The Similarities, <span>Both Buddhism and Hinduism share a strong belief in reincarnation; an endless cycle of births and deaths that must be broken.Attachment to people, places, things, or even ideas can lead to suffering; therefore, it’s best to practice non-attachment in the sense that you’re more anchored in your center than in outer circumstances.Meditation is highly regarded in both religions, because they believe real truth and spirituality is inward, not outward.Both believe that everything on the planet will eventually achieve enlightenment and liberation.</span>The
Differences, <span>Buddhism has no “rituals” in the traditional sense. They don’t do elaborate prostrations or pujas (prayer rituals). There are not even priests, really; though they do have senior monastics.Hinduism has an entrenched caste system (though it can be argued it was never meant to be that way), where as Buddhism does not. Buddhists believe that anyone can achieve enlightenment, where Hindus believe you must be of the Brahmin caste.In many sects of Hinduism, it’s believed extreme asceticism is the ideal spiritual life. In Buddhism, the middle path is best. Neither extreme poverty nor extreme wealth are considered to be ideal.Traditional Buddhism has no gods, where as Hinduism has literally endless variations and incarnations of gods and goddesses. Although many Hindus believe Buddha is an incarnation of Vishnu, Buddhists do not usually share that view.<span>Buddha taught that the original Vedas (ancient religious texts) were originally sacred until animal sacrifice was introduced.</span></span>
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
McCarthy noted that “we are engaged in a final, all-out battle.” How did he characterize the two sides in the “battle”?
What Republican Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy did was to confront the American People by accusing that several members of the federal government and the US military had ties with Communists or were Communists.
Why do you think he portrayed the Cold War in this manner?
I think he was a cruel person with peculiar political ambitions because he did accuse people but never present a valid or serious argument or piece of evidence to support his claims. He only accused people, affecting their public image and reputation. And that was so wrong. However, he scared and alienated many citizens and made the federal government investigate the alleged cases.