Buddhism: Religion or Philosophy

Status
Not open for further replies.

Duncable

I iz a lady, ppl. Srsly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
515
Reaction score
73
Location
Playing a big fiddle
I'm not sure if this would be more appropriate in the Comparative Religions board; if so, can a mod please move it? Thanks!

I was just curious what the fine patrons of AW think on the subject. I know opinions differ even when you're talking to two Buddhists, and it's pretty dang hard to define "religion" in general since it means something different to everyone.

But in your opinion, do you consider Buddhism a religion, or a philosophy? I'd like to get responses from Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. I won't throw in my two cents right off that bat, just wanted to pose the question and see where it takes us. :)

Also, I'm pretty sure there isn't a thread already exisiting on this particular subject, since I didn't find it in searching, but I'd be lieing if I said my search skills are top-notch. So feel free to link a thread if I missed it. :)
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
Firstly, THANK YOU for creating a Buddhism thread. I've been miffed about the lack of one in the past.

I consider it a spiritual philosophy, and it's what I "practice" in lieu of an organized religion. I like that there are no specific rites to go through or vows to recite--it's a personal journey, and no two people experience it exactly the same way, and aren't supposed to.

I've always felt that spirituality is necessarily personal, and not something that you can get out of a book or a building. Buddhism tends to reflect that, and it's what I finally stumbled on when trying to put a name to what I actually believe and not finding it in any existing Western faiths.
 

Maxx

Got the hang of it, here
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
202
Location
Durham NC
I'm not sure if this would be more appropriate in the Comparative Religions board; if so, can a mod please move it? Thanks!

I was just curious what the fine patrons of AW think on the subject. I know opinions differ even when you're talking to two Buddhists, and it's pretty dang hard to define "religion" in general since it means something different to everyone.

But in your opinion, do you consider Buddhism a religion, or a philosophy? I'd like to get responses from Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. I won't throw in my two cents right off that bat, just wanted to pose the question and see where it takes us. :)

Also, I'm pretty sure there isn't a thread already exisiting on this particular subject, since I didn't find it in searching, but I'd be lieing if I said my search skills are top-notch. So feel free to link a thread if I missed it. :)

As a non-Buddhist, it seems to be that there has been a lot of organized Buddhism. I don't know how things are now, but lots of organized religious institutions have been Buddhist.

For example the complex of the Magao Caves suggests a religion more than a philosophy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mogao_Caves
 

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
9,767
Reaction score
3,936
Location
you martyr and shine.
I think it's a loose religion based on a philosophy. I know a few Buddhists and they seem to hold non-scientific beliefs and base their actions around those beliefs. For example, the Buddhists I know will not kill bugs, because they believe the assertion that bugs have souls and these souls are here in the form of a bug for the purpose of development, and killing the bug thwarts their development to reincarnate into a "higher" being.

Those are assertions that seem religious in nature to me. If it was only a philosophy, it would just be "live and let live" without the non-scientific reasoning about higher consciousness, reincarnation, soul development and so on.

JMO
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
^I hold to that for everything except cockroaches. I have....issues....which cockroaches. Trying to work on it, but still.

However, I still stick with the assertion of it being a spiritual path, but not necessarily "religious." It's very individualized, which to me is the opposite of how I think of organized religion.
 

zornhau

Swordsman
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
1,491
Reaction score
167
Location
Scotland
Website
www.livejournal.com
If you believe in non scientific stuff, you at the very least have a Faith.

If all Faiths are also Religions, then you have a Religion. If not, then we're into an argument about what we mean by "religion".
 

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
9,767
Reaction score
3,936
Location
you martyr and shine.
If you believe in non scientific stuff, you at the very least have a Faith.

If all Faiths are also Religions, then you have a Religion. If not, then we're into an argument about what we mean by "religion".
The word does have a definition, and Buddhism seems to fit it.

Definition of RELIGION
1
a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3
archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
Commitment or devotion to a faith? Check. A personal set of beliefs? Check. And practices? Check. Held to with ardor and faith? Check. By the word's definition, the Buddhists I know are actually more "religious" than the casual Christians I know.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.
 
Last edited:

Maxx

Got the hang of it, here
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
202
Location
Durham NC
^I hold to that for everything except cockroaches. I have....issues....which cockroaches. Trying to work on it, but still.

However, I still stick with the assertion of it being a spiritual path, but not necessarily "religious." It's very individualized, which to me is the opposite of how I think of organized religion.

There may be interpretations of Buddhism that are in some way not religious, but it looks like most Buddhist institutions and art have been religious most of the time.

As the stories behind these lost caves suggest:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/4256119
 

Duncable

I iz a lady, ppl. Srsly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
515
Reaction score
73
Location
Playing a big fiddle
I forgot I even started this thread, since it didn't get any responses the first few days. I must remember to subscribe!

However, I still stick with the assertion of it being a spiritual path, but not necessarily "religious." It's very individualized, which to me is the opposite of how I think of organized religion.

This is basically how I feel about it, too, and I consider myself a Buddhist.

While it may have some aspects in common with most religions, I believe that speaks more to the fact that all religions are philosophies, so they all have philosophical similarities. It's what Buddhism lacks that sets it apart.

Yes, people have and do treat it as a religion, and they have tacked certain rituals and ceremonies and other trapings onto it to make it more organized and structured; fine, that's what they need, and one of the best aspects of Buddhism in my opinion is that, like Rhoda said, it is a personal journey which is experienced differently by everyone. The Buddha did, after all, instruct us to disregard those ideas which don't resonate with us personally. But the core of Buddhism doesn't change.

If someone who had no idea what Buddhism was were to ask me to describe it as simply as possible I would say this: Buddhism is the awareness of the nature of cause and effect; or, it is simply the awareness of being aware. I don't personally think there is anything necessarily religious about either of those statements.

Since that is what (and, essentially, all) Buddhism is to me, I can't lump it into the same category as the other world religions. Which is probably why my World Religions professor didn't like me very much back in the day. :D

Thanks for the responses, guys. I've got a jumble of a story idea bouncing around in my brain that you're helping me cement into something worth writing about.

ETA: Maxx, I'm at work so I can't check out those links you provided, but I plan to when I get home tonight. :)
 

Maxx

Got the hang of it, here
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
202
Location
Durham NC
Since that is what (and, essentially, all) Buddhism is to me, I can't lump it into the same category as the other world religions. Which is probably why my World Religions professor didn't like me very much back in the day. :D

Well, I've never taken a World Religions class, but it seems to me that there is something religious about most religions. For example, you could reduce Christianity to having a nice feeling about some things that Jesus reportedly said, but that would suggest that whatever professed Christians have done for the last two thousand years is somehow not Christian. It seems to me that a non-religious interpretation of a religion is clearly not the same as a religious interpretation of a religion. Moreover, for most people who have professed a religion (say Christianity or Buddhism) over the last few thousand years, the religious aspects of their religion would be foremost in their minds. For example, Christian women have traditionally covered their hair in Church (as Paul suggests) "because of the Angels" (ie female hair excites Angelic Lust and that's no appropriate in Church). That's clearly a religious idea and not a philosophical one and one that probably has some analog in Buddhism: ie a day-to-day religious action such as reciting the Sutras to get good things in life.
 

RandomJerk

Jerk.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
309
Reaction score
20
Location
Connecticut
Website
johnnynull.com
As I understand it, it's a religion that was built off a philosophy. One can practice either, though the religion is specifically at odds with some of the philosophical underpinnings. Like most religions.
 

Namatu

Lost in mental space.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
4,489
Reaction score
967
Location
Someplace else.
I see philosophy as the foundation of all religion. Buddhism is a religion because of the formalized institutions - the traditions of Theravada, Mahayana, etc. - and the ceremonies therein that have built up around it. Its philosophy, however, makes it well-suited for practice outside of those formal institutions. This may be equally true of other religions, but Buddhism appeals to me for the same reasons Rhoda mentions, it's a very personal journey that doesn't rely on rites and passages.
 

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
20,322
Reaction score
3,513
Location
Transcending Canines
First of all I'm not a Buddhist, never been one, and what I write here may be off the mark, but I'm sure it's not as far off as this speaker I quote. But at least he (inadvertently) pompted me to learn a little about something I had almost no clue about before. Take what I say with a grain silo of salt.

I distinctly remember one "eloquent" speaker I heard over 20 years ago who said "Just as Christians turn their wills and lives over to Jesus, Muslims turn their wills and lives over to Mohammed and Buddhists turn their wills and lives over to Buddha." Despite my lack of religions knowledge outside of what I learned growing up in Baptist Sunday School, I was suspicious of that last one about Buddhists, so I read what few popular books I could find (ISTR Alan Watts, mainly). Indeed, Buddhism appears to have little if anything to do with God, or turning your "will and life" over to anything. Buddha apparently found some way to achieve "enlightenment" or a way to be happy, and his writings were just instructions on how to do it. This is definitely a philosophy and not a religion.

That's my understanding of the origins of Buddhism. Of course after growing over the centuries, it changed and different factions grew with various amounts of ritual and whatnot added, which may be religious by some definitions, but still it (or the way many people practice it) does not include God.

My hypothesis of how it got called a religion is that the Western World studied Eastern practices, and wondered what the East had for religion (because everyone must have religion, right???). Buddhism was the thing that most closely resembeled a religion, so Westerners started calling it a religion and assumed that what Buddhists do is worship Buddha as some incarnation of God, just as Christians worship Jesus.
I consider it a spiritual philosophy, and it's what I "practice" in lieu of an organized religion. I like that there are no specific rites to go through or vows to recite--it's a personal journey, and no two people experience it exactly the same way, and aren't supposed to.

I've always felt that spirituality is necessarily personal, and not something that you can get out of a book or a building. Buddhism tends to reflect that, and it's what I finally stumbled on when trying to put a name to what I actually believe and not finding it in any existing Western faiths.
^I hold to that for everything except cockroaches. I have....issues....which cockroaches. Trying to work on it, but still.

However, I still stick with the assertion of it being a spiritual path, but not necessarily "religious." It's very individualized, which to me is the opposite of how I think of organized religion.
Spirituality is an interesting word. There was a time when its meaning was tied more closely to religion, and I suspect ir was Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs that have popularized the idea of spirituality as separate from religion. AA has claimed from the start (the 1930's) that it is "spiritual, not religous. This originated in the Oxford group (within which AA originated and then split off from) a fundamentalist Christian group that claimed to be "more spiritual than religious."

Spirituality used to be a part of religion (dictionaries still have these earlier meanings). Now spirituality, as commonly used, means believing in or worshiping God, but outside the formal trappings of religion and church buildings. I suppose whether Buddhists are "spiritual" is an open question, but apparenty those in this thread are claiming so.
 

Namatu

Lost in mental space.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
4,489
Reaction score
967
Location
Someplace else.
I think the definition of spirituality, while perhaps originally based in religion, has expanded beyond those borders. I've seen it mentioned in regard to yoga practice and other things that are decidedly not religious. I interpret it in those situations to be referring to a mindfulness and compassion/understanding that doesn't need to connect to religion.
 

froley

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
536
Reaction score
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia
Website
www.reelthinker.com
As I understand it, Buddhists believe in certain supernatural principles. And many different people all around the world believe/follow the same core ideas/beliefs. That's pretty much a 'religion' by definition, isn't it?
 

AVS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
529
Reaction score
73
Location
Beacon and mountain, river and road.
Religion, philosophy and political movement can be close companions on the highway to the somatic experience. Often they contain or procure elements from each other. The fervour they are able to tap into appears to come from the same psychological source. Sometimes they inspire dangerous zealotry sometimes they inspire peace, love and understanding. (often derived from different interpretations of the same underlying data).

I'm not saying religion, politics and philosophy are the same thing, clearly they can be distinct. Think of a Venn diagram (remember those?) the areas of overlap can be large.
 

Rufus Coppertop

Banned
Flounced
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
948
Location
.
It's what Buddhism lacks that sets it apart.

What is it that Buddhism lacks to set it apart?

Buddhism is the awareness of the nature of cause and effect;
If you're defining that awareness as the ability to see the working of karma, then I personally don't think that that awareness is Buddhism. It might be an aspect of Buddhahood but not of Buddhism.

Buddhism is the set of teachings, philosophies, rituals and meditation techniques which lead to Buddhahood and that awareness.

Allegedly.
 
Last edited:

Rufus Coppertop

Banned
Flounced
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
948
Location
.
As I understand it, Buddhists believe in certain supernatural principles. And many different people all around the world believe/follow the same core ideas/beliefs. That's pretty much a 'religion' by definition, isn't it?

Of course.
 

Rufus Coppertop

Banned
Flounced
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
948
Location
.
Religion, philosophy and political movement can be close companions on the highway to the somatic experience.

Somatic means "of the body". While there are physical yogas in Buddhism, it's not a highway to a "somatic" experience.
 

AVS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
529
Reaction score
73
Location
Beacon and mountain, river and road.
Rufus,

"O wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world
That has such people in't!"

Well the mind and body might be a different thing, but it's jolly hard to prove.
 
Last edited:

Rufus Coppertop

Banned
Flounced
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
948
Location
.
In that the mind can be defined as the "working" of the brain, we might be able to prove that the mind is different from the body in the same way that the functioning of software is different to hardware.

You're right in that we cannot prove that the mind doesn't arise strictly and only from the functioning of the brain.

Given this, maybe I should have said that Buddhism does not regard itself as a highway to somatic experience rather than saying that it's actually not.
 

nibris

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
53
Reaction score
3
I have a research project that has a lot to do with Buddhism and other Southeast Asian religions, and I think there's evidence for the idea that Buddhism is a religion rather than strictly a philosophy. The reason I say this is the fundamental belief that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu, who is known in Hindu religion to be the god of all gods. Even though the Buddhists don't believe in the plethora of the Hindu gods, they believe in Vishnu and that Buddha was his most enlightened, spiritual form in which he bore all truths.
 

Rufus Coppertop

Banned
Flounced
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
948
Location
.
I have a research project that has a lot to do with Buddhism and other Southeast Asian religions, and I think there's evidence for the idea that Buddhism is a religion rather than strictly a philosophy. The reason I say this is the fundamental belief that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu, who is known in Hindu religion to be the god of all gods. Even though the Buddhists don't believe in the plethora of the Hindu gods, they believe in Vishnu and that Buddha was his most enlightened, spiritual form in which he bore all truths.

Which school of Buddhism teaches this?

I know that some Hindus believe that the buddha Shakyamuni was an avatar of Vishnu but I've never heard this from fellow buddhists and I've been a buddhist since 1993.
 

Maxinquaye

That cheeky buggerer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
10,361
Reaction score
1,032
Location
In your mind
Website
maxoneverything.wordpress.com
I have a research project that has a lot to do with Buddhism and other Southeast Asian religions, and I think there's evidence for the idea that Buddhism is a religion rather than strictly a philosophy. The reason I say this is the fundamental belief that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu, who is known in Hindu religion to be the god of all gods. Even though the Buddhists don't believe in the plethora of the Hindu gods, they believe in Vishnu and that Buddha was his most enlightened, spiritual form in which he bore all truths.

That is a very strange interpretation of buddhism. Buddha, afaik, consider belief in a god to be an attachment, ie something that lead to suffering. There are some buddhist sects that consider the Boddhisatva to be a more-than-human, a predestined birth, but that's as far as Buddhists go to deify things.
 

aruna

On a wing and a prayer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 14, 2005
Messages
12,862
Reaction score
2,846
Location
A Small Town in Germany
Website
www.sharonmaas.co.uk
^

However, I still stick with the assertion of it being a spiritual path, but not necessarily "religious." It's very individualized, which to me is the opposite of how I think of organized religion.
Then we come back to the definition of "religion", which is variable; the defniitions posted by Devil, for me, are not complete. For me, religion in its essence IS spirituality. That is the core of every religion: personal experience, individual transcendence. The very word Religion can be traced back etymologically to mean re-bonding; and that would be, re-bonding with the essence of life, which is internal; thus all religion starts with spirituality.

Because that re-bonding experience is too abstract for most people, all kinds of beliefs, customs, traditions are pasted on top of that core experience, and thus we have the superimposition of externalised religion, which is what most people understand under the definition.

In effect, it's hard to discuss Eastern religions with Westerners, since there are certain pre-conceptions and presumptions that are immediately latched onto the Eastern principles, which simply don't hold true.

I'm not a Buddhist but I have occasionally visited the Buddhist temple north of London for meditation, and I know many Buddhists and it's always a joy to see the core correlation between Buddhism and Hinduism, and for that matter Taoism. All of these religions are built on the assumption that man has to turn inwards to find Truth; that God is not some white-bearded entity sitting up in heaven judging us but right here and now, within consciousness itself; that consciousness itself is the key to religion. That heaven and hell are all in the mind.


As I understand it, it's a religion that was built off a philosophy. One can practice either, though the religion is specifically at odds with some of the philosophical underpinnings. Like most religions.
My bold.

This is the difference between Eastern and Western "philosophies". Eastern philosophy, or teaching, is based on practice, ie, direct experience; turning the mind within to find the truth of one's own being. It's not conjecture or cognitive; and approaching it from a purely rational, analytic (Western!) mindset is futile. Somebody who merely talks philosophy wothout trying to actually practice it is, in Eastern religions, just playing mind-games. You have to go there. You can't just talk about it. That's why I mostly keep away from the god-threads! :)

The reason I say this is the fundamental belief that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu, who is known in Hindu religion to be the god of all gods. Even though the Buddhists don't believe in the plethora of the Hindu gods, they believe in Vishnu and that Buddha was his most enlightened, spiritual form in which he bore all truths.

Hindus believe that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu, like Rama and Krishna and the others. This is a Hindu belief, not a Buddhist one. Then again, Vishnu himself is not God. The idea that Hinduism has many gods is just another Western misconception. In the final analysis Hinduism too teaches that there is nothing outside consciousness; that God, the self and the universe are all nothing but consciousness. The many gods, the rituals, the various manifestations of religions are all only props, which help the mind to turn away from the material and to the spiritual. Once it can do that unaided, once it is strong and unwavering, the props are unnecessary. Till then, they are helpful.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.