Beyond exploring a new area of study completely different from anything I had done before in other classes, my primary motivation for taking this class was to learn more about the religion I have called my own for the past seven or eight years: Buddhism. While I had done a fair amount of reading on associated traditions, history, and practices, I had never researched or discussed Buddhism in a scholarly format prior to taking this class. I knew from the start that, being an “insider” to some degree, many of my beliefs and assumptions would be challenged, something I was very worried about; however, I knew that regardless of how my beliefs changed, studying the history of my religion (if not my specific sect) would surely prove to be eye-opening
…show more content…
Sure, I knew that Siddhartha Gautama was born a Hindu, and that the concepts of samsara (the cycle of death and re-death) and dharma (order, duty, and the fundamental nature of things) carried over to some degree. What I was not prepared for was both the interconnectedness of Buddhist and Hindu ideals, so much that certain rituals and practices, such as treatment of relics, are similar enough to “suggest that the Buddha is considered to be somehow accessible” in the same way in which a Hindu deity might be accessible (Mittal and Thursby 114). The fuzzy borders between different systems of belief and practice – as well as areas such as the nature of Hindu gods and goddesses that might not have a direct parallel in Buddhism – give further credence to the idea that South Asian religions and philosophies (and ethnography, and social structure, and architecture) cannot be easily divided or classified according to “traditional” (read: Western) methods and tendencies. The relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism is much more fluid and complex than that of Buddhism and other religions, or that of Hinduism and other …show more content…
When I was in the process of coming to terms with my perception of reality and the nature of the universe, I was put off by certain discrepancies between teachings and practices in some of the religions I had experience with but never called my own. For example, Christianity’s fascination with heaven, which was supposedly superior to life on Earth, seemed absurd in the absence of concrete knowledge; furthermore, the hatred I saw being spewed by fundamentalists gave me the impression that American Christianity, while not in any way inherently bad, had the potential to manifest itself in the ugliest of ways. Buddhism offered ideas that seemed to counter the negative sides of other religions, and while I was informed of them when I converted, I got a much better picture this semester. In Buddhism, it is accepted that nirvana, or any other escape from the cycle of death and re-death, results in a state of being that is not just mysterious and incomprehensible but even without qualities (like the concept of nirguna brahman). Setting aside the otherworldly, Buddhism has the power to motivate people to do good, in keeping with the idea that “to become fully enlightened, a bodhisattva must...develop infinite compassion” (Kessler 243). Certain Buddhist ideals, such as Ambedkar’s Navayana Diksha, are “more material and psychological than metaphysical or
Sure, I knew that Siddhartha Gautama was born a Hindu, and that the concepts of samsara (the cycle of death and re-death) and dharma (order, duty, and the fundamental nature of things) carried over to some degree. What I was not prepared for was both the interconnectedness of Buddhist and Hindu ideals, so much that certain rituals and practices, such as treatment of relics, are similar enough to “suggest that the Buddha is considered to be somehow accessible” in the same way in which a Hindu deity might be accessible (Mittal and Thursby 114). The fuzzy borders between different systems of belief and practice – as well as areas such as the nature of Hindu gods and goddesses that might not have a direct parallel in Buddhism – give further credence to the idea that South Asian religions and philosophies (and ethnography, and social structure, and architecture) cannot be easily divided or classified according to “traditional” (read: Western) methods and tendencies. The relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism is much more fluid and complex than that of Buddhism and other religions, or that of Hinduism and other …show more content…
When I was in the process of coming to terms with my perception of reality and the nature of the universe, I was put off by certain discrepancies between teachings and practices in some of the religions I had experience with but never called my own. For example, Christianity’s fascination with heaven, which was supposedly superior to life on Earth, seemed absurd in the absence of concrete knowledge; furthermore, the hatred I saw being spewed by fundamentalists gave me the impression that American Christianity, while not in any way inherently bad, had the potential to manifest itself in the ugliest of ways. Buddhism offered ideas that seemed to counter the negative sides of other religions, and while I was informed of them when I converted, I got a much better picture this semester. In Buddhism, it is accepted that nirvana, or any other escape from the cycle of death and re-death, results in a state of being that is not just mysterious and incomprehensible but even without qualities (like the concept of nirguna brahman). Setting aside the otherworldly, Buddhism has the power to motivate people to do good, in keeping with the idea that “to become fully enlightened, a bodhisattva must...develop infinite compassion” (Kessler 243). Certain Buddhist ideals, such as Ambedkar’s Navayana Diksha, are “more material and psychological than metaphysical or