Differences of Ultimate Realities in different traditions In Theravada Abhidhamma Pitaka there are four Ultimate Realities (paramattha dhammaa) mentioned, 


Citta
Cetasika
Rupa
Nibbana


Is there any variations in these realities in other traditions of Buddhism?
There are those traditions that disregard pursuing an &quot;ultimate reality.&quot; In Tools of Perception (and mp3), Thanissaro says:

There's a point where the perceptions have done their work and you put them aside. That's the correct use of all the different ideas and concepts that we pick up from the study of the dhamma. The incorrect use is to say there is an ultimate view of reality and there are conventional views of reality and what we're trying to do is get the ultimate view which describes things as they really are.
And so you latch on to those ideas: okay, this is ultimate reality and you hold on to it as if you could hold reality in words. But if you hold on to it with words, what are you doing with it?

His point being that even if you found an &quot;ultimate&quot; reality, what use is it compared to what your actions are? What use is having a mental description of something when the mind has not gone beyond suffering:

So we're not trying to get to an ultimate description of reality, we're trying to get to an end of suffering--two very different things.