The world has many different religions. Asia has had many religions spring up. Out of these Buddhism and Hinduism are the most popular beliefs in the general population. Hinduism is the oldest known religion and is very rich with literally hundreds of gods, symbolistic rituals and beliefs. It is believed to have been established around 1500 B.C. but one person never founded Hinduism as it evolved over a long period of time. Buddhism on the other hand has a definite founder, Siddhartha Gautama who is otherwise known as the Buddha or Enlightened One who lived from 565 to 483 B.C. Both these religions originated in India. Siddhartha Gautama was a Hindu who found Hindu theology lacking and after years of searching for truth created a religion now known as Buddhism. Because of these basic similarities, the two religions have much in common, but in the same light they differ immensely.
I'm sorry if this is incorrect but this was all I could find :(
Answer:
I dont get it what do you want us to answer
A freelance singer-songwriter is planning the restoration of a recently purchased civil war-era farmhouse. While he professes an enjoyment of, and talent in the construction trades, the theory of comparative advantage implies that the income lost while away from music will likely exceed the savings realized by doing the work himself, thus, he should hire professionals to do the restoration work.
<h3><u>
Explanation:</u></h3>
The ability of economy to involve in production of goods and services at an opportunity cost which is lower in nature when compared with the trading partners. This will help the company to sell a product or service at a cot lower than the cost of the competitors. This will result in the company achieving the comparative advantage.
In the example given, a freelance singer can hire some professionals for the purpose of restoration work. This is because the income the singer gets from the freelancing work will be lost or it will be exceeded the savings , when he does the restoration work by himself. Hence he can hire some professionals for this purpose.
No.
As a charged isn't constrained to give prove in a criminal antagonistic continuing, they may not be addressed by a prosecutor or judge unless they do as such. Be that as it may, should they choose to affirm, they are liable to round of questioning and could be discovered liable of prevarication. As the race to keep up a charged individual's entitlement to quiet keeps any examination or round of questioning of that individual's position, it takes after that the choice of advice in the matter of what proof will be called is an essential strategy regardless in the ill-disposed framework and thus it may be said that it is a legal counselor's control of reality. Surely, it requires the aptitudes of insight on the two sides to be decently similarly hollowed and subjected to an unbiased judge.
By differentiate, while litigants in most affable law frameworks can be constrained to give an announcement, this announcement isn't liable to round of questioning by the prosecutor and not given under vow. This enables the litigant to clarify his side of the case without being liable to round of questioning by a talented resistance. Notwithstanding, this is predominantly on the grounds that it isn't the prosecutor yet the judges who question the respondent. The idea of "cross"- examination is altogether due to antagonistic structure of the customary law.
Judges in an antagonistic framework are unprejudiced in guaranteeing the reasonable play of due process, or basic equity. Such judges choose, regularly when called upon by advise as opposed to of their own movement, what confirm is to be conceded when there is a debate; however in some customary law wards judges assume to a greater extent a part in choosing what confirmation to concede into the record or reject. Best case scenario, mishandling legal carefulness would really make ready to a one-sided choice, rendering out of date the legal procedure being referred to—run of law being illegally subordinated by lead of man under such separating conditions.
Answer:
Inclusive politics means to make every citizen actively participate in the state development process. The purpose of inclusiveness in a multi cultural multi communal state is to ensure that citizens from all classes, communities, and regions are able to participate equanimously and be able to be represented correctly.
Explanation:
sorry if this isn't what your looking for
