What the Buddha Taught

Rating:
Summary: What the Buddha is said to have taught
Review: I find this book to contain not only the best but perhaps among the only good expositions in English of what the Buddha is said to have taught. My response to those who might cite it as "dry and scholarly" or as "introductory," simply would be to repeat the previous statement. As to previous comments on the issue of Mahayana versus Theravada, I would say that the many branches of Mahayana tradition seem to occupy themselves in general with topics beyond what the Buddha is said to have taught. Whether one views these as advancements or corruptions is a matter of doctrinal dispute, as is the soul/no soul question, for which the Buddha himself, one senses, might have had little use.

Rating:
Summary: Packed with Information about Buddhism
Review: What the Buddha Taught was written in 1959. It is a little dry, but goes right to the core of Buddhism.
It is continually being printed in new editions. I first came across this book in a religion course in college. It is written like a college text, and is written to educate, not inspire.


Rating:
Summary: A competent and brief introduction
Review: It's difficult to think of a better brief introductory text to classical or Theravada Buddhism. The author gives a short introduction and then discusses the Four Noble Truths, the value of meditation, and some ideas on the modern relevance of Buddhism. The writing style is reasonably good, and the index and glossary are excellent if a bit out of date (one excellent source of modern text translations is accesstoinsight.org). This book can be recommended for beginners and to experienced meditators or Buddhists who would like a good "memory refresher."
One caveat: Mr Rahula seems to argue that the Buddha's views were atheistic. In my opinion, given the Buddha's admonition to investigate-for-yourself, his non-dogmatic statement that he had simply not seen a transcendent deity (rather than saying he knew there was no such deity), and his acceptance of some revelation and authority in addition to his reliance on analysis, I would argue the Buddha's views were probably agnostic rather than atheistic.