REL 1300 Spring 2010, Comments on Paper 2
Use of Sources:
Many of you are quoting far too much from the
text-book.
Here is an example:
Moreover,
Buddhism also appeals to Confucians with the "performance of
funeral
and memorial services for the dead" (Molloy, 158), which is what
Confucians consider as "Xiao", filial piety. One of the ideas that
I
agree with of the author, Michael Molloy, is that Buddhism became
popular and accepted by most Chinese because it "helped those
monks and
nuns to have a secure life and they don't pay taxes." (Molloy,
252)
Moreover, Mahayana which is one of the Buddhist schools most
accepted
in China because of it's belief in resisting to enter nirvana.
"The
Mahayana tradition maintains that a person must save himself by
saving
others." (Molloy 150)
Direct
quotation should be used when presenting important evidence from
a
primary text, or some particularly memorable or pithy remark
from a
secondary text, or when you want to demonstrate an accurate
knowledge
of someone you disagree with. It should not be used to present
basic
information that comes straight from the text-book: you should
paraphrase - like this:
According
to
Molloy, one reason Buddhism was attractive to Confucians was
that it
provided rituals that could be performed for deceased
relatives, an act
of filial piety (Xio). (Molloy 158) A further incentive was
that life
in a monastery is secure and tax free. (Molloy 252)
I cite
the
source of the information, but the wording is changed. Too
many direct
quotations make me wonder whether you have understood the
material and
have the ability to explain it well in good English. That's
why direct
quotations should be used only when really necessary.
Here is a good example:
Both
Zen
Buddhists and Confucians believe that there should be no
prejudice
concerning who has the right to be educated. In the Sutra of Hui Neng the
scripture
states: "Although there are nothern men and southen men,
north and
south make no difference to their Buddha nature. A
barbarian is
different from your holiness physically, but there is no
difference in
our Buddha nature". Similarly in the Analects
15:38 "...in education there should be no class
distinction."
Here
we have a
point about the similarity between two religions, backed
up by
appropriate reference to the primary sources.
Another example:
One
difference was the view about the family. We must
remember that in
China filial piety was one of the most important
aspects of life and
even if people were Taoist or Confucian it didn't
matter, both
religions promoted family values.
He who loves
his
parents does not dare to do evil unto othersl he who respects his
parents does not dare to be arrogant to others. Love and respect
are
exerted to the utmost in serving the parents, and this virtue and
teaching is extended to the people; the example is shown to the
whole
world beyond China (Xiao Jing,
Filial
Piety in the Son of Heaven)
So it is
no
surprise that when Buddhism spread throughout China, many of the
sacred
Chinese Buddhist texts talked about the love of parents towards
their
children,
How heavy
is
parental kindness and emotional concern!
Their kindness is difficult to repay.
Willingly they undergo suffering on their child's behalf. (Filial Piety Sutra)
Once
again, a
point is made about how one religion influenced the other,
supported by
evidence from primary texts. Later in the same paper, the
student
indicates that Buddhists were not happy with all aspects of
the Chinese
approach to filial piety:
But
what did
original Buddhism think of this? (When speaking of
'original' Buddhism
I refer to the Indian Buddhism also known as the first
Buddhism
practiced). "The
Chinese in the olden days had the tradition of burning
white silk when
praying to their ancestors. They burned the silk so the
ancestors may
use it. They were then replaced by paper, as it is more
economical.
Later they used paper to make money, ingots, notes and
even houses and
cars, and burn they for their ancestors. These are
generated from the
traditional customs of the olden days. They are not the teachings
of the
Buddha." (Teachings in Chinese Buddhism, Translations
of
Miao Yun).
Original
Buddhism saw their ancestors as something unimportant;
first of all it
was something temporary because they were going to be
reborn, so it
made no sense to honor their dead. And also they did
not pay reverence
to anything, not even to Buddha himself as a person,
but rather to his
teachings and his way of life. So if they did not
worship Buddha or any
other god, it was less likely for them to honor their
ancestors.
Together,
these
two passages give a balanced picture: we see that
Buddhism adopted
Chinese ideas about filial piety, but that this
creates a
tension, because Buddhists realize this is taking the
religion away
from its roots. It shows an understanding of the
fact that
changes to a religion can create tension.
Concluding a paper:
Here is a bland conclusion:
These two
religions seem to be both suited for anyone. The
effect on makind is
huge and makes you wonder beyond a text or a
teaching. These religions
are all about the personal preferences that you
choose to
take....Anyone can agree to disagree to tell which
one is better but it
is all a matter of personal preferences or opinions.
The two offer a
great deal of teaching to offer and both are very
historic.
They "...offer
a great deal of teaching to offer". Doesn't the
repetition of "offer"
sound bad? More importantly, think how little this
says. The effect is
huge. They are very historic. I would hardly ask
you to write an essay
about something unimportant, and you could write
this about almost any
topic.
In conclusion, the
topic I was asked to write about was very
important, and interesting,
and historical, and significant.
You could
include that sentence in the concluding
paragraph for any essay on a
historical subject - which is a good reason
for not including it in
any. It tells me nothing specific. Also,
saying that anyone can agree
to disagree and that it is all a matter of
opinion is just a way of
avoiding saying anything controversial, and
so avoids saying anything
at all.
Lots of
people think different things and I'm not
going to say which of them I
think is right.
Again, you
could say that about any subject, so it
isn't worth saying.
Back to REL 1300
Home.