Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Is *your* Buddhism a religion?

username_5username_5
edited September 2010 in Buddhism Basics
It seems that there are many perspectives on whether or not Buddhism is properly classified as a religion or not. The answer, of course, depends on how one defines what a religion is.

I am not asking whether *you* believe "Buddhism" is a religion or not, rather I am asking whether your beliefs and practices are something *you* regard as being religious or not.

The question assumes that you do self identify as Buddhist. Extra brownie points if you provide some explanation of why you do or do not regard your beliefs and practices as religious in nature.

I am not going to answer my own question as I don't wish to set any tone (I may answer my own question later after others have had a chance to respond (assuming anyone does respond ;) )

Comments

  • EngyoEngyo
    edited September 2010
    My Buddhist practice is religious. Nichiren Buddhism is devotional; we prize sangha and practicing together. Our services are ceremonial, and we have several special days throughout the year when we commemorate specific anniversaries or occurrences.

    I have done Nichiren practice alone; but it is better in community with others.
  • KundoKundo Sydney, Australia Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Namaste,

    I consider my practise of Buddhism to be religious as there is ritual and practise I adhere to.

    Sadly, I cannot eloquently justify WHY I feel it to be a religious practise, other than to say that's what it feels like, so I miss out on the brownie point :)

    In metta.
    Raven
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    If religion means structure then my Buddhist practice is not as religious as it could be.
  • ShutokuShutoku Veteran
    edited September 2010
    I think faith in that which is not apparent is what makes it religion as opposed to just a philosophy. (of course philosophy is part of religion, and one can have a non-religious philosophy)

    So to me any Buddhist who accepts the ideas like suchness, Buddha nature, or Nirvana is practicing a religion, regardless of how structured or unstructured it is.

    My Buddhism is definitely a Religion.
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    By that definition then I guess I am religious.
  • Buddhist1Buddhist1
    edited September 2010
    I've only been to 3 services and none of them have had any mention of a God or supernatural being or an afterlife. As one who is turned off by that sort of thing, I really appreciate Buddhism and the teachings but do not consider myself religious. In my short time learning about and participating in Buddhism it has helped me gain control of my life. I am following the teachings as best I can with faith that things are getting better.

    So I guess my answer to your question is more gray than black or white.

    Thanks for reading my first post.
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited September 2010
    Sitting in a Monastery, surrounded by Buddhist Monks all of whom have been ordained, and practice diligently, I would say they regard Buddhism as a religion.
    As do I.....
  • andyrobynandyrobyn Veteran
    edited September 2010
    For me it qualifies for a definition of religion which includes a specific set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of life, involves devotional and ritual observances, and a outlines a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
  • DazzleDazzle
    edited September 2010
    Does 'faith' imply blind faith, I wonder?

    I have confirmed confidence in the teachings of the historical Buddha because they are verifiable through practice and direct experience and understanding.

    Added cultural superstitions and rituals have no place in my life.

    .
  • ShutokuShutoku Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Dazzle, when you start out, and have not yet confirmed all of the teachings experientially, then there is something like a blind faith.
    I suspect few....maybe none of us have experienced nirvana, but we have faith that it is real. We might see some supporting evidence, but ultimately until we experience it, we are practicing a sort of blind....or at least vision impaired faith :lol:

    Also ritual and superstition are very different. The latter has little value to me, but the former has great value in creating mindfulness.
    All that bowing, lighting incense, wearing a kesa, using a nenju, chanting even if you don't speak that language, and/or have chanted the same thing thousands of times....all of it creates a spiritual, mindful state of respect, honour, gratitude and focus....very conducive to practice and very valuable IMHO.:cool:
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Dazzle wrote: »
    Does 'faith' imply blind faith, I wonder?

    I have confirmed confidence in the teachings of the historical Buddha because they are verifiable through practice and direct experience and understanding.

    Added cultural superstitions and rituals have no place in my life.

    .
    Bold statements.
    This implies not only that we know exactly what the "historical" Buddha taught but also that you have some kind of direct insight into their verifiable nature.
    What is nirvana like Dazzle?
  • ChrysalidChrysalid Veteran
    edited September 2010
    For me, religion is mankind's attempt to understand our place in the universe. Christianity has one answer, Hinduism another and Buddhism another. They all offer different understandings of human nature and it's relation to everything else.
    What makes any system of thought more than a philosophy are it's practical aspects and the changes those practices bring about in the practitioner.
  • MountainsMountains Veteran
    edited September 2010
    The word "religion" has such connotation attached to it, I tend to sort of shy away from it myself, but whatever floats your boat. I know the dictionary defines it several ways, including one that doesn't include worshiping a deity or deities, but that's how I think of it myself, and I've lost my belief in "god" in the traditional "religious" sense over the years.

    Different strokes for different folks though...
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    edited September 2010
    I'm new to "buddhism," though i'm quickly finding that beliefs I have developed using my own mind are the same things that buddhism teaches. This to me gives me assurance that I am on the right path, because if buddhism were true than it makes sense that one would be able to come to the same conclusions without the aid of it and, guess what, I have. I haven't fully developed it to the point that the buddha did, granted, but what I have developed is very much in line with the buddha's teachings. That being said, I refuse to follow a religion. So, of course, I don't view my buddhism as a religion. I will not follow anything I hear simply because it's "buddhist" to do such. I will do anything I feel is helpful on my own personal journey, even if it's not "buddhist."
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    TheJourney wrote: »
    I will not follow anything I hear simply because it's "buddhist" to do such. I will do anything I feel is helpful on my own personal journey, even if it's not "buddhist."

    Dare I say, that sounds like a very Buddhist attitude to me.
  • andyrobynandyrobyn Veteran
    edited September 2010
    TheJourney wrote: »
    I will do anything I feel is helpful on my own personal journey, even if it's not "buddhist."


    the difficulty is with the parameters for the anything ... finding a tradition and if you are fortunate a live teacher to guide you is beneficial, from my experience.
  • ThaoThao Veteran
    edited September 2010
    i consider it a religious philosophy.
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    edited September 2010
    by Dazzle:

    I have confirmed confidence in the teachings of the historical Buddha because they are verifiable through practice and direct experience and understanding.

    I can pretty much go along with this. This is just my experience, but I find it pretty amazing that a bunch of people could have gone out to Amdo in Tibet in 1938 to find a two-year-old, and lo, these many years later, we see who/what that boy has become. That happened in my lifetime, and the occurrence of that is something visible and demonstrable. I think it's pretty amazing.

    The movie Kundun is pretty good, although of course it's a movie. I think it's pretty close to historically correct, as far as I know. (Of course I don't condone downloading pirated movies with BitTorrent because it would be stealing from the producers, but the movie is generally available.) So I can go along with Dazzle on this one. I don't think he's overstating his experience.

    One might say as an ironic joke that Buddhism is not a religion- it's the truth.

    Given that, HHDL has said that if science specifically refutes anything in Buddhism, he can't be a Buddhist any more. (I would guess he could still make a good living as a motivational speaker or a consultant :))

    Finally, I just have to say that using *asterisks instead of quotation marks* just drives me totally nuts. We have people that are in the process of learning English as a second language reading and posting on this board and although some issues with grammar are acceptable, that's just going too far.
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    edited September 2010
    Ooops...
  • JakbobJakbob Explorer
    edited September 2010
    I value my Buddhism greatly. I wake up everyday jubilated to be alive. I think, though I only began this journey a few months ago, its already integrated itself into the majority of my day. Everything feels in balance :). Therefore, I value it immensely, so I guess it is like my religion. :D A way to summarize it in plain-man's term : "Everything just feels right" :)
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Jakbob wrote: »
    I value my Buddhism greatly. I wake up everyday jubilated to be alive. I think, though I only began this journey a few months ago, its already integrated itself into the majority of my day. Everything feels in balance :). Therefore, I value it immensely, so I guess it is like my religion. :D A way to summarize it in plain-man's term : "Everything just feels right" :)

    That sounds great, but is it permanent?
  • JakbobJakbob Explorer
    edited September 2010
    GuyC wrote: »
    That sounds great, but is it permanent?

    Haha. Of course not :D But that is also satisfying. I think my original post was written a little wrong. I possibly exaggerated things accidentally o.O. I am on a journey like many :) with many twists and turns.
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Jakbob wrote: »
    Haha. Of course not :D But that is also satisfying. I think my original post was written a little wrong. I possibly exaggerated things accidentally o.O. I am on a journey like many :) with many twists and turns.

    Cool, good luck on your journey. I hope that the Sukha (happiness) that you are experiencing now lasts a long time. :)
  • JakbobJakbob Explorer
    edited September 2010
    I don't believe that I have attained happiness, rather I'm working to eliminate suffering which is satisfying when it isn't present. Hope I clarified myself. :)
  • FoibleFullFoibleFull Canada Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Before answering this question, "religion" must be defined. So I will supply my own definition: Faith in a higher power which will save you in one way or another.

    No, I do regard my practice as a religious one.

    Buddha taught that no one can "save" us but ourselves. And I believe that. So even though my practice may look like a religion to others, in actuality it is not. I see the various rituals and pujas as being very much a cognitive-behavioral retraining of the mind, not as an act of faith or an act of supplication. I do revere all those who have attained Buddhahood, but this is not the same thing as worship.
  • DazzleDazzle
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    Bold statements.
    This implies not only that we know exactly what the "historical" Buddha taught but also that you have some kind of direct insight into their verifiable nature.
    What is nirvana like Dazzle?




    Really shenpen nagwa, does it give you pleasure making such sarcastic remarks to me?

    Where's all that special bodhisattvic loving kindness and compassion for all sentient beings you're supposed to be developing ?


    .
  • JakbobJakbob Explorer
    edited September 2010
    I've come to a realization that I didn't in my prior posts. I was to hastey to think of this, but I don't like "labeling" things with "titles". It promotes perceptions of things I think... I don't know. :o Life is just a basket of lolipops with various colors and wrappings :P
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Jakbob, your aversion to labels is also a form of labelling. Labelling labels.

    This is a link (notice how I labelled the link as a link, cool huh?)
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Dazzle wrote: »
    Really shenpen nagwa, does it give you pleasure making such sarcastic remarks to me?

    Where's all that special bodhisattvic loving kindness and compassion for all sentient beings you're supposed to be developing ?


    .

    Not really.
    You're the one making bold and definitive statements. I just responded to them.
    My sarcasm has a point, that point is not necessarily to offend you but to highlight the problems with posts that make strong singular claims about what we do and do not know about the "historical" Buddha and his teachings.
  • username_5username_5
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    Not really.
    You're the one making bold and definitive statements. I just responded to them.
    My sarcasm has a point, that point is not necessarily to offend you but to highlight the problems with posts that make strong singular claims about what we do and do not know about the "historical" Buddha and his teachings.

    Technically we don't know anything at all about the 'historical Buddha'. There are writings and stories and we know that the community of Buddhists accepts them as authoritative (with some exceptions), but that's all we have to go on.

    When I read words about what the historical Buddha taught I just assume one is referring to the basic and fundamental teachings on suffering and the path that leads to liberation. These truths are verifiable through reason and direct experience, aren't they?

    I guess I don't see any statements that are 'bold' being made.

    I think I need to flag my own post as :ot: Perhaps I get special allowances since I am the OP, but perhaps not :D
  • LincLinc Site owner Detroit Moderator
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    What is nirvana like Dazzle?
    Goading.
    Dazzle wrote: »
    Where's all that special bodhisattvic loving kindness and compassion for all sentient beings you're supposed to be developing ?
    Goading right back.
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    I just responded to them.
    BS claim of innocence.
    Dazzle wrote: »
    zzz.gif
    Unbelievably rude.
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    You really are one of Dhammadhatu's disciples arent you.
    Rude retort.


    You're both excused from this discussion. I've removed some of the quoted posts and several following. I suggest taking a break from engaging each other.
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Lincoln wrote: »
    Goading.
    Goading right back.BS claim of innocence.Unbelievably rude.Rude retort.


    You're both excused from this discussion. I've removed some of the quoted posts and several following. I suggest taking a break from engaging each other.

    fair enough.
  • still_learningstill_learning Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Would practicing buddhism as a religion create for the practicioner some attachments, and therefore counterproductive? No sarcasm, actual question.

    But of course, that would depend on what religion means.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Would practicing buddhism as a religion create for the practicioner some attachments, and therefore counterproductive? No sarcasm, actual question.

    But of course, that would depend on what religion means.

    Yes but you could also have attachments to buddhism as a non-religion. And you could be free from attachments as a religion or as a non-religion. It really depends what you mean by religion.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    What is nirvana like.....?

    imminently verifiable

    http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showpost.php?p=119005&postcount=1
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    still_learning wrote: »
    Would practicing buddhism as a religion create for the practicioner some attachments, and therefore counterproductive? No sarcasm, actual question.

    Good question. Have you heard of the "Simile of the Raft"?


    The Raft Simile

    "Monks, I will teach you the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

    "As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One.

    The Blessed One said: "Suppose a man were traveling along a path. He would see a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. The thought would occur to him, 'Here is this great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?' Then the man, having gathered grass, twigs, branches, & leaves, having bound them together to make a raft, would cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with his hands & feet. [7] Having crossed over to the further shore, he might think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying on my back, go wherever I like?' What do you think, monks: Would the man, in doing that, be doing what should be done with the raft?"

    "No, lord."

    "And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas."


    "Alagaddupama Sutta: The Water-Snake Simile" (MN 22), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, July 16, 2010, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited September 2010
    still_learning wrote: »
    Would practicing buddhism as a religion create for the practicioner some attachments, and therefore counterproductive? No sarcasm, actual question.

    But of course, that would depend on what religion means.

    Not necessarily, it depends on the individual.
  • username_5username_5
    edited September 2010
    still_learning wrote: »
    Would practicing buddhism as a religion create for the practicioner some attachments, and therefore counterproductive? No sarcasm, actual question.

    But of course, that would depend on what religion means.

    It does depend on what religion means which is why I left it undefined in my OP. I wanted others to think for themselves what religion is to them and whether they regard their own practice as religion or religious.

    I can very quickly provide one definition of religion and then prove it's impossible not to form attachments, but that would be putting the cart before the horse.
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    imminently verifiable

    http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showpost.php?p=119005&postcount=1
    A link to one of your own posts is a verification of nirvana?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    A link to one of your own posts is a verification of nirvana?
    My own post is not the point. What the post describes is not novel to me or my invention, but basic Dharma as taught and openly discussed by those who practice in my Sangha. It is straightforward.
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    My own post is not the point. What the post describes is not novel to me or my invention, but basic Dharma as taught and openly discussed by those who practice in my Sangha. It is straightforward.


    Anything more convincing you would like to share? An actual source of some kind?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    Anything more convincing you would like to share? An actual source of some kind?
    No. I have no investment in convincing you of anything. The content of the post speaks for itself.
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    No. I have no investment in convincing you of anything. The content of the post speaks for itself.

    The content of the post speaks for what you believe. Nothing more.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    shenpen nangwa wrote: »
    The content of the post speaks for what you believe. Nothing more.
    I'm not going to defend the post. You judge it as you see fit and we can leave at that.
  • shenpennangwashenpennangwa
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    I'm not going to defend the post. You judge it as you see fit and we can leave at that.

    Okie dokie.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    regarding the OP. In the experience of me and my family, there is a congregation, there is the ordained Sangha (in zen you will find the position "reverend" and "priest".) It involves a 100% commitment that includes every aspect of life. Much social life is organized around Sangha. it represents the highest values. If "religion" is going to fit anything it would fit that it seems. Yet we don't think about the word much.
  • still_learningstill_learning Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Back to answering the OP's question. My practice of buddhism is not a religion, but more like a philosophy of life. I'm pretty laid back about it. I just try to be as compassionate as I can, as often as I can and to as many people as I can. I don't follow all the precepts nor understand them enough.

    Practicing buddhism as a religion sounds like it's the next step, one that I'm not ready for yet.
  • cazcaz Veteran United Kingdom Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Yes Buddhism has a religious aspect, It is where the Dharma is learnt, But the Dharma Itself is a manual for training the mind, there are many parts that are applicable to all people without exception and some just for dedicated Dharma practitoners. :)
    It wonderful when people practise Dharma it makes for happy's ! :)
  • AzikilAzikil
    edited September 2010
    I think for me, this is going to be a philosophy and a strong influence on my life. How I think of and regard other people. How I think about myself. But I just don't think I'm ready for a religion yet.

    My brain is just not wired that way, maybe for now, maybe for this life.
    :lol:

    Too many questions. Though I don't think that's a bad thing. 80% the reason I get up in the morning is simply out of curiousity
  • DeformedDeformed Veteran
    edited September 2010
    username_5 wrote: »
    It seems that there are many perspectives on whether or not Buddhism is properly classified as a religion or not. The answer, of course, depends on how one defines what a religion is.

    I am not asking whether *you* believe "Buddhism" is a religion or not, rather I am asking whether your beliefs and practices are something *you* regard as being religious or not.

    The question assumes that you do self identify as Buddhist. Extra brownie points if you provide some explanation of why you do or do not regard your beliefs and practices as religious in nature.

    I am not going to answer my own question as I don't wish to set any tone (I may answer my own question later after others have had a chance to respond (assuming anyone does respond ;) )

    I am as much of a painter, a driver, and a worker as I am a Buddhist. I practice all of these things, and many more things. I am a dishwasher, a boyfriend, and a hiker.

    What I "believe" does not make who I am. Perhaps beliefs are rather useless, and intentions are where we actually use our mind to take action, or non-action.
Sign In or Register to comment.