I think you would have to be a Sanskrit expert to really conduct such an analysis. (I'm not saying that as a Sanskrit expert" although I have studied fhe language). But there are very many differences between the Advaita and Buddhist views which are practically imperceptible outside the culture in which those debates took place. So from a 'universalist' perspective, it is always possible to argue that the different formulations are 'many paths up the mountain' or variations on a theme. But the advocates for the different schools will generally object to those kinds of analogies. After all thy spent centuries debating their differences and refining them, so it won't do to say they are really 'talking about the same subject'. So I think the case is quite easy to make from the viewpoint of comparative studies, but whether that would impress any of the traditional exponents of such views,who after all are the custodians of them in some sense, is a different matter.
So my suggestion is that you could use the examples that you mentioned, but I would be very careful about conflating them. I think you need to respect their differences.
He that knows it, knows it not.