9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Good "Comparative Religion 101" type guide, August 16, 2006
This review is from: The Best Guide to Eastern Philosophy and Religion (Paperback)
This is certainly a notch or two above what one would expect to find in a "Dummies" or an "Idiot's" guide. Diane Morgan, who teaches philosophy and religion at Wilson and Frederick Community College in Pennsylvania, has a light touch that sometimes drifts into something close to irreverence, which might offend some sensitive readers, although the Zen Buddhist part of me found it agreeable. For example, Morgan writes about Milarepa "an important character in the development of the Kagyupa school of Tibetan Buddhism" who, during an ascetic period of his life (before he began imbibing ambrosia), lived on nettle soup "which turned his skin completely green." She observes that Milarepa died at the age of 84 "after knowingly ingesting some poisonous curds." She adds "(Curds are quite a comedown from ambrosia, but about on a par with nettle soup)."
Hers is not a true believer's approach, that is for sure; and this is only to be expected. How could a true believer of any religion be objective about the nine religions/philosophies she covers? Consequently this book is written from a secular point of view with the usual assumption that no one religion or philosophy has a monopoly on truth or wisdom.
The nine religions covered are Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Jainism, Tantra, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, and Shinto. The first four are covered in some depth, forming the first four parts of the book, while the latter five comprise the five chapters of Part 5. Strictly speaking Tantra is an adjunct of both Hinduism and Buddhism, and it is debatable whether Confucianism should be called a religion. Actually, as Morgan points out, in the East, religion and philosophy go hand in hand, and one is hard put to separate them.
Needless to say it is impossible to do complete justice to even one religion in a single book. Nonetheless I think Morgan does a good job of introducing a religious and philosophical view from the East that is different from the Abrahamic and Greek traditions that are so familiar to us in the West. What she doesn't do--and I think this is a significant failing--is to make a distinction between the fundamentalist or literal interpretation of the religions and a philosophic or symbolic interpretation. In Christianity there is a world of difference between the fundamentalist and the more progressive branches, between strict interpretations of the Bible and symbolic ones. In Buddhism in particular there is a significant difference between not just the two main branches or between the Tibetan and Zen offshoots, but between the way the average Buddhist sees the world and the way the monk or the educated Buddhist sees it. The idea of reincarnation is taken as literal to most Buddhists, but a deeper understanding may require an interpretation that sees our individual "consciousness" as what is reincarnated, with the understanding that our consciousness is like fire, essentially the same in every manifestation.
Also in Buddhism and Vedanta (part of Hinduism) there is the idea of "non-self," an idea that takes many years of study or experience (or a marvelous "enlightenment") to fully appreciate. This idea has very little relevance to the everyday practitioner. It could even be said that the idea of karma, which, as Morgan explains, can include actions from previous lives, is really just a symbolic way of expressing a general tendency in life (or even a way of hinting at biological evolution) without any need for reincarnations. In fact, strictly speaking the Buddha spoke only of the here and now, this lifetime and did not trouble himself with gods or afterlives.
At any rate, this book is very much like a "Dummies" book with the usual easy-to-read, "lite" style, with sidebars, text boxes and summaries at the end of each chapter. It is especially good for someone who wants an introduction to Eastern religions such as one might get in a Comparative Religion 101 class. It is for the curious, and good place to start for those who want to go on to more in-depth studies.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Disappointing, December 18, 2004
This review is from: The Best Guide to Eastern Philosophy and Religion (Paperback)
I picked up this book as it looked like some nice light reading to fill in some aspects of eastern religion unfamiliar to me.
Perhaps I'm spoiled by reading books by actual participants in a religion, but even an external observer should be able to provide more insight than is found here. I confess to having read only the Buddhist sections, but they were so misguided and innacurate I won't be reading more.
The author seems to be disinterested and even have disdain for the subject. Perhaps in an attemempt to be user-friendly, the book has an undertone of humor, but unfortunately it all has a negative tone.
If you have never read a book on eastern religion before, this would not be a good first step, in my opinion.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very Good Introduction, December 28, 2009
This review is from: The Best Guide to Eastern Philosophy and Religion (Paperback)
A very good introduction to Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism, as well as to five other systems such as Shinto.
The author's sense of humor may seem a little irreverent to some at times, and she sometimes may gloss over things a bit, but for the most part it was an interesting and insightful introduction to the various systems it covers. Certainly gives enough information to guide one to further study into details.
For my part, I will be looking more deeply into Hinduism and to a lesser extent Zen and Taoism.
Recommended.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
