Watched the episode on Buddha and found it thoroughly unenlightening. The Western mind is steeped in the notion of breakthrough conceptual thinking, so Buddha's story is presented in that framework, completely disregarding the various soteriological philosophies and paths of India that pre-date Buddhism and intimately informed and influenced its development. Brahminism is the usual villain, reduced to priests performing rituals, as if that's all to Hinduism, as if before Buddha there were no methods and teaching for liberation, as if the Upanishads, Brahma Sutras etc did not exist. It is clear the presenter neither understands Hinduism nor Buddhism, else she would have known that the paths of Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism are similar to the extent of being almost same, differing only in the ultimate nature of Brahman/Nothingness. The multi-layered story of Buddhism is dumbed down to an extent that may have been forgiven for a movie maker, but not for a historian. Those who really want to learn about the history and development of Buddhism and comparative with Hinduism should go to serious scholars like Edward Conze, Anand Coomaraswamy, Ram Swarup etc rather than waste time with a bogus history and historian here.
