Originating in India, Mahayana Buddhism spread across Asia, becoming the prevalent form of Buddhism in Tibet and East Asia. Over the last twenty-five years Western interest in Mahayana has increased considerably, reflected both in the quantity of scholarly material produced and in the attraction of Westerners towards Tibetan Buddhism and Zen.

I would like to add some short remarks to mkp's thorough and accurate review.

1. The book does not cover Zen or Tantric Buddhism. It focuses on Indian and Chinese Buddhism, with discussions of selected (non-tantric) doctrines of Tibetan Buddhism.

2. The title means what it says about emphasis on doctrine. There is little or no discussion of practice as such.

3. For most readers the book may be primarily useful as a reference work. It is, as mkp described, thoroughly academic, philological, and detailed. The author truly leaves no stone unturned in the topics he treats. I read all the endnotes, which fill a large proportion of the book, and there is an enormous amount of valuable material in them as well as in the text.

4. The best parts are on Indian Buddhism, which are superb, especially the sections on Madhyamika. The parts on East Asian Buddhism are very good but not as encyclopedic as the Indian sections. IMO the author did not present an adequate grasp of the Taoist elements in Chinese Buddhism. And of course the limitation on the discussion of Chan and Zen is a drawback.

5. Despite my caveats, I recommend this book highly to anyone who feels interested in the challenge.

Incidentally, until I read mkp's review I had not heard of the author's alleged conversion to Roman Catholicism. I can think of not one example of pro-Catholic or Christian leaning or bias in the book. Interestingly, though, while reading it, I could not determine whether the author was or was not Buddhist, or was pursuing a strictly academic inquiry. ( )

My goal was to get a general overview of Mahayana Buddhism, and at first I thought this book was not for me. In fact there are several aspects to the book that I found disturbing:

1. The author, Paul Williams, writes in a cautious, academic style. Almost every sentence is filled with extra clauses that qualify his assertions or otherwise make comments on what is being said.

2. Overall, Williams’s focus is on the philology of the sacred texts. How authentic was the attributed authorship, what editorial changes were made, how accurately were the various editions translated into other languages, etc.

3.. There are almost 150 pages of lengthy endnotes which are even more academic than the text. One is tempted to read them, because they include more background information, but these represent further distractions from the general narrative.

4. I understand that Williams, converted from Buddhism to Roman Catholicism sometime between the first and second editions. This was a concern, because it suggested that Williams had lost interest in the fundamental messages of Buddhism.

So you may be surprised that I heartily recommend this book, anyway, and rate it at five stars. Williams’s careful academic style turns out to be just right, after all. There are all sorts of subtleties in connection with the evolution of Buddhist thought, and Williams elucidates these subtleties very well. It turns out to be well worth the effort to wade through his exposition and follow the various developments that he charts. Certainly his expertise in this area is impressive.

Because of the complicated, nonlinear history of Buddhism, it’s difficult to put it all into a single narrative thread. Now that I have read it all, I intend to read it all over again, because the next time I will have the fuller context in my head as I read the opening chapters. This book is not a quick, casual read, but it is definitely rewarding. ( )

I already read this book with a different cover ! 12/28/12 to 1/13/13 note book # 813