This business of trying to assert that I am disparaging Buddhism is a
particularly low blow. At a time when religious differences are the cause of
much upheaval in the world, to make a claim that a person is insulting
(disparaging) another's religion is inflammatory. Shame on anyone who would
fan those flames, particularly when the claim is false.
With regard to the whether Buddhism can be considered a religion or not, most
would agree that it is not, at least not in any usual sense of the word
religion. To make my point, here are several definitions of the word
'religion' (Unlike some, I provide references for my assertions):
"a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human
destiny;"
"Religion, sometimes used interchangeably with faith, is commonly defined as
belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine"
"In the service and worship of God or the supernatural a personal set or
institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices"
"the service and worship of God or the supernatural" - Merriam-Webster
"the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and
worship": - Cambridge Dictionaries
"Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as
creator and governor of the universe." - Word.com
As anyone reading this can plainly see some sense of the supernatural or a
deity is included in the common meaning of religion. There is no such belief
in Buddhism. It is much more like Taoism in this regard. It is a method to
avoid suffering and to live with compassion in this life.
You can find the same conclusion about Buddhism and religion in the works of
Tich Nyatt Hanh, (Zen Buddhist Master), Pema Chodron (Tibetan Buddhist
Master), Alan Watts (British expert on Buddhism) or even D. T. Suzuki
(perhaps thet Zen Buddhist follower best known in the west)
I would hope that any person refuting this would provide references as a
basis for that refutation and not merely fill the page with blind assertions.
|
|