¶ … appealing factors of the religious traditions of India is their broad-mindedness. However, after encountering primary sources like the Bhadavad Gita, the Upanishads, and the Dhammapada, I grew to favor the Buddhist philosophical doctrines over their Hindu counterparts. While I admire Hinduism for its rich pantheon and its ability to incorporate a wide range of seemingly conflicting beliefs, I found Buddhism to be a more practical application of religious sentiment. Although I find Hinduism more palatable than many major world religions, I nevertheless find its texts to be still somewhat removed from this world. However, the moral teachings contained in the Hindu texts do provide a practical foundation to the allegories and allusions to the supernatural contained therein. Compiling all of the texts used in class and reflecting upon them, I also note the threads of commonality that run though the major religious traditions of India. Namely, Hinduism and Buddhism deal with the very real problems of human suffering and try to teach their followers how to overcome or cease this suffering. What I appreciated about both Hinduism and Buddhism, in addition to their relative doctrinal flexibility, is their treatment of death and the fundamental structure of the ultimate reality. I found in all the course readings an inspirational alteration of the common Western outlook on life, one which fears a day of judgment and posits that the world is the manifestation of a battlefield between good and evil. Although Hinduism and Buddhism also address the concepts of good and evil, especially on an ethical level, these Indian religions do not espouse rigid dualism. Instead, the ancient Indian universe is a dynamic, polymorphic, multifaceted manifestation of an ultimate unified reality. This underlying reality, moreover, can be accessed through direct action and spiritual practices and not merely a testament of emotional or intellectual faith. In his...

Ross demonstrates how Buddhism is a daily practice, not just an abstract set of doctrines. Although Buddhism has become dogmatized in certain circles of it practice, the core of the tradition remains essentially flexible and relative to mundane life. After reading Ross's text I find I have the most affinity for the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. The combination of a colorful and vibrant supernatural world, seductive mysticism, and common sense teachings allures me more than many other branches of Buddhist thought, although I quite liked reading about them all. I admire Zen for its simplicity and its negation of all things that could prove extraneous to enlightenment. The emphasis on deed and personal practice are common to all the Buddhist traditions, both Mahayana and Theravada, something which I find totally refreshing. I also noted while reading Ross's text that Buddhism is a living, changing tradition that is as applicable to modern times as it was in ancient times. The ability for Buddhists to adapt and accept modernity is one of the strengths of this Indian tradition. Moreover, Buddhism has consistently cultivated a seeming contradiction between negation of the world and of the self; and social action and deep caring. For example, the concept of the Boddhisattva creates a natural tension between the desire to escape from the wheel of Samsara completely and the real need to help others remove ignorance from their lives. This paradox of Buddhism makes the tradition intellectually appealing and emphasizes the need for personal practice as opposed to simple theoretical understanding.
The only problem I had with the Buddhist texts we read for class was actually with the primary source. The Dhammapada contained a few more moral laws and imperatives than I would like to see. However, I do understand that these core ethnical constructs form the basis of right action that is so fundamental…