Hinduism paper

Philosophy 7: Asian Philosophy (Spring 2020)
Paper Guidelines
1
Paper #1: Hinduism
Choose from one from the following two options:
1) a passage from a particular Upanishad or from the Bhagavad Gita.
2) a mahavakya (e.g., tat tvam asi—“you are that”) [see Hindu terms handout for all 4
mahavakyas]
and
Analyze and explain the passage/mahavakya as thoroughly and precisely as you can,
staying close to the text. I want you to try to capture the essence of the passage/mahavakya
you choose. You might imagine that what you are trying to do is teach someone what the
passage/mahavakya means within the context of Hinduism.
I am looking for in-depth and detailed analysis/explanation, as well as the deployment of
appropriate Hindu terminology (e.g.: karma, Brahman, Atman, samsara, maya, etc.).
See more below.
N.B.: All of the ideas we have learned in Hinduism interpenetrate. You won’t be able to
talk about one idea without talking about some of the others. But try to focus your
efforts explaining the passage, defining and using terminology as need-be, given the
passage/mahavakya you choose.
Paper Details
Due Date
FRIDAY, February 21st on Canvas by MIDNIGHT
Paper Length
At least 3 full pages of text (“full” beginning from the place on the page that your first
paragraph starts, not the top of the piece of paper). No more than 4 pages.
Paper Format
Double-spaced
12-point font (use a standard font, of your choice, but nothing difficult to read, please)
1” margins
Terminology
Philosophical writing generally assigns weight to technical terms that are unique and
significant within that specific system or thinker’s texts (think of Plato’s “Forms” or
Descartes’ “thinking thing”). The weight of terms like “Brahman,” and “Atman” (Self),
and karma are essential to understanding Hinduism, so make sure you strive to use
these terms correctly, defining them when you introduce them, and—overall—show
comprehension of the work they do within Hindu thought, generally, and your
passage/mahavakya, specifically.
Philosophy 7: Asian Philosophy (Spring 2020)
Paper Guidelines
2
Textual Evidence/Citations
I expect you to use the text, which means: offer quotes from the text that support your
analysis/explanation. USE ONLY PRIMARY TEXT (i.e., no material from introductions
or the chapter introductions). You are writing a text-based analysis/explanation, and I
expect you to explain your passage/mahavakya with textual support from other Hindu
primary texts (i.e., other passages from particular Upanishads, or from the Bhagavad
Gita).
Please simply cite parenthetically within the body of your text (no footnotes), using the
following model (note that the title of an Upanishad are italicized, but the Bhagavad
Gita, like the Bible, is not):
For The Upanishads = (Name of Upanishad, page #). E.g.: (Mundaka, 186).
The line and verse numbers are often confusing within individual Upanishads, so since
we all used the same edition, please just give the page number.
For The Bhagavad Gita = (BG, verse #:line #). E.g.: (BG, 6:29).
Since most students seem to be completely oblivious when it comes to in-text,
parenthetical citations, here is a paradigm to follow, in terms of grammar and
punctuation:
…Krishna tells Arjuna, “quit your whining, you big baby” (BG, 2:12). [not a real quote]
The quotation marks designate only the quoted text, and the period goes at the end of
the sentence, after the parentheses. This is a rule that far too many students do not know
and/or follow. (And periods and commas go inside double-quotation marks).
****YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO USE OR CITE OUTSIDE SOURCES****
Final Comments
I will be grading these papers with an eye toward their execution and presentation, which
includes grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, etc. This is an “execution-based”
assignment (see Syllabus).
Likewise, I am looking for you to strive to articulate yourself clearly and with precision.
Admittedly, this is not an easy task when it comes to philosophical issues and especially
to ideas that exist beyond “name and form”—it takes practice and effort. I am looking to see
genuine effort to really grapple with the text, make important connections, follow the
movement of its thinking, and attempt to offer an explanation that goes beyond a
superficial reading.