interest in atomist explanations (Gangopadhyaya 1980, 52; Ronkin 2005, 59). In the enumeration of different kinds of mental states, notions that correspond to materiality are included, although earth, water, wind and fire are typically considered to be merely mental constructs in Buddhist thought.