Buddhism is not a religion. Can anyone find inconsistency in Buddhism?

Question

Regardless of what anyone will say, Buddhism is NOT a religion. Buddhism is philosophy. However, 'personally', I find Buddhism the most credible system of thought, when compared to any other religion. Then again, there are people who claim to be Buddhists when they don't know the teachings behind it, and rub the stomachs of fat golden statues...for good luck; hence they are 'religious'. I'm asking the question: Can anyone find any inconsistency in Buddhism?

If you can, I'd like to hear any, and explanations would be highly valued. I'm hoping there are no religious prejudices, e.g. Buddhism has no God and contradicts my religion, because frankly, that doesn't make Buddhism inconsistent. I'd like to get some facts down. Perhaps, it's about time to clarify misconceptions and prejudices over Buddhism, whereas I can understand society in a broader sense.

Thanks. :)

Answer 1

Basically Buddhism is a practise that helps people to be a better person, basically rubbing stomach of a laughing buddha are just a gimmic for some people to make a place as a tourist attraction area.

Do you really belief that rubbing a stomach of a laughing buddha will bring you wealth and happiness?

Buddhist practices the Four Noble Truths and the Eight-Fold Path.

Dont talk so much about it's deep practices, lets just talk on the most basic ones, okay?

Do you enjoy killing beings and even throw a party after killing?
How about Having Sexual Misconduct?
Or do you like Stealing and making it as your hobby?
and Lying and get people in trouble and be proud of it?

No to each question? well congratulations! you are practising the Buddhism!

I'm running short of time and need to go off, if you are interested to debate or to know more about buddhism email me at [e-mail]

or visit my blog at http://www.tsondruegyatso.blogspot.com

Answer 2

Well, most religions I know of have some sort of idolistic figure, eg a God or some kind of Spirit, to guide the people. Buddhism on the other hand, does not have a God per se. So i'm more lenient in the opinion in that Buddhism is more of a philosophy on life, rather than a religion.
I think there should be questions like this regarding ALL other kinds of religions, eg Sematics, Catholics, Christians, Islamic, Hinduism, etc, so we don't have people making all sorts of polls such as "what's your REAL opinion on Christians?", or even worse, "why are Christians so opposed to so-and-so?". Frankly, I'm sick of people asking so many negative questions about this-religion and that-religion- Christianity in particular. (And yes, I'm actually non-religious although I have devoutly religious friends.)
On Buddhism now. To quote from Wikipedia: "Buddhism is a dharmic, non-theistic religion, a philosophy, and a system of psychology." So, it's both a religion AND a philosophy. From the little knowledge of buddhism, I'd say its more of a philosophy, since its teachings are to improve oneself, such as "In Buddhism, any person who has awakened from the "sleep of ignorance" is called a buddha". Basically, being unselfish, not being arrogant and give more than you take.
Also, I don't know of anyone has noticed, but there aren't anything in particular that buddhism is opposed to, except to be more selfless. Christianity is opposed to the idea of killing life, not matter how small which is how we have Christians opposing against abortions. If i were to choose which religion to follow, I'd prefer it to be Buddhism. It may teach people to be more selfless, less ignorant and to think of other peoples' needs, but it still reminds us to remember the reality of the world, i.e stop dreaming in fantasy land.

Answer 3

I understand why you think Buddhism does not rise to the definition of a religion, particularly if you believe a religion must have a central deity or deities to qualify as such.

However, Buddhism involves a practice and a way of thinking that is fairly life-changing. It takes a certain discipline to sit and meditate, sometimes for hours each week. A philosophy often does not require so much from its adherents. Buddhism talks about becoming different as a person. It encourages altering your thoughts to alter who you are. It denies that there is a self, an idea many people find counter-intuitive. It offers "religious" tenets, such as the Four Noble Truths and the Eight-Fold Path.

Perhaps Buddhism can be said to remain a philosophy instead of a religion if one doesn't practice, but accepts that the practice may be beneficial. However, if you engage in it, the increase in self-knowledge and the development of relationships with your fellow human beings can alter your entire life. In that way, it may qualify as a religion.

Mysticism is finding its way out of western Buddhism. Many in Asia and in the west are abandoning the idea of reincarnation. A book by Stephen Batchelor may be helpful: "Buddhism without Belief." It's a brief summary of Buddhism and requires no reference to or acceptance of anything supernatural.

.

Answer 4

Regardless of what Buddhists claim... the "movement" known as Buddhism has many of the same social characteristics as modern religions, and undoubtedly fills many of the same voids that religions fill in the lives of their respective followers.

People in general seem to NEED a prescribed set of doctrines that tell them what is right and wrong, how to live, and how to treat their fellow humans. This is the constructive aspect of religion in general, and Buddhism shares this quality with other major world religions. Therefore, although it's not a religion in a theistic sense, it is one in a social sense.

Were it not for the Buddhist belief in reincarnation, it's likely that Buddhism would universally be considered a philosophy, like Confucianism. Reincarnation is a supernatural concept, and therefore propels Buddhism into the realm of religion, even if it was not originally founded as such.

Like so many religions throughout history, it's easy to imagine that Buddha would be shocked to see what his beliefs have evolved into.

Answer 5

I'm not an expert, but from what I do know about Buddhism, there is some debate among its adherents as to whether or not the statement "Nothing is permanent, everything changes" applies to the Buddha and Nirvana, or if they are exempt because of their freedom from Samsara.
I do agree with you though, Buddhism is more of a philosophy in many ways than a religion in of itself, but culturally its been treated more like a religion over the years. In a way, very much both, depending on how you look at it. The word religion itself comes from the latin "religio" which roughly means "sense of right" so by that definition, philosophy and religion are not mutually exclusive.

Answer 6

I read all the other answers before I began mine, and as far as I can tell, no one that has answered is Buddhist. I am, and so I will tell you what you want to know from my perspective. Mind you, this discussion could be easily neverending! That is one reason I devote my life to it.

As "500 mag" said when stating the definition of a religion, a philosophy CAN be a religion, and Buddhism is an example of that. I personally call it MY religion because I follow it wholeheartedly. Buddhism is, most simply put, a way of life. (And a wonderful one, at that! :) )

As for the base of your question, the only inconsistency about Buddhism is the perceptions and statements of PEOPLE, because we are all imperfect and have inconsistent views.
1) Idolatry plays NO part in Buddhism. We do NOT worship statues, and we also do NOT worship even Buddha himself. Gautama Buddha is simply our inspiration, and gives us the drive to achieve what he did, because his experiences (and many other's after him) proved that it can be done. Hope and faith play huge parts in "religions" or "ways of life."

2)Buddhism is not a "godless" religion. Nor does it promote a god. For this, I will quote a part of one of my favorite books. " .....In this way Buddhist morality is grounded in human experience. It has no reference to a supernatural being. We do not have to have a concept of a diety or God in order to have a concept of morality or to appreciate the importance of morality." Basically, Buddhists are allowed to believe what they want to about a God, but it really plays no part in our general practice.

3) The second part of "commodore's" answer was good.

4)About the answer from "Torchbearer".......Gautama Buddha didn't ask to be worshipped or claim he was a god, so he's right there, but all monks and nuns are forbidden from asking for ANYTHING, anything at all. We can only take what is offered, we cannot ask.

5)About answer from "NH Baritone", the practice of Buddhism is not "fairly" life-changing, it's utterly life-changing, and wonderful. It DOES, as he said, take much discipline, and I agree with everything else in his answer.

Wow, this is already really long, and so if anyone wants answers to things I did not cover, I would gladly chat through the email about [e-mail]

Answer 7

Your question was about inconsistencies in Buddhism. You stated that Buddhism is not a religion. That part was not a question. I agree, btw. Buddhism is a set of psycho-physical tools. As the Dalai Lama has said, you can experiment with these tools. You don't need to accept anything on faith.

Buddhism has several main types, and many schools within those categories. The main areas are Hinayana, or Theravada, as practiced mainly in Thailand and Vietnam. Mahayana, and Vajrayana are the types practiced in Tibet. This is a form of tantra. It has also evolved to incorporate Dzogchen, which is related to the shamanistic tradition that Tibetans practiced before the arrival of Buddhism around the 8th century.

Zen in Japan evolved out of Chan Buddhism from China, which was brought there by Bodhidharma. Sometimes, Zen and Dzogchen are considered similar, since they are so advanced that they are almost unrecognizable from the level of Theravada.

So, without going in to sub-schools within these major categories, you could say that there is a certain amount of inconsistency between the major categories, or vehicles (yana means "vehicle," as in Hinayana...lower vehicle...and Mahayana...higher vehicle.)

Theravadans follow the Damapada, which is considered a direct account of the words and teachings of Shakyamuni, "the Buddha." They are very ascetic, as was Shakyamuni in life, along with his community of monks...although he is famous for having repudiated the asceticism of Vedic yogis from the Hindu tradition of his time, in which he excelled.

Mahayana Buddhism has a huge cannon, which is not the Damapada. In some cases, the teachings are directly attributed to the historical Buddha. These are said to be teachings given on a transphysical platform. There are also numerous other enlightened or very wise authors whose texts are included in the Mahayana library.

So, at some level, there is a disagreement on certain points between many practitioners of these two "vehicles." Dzogchen and Zen is another story altogether, and often almost defies explanation or understanding by ordinary people.

Then, without going in to detail, I would say there are many various sub-schools, which are certainly not homogeneous. In Tibet, there are four main schools, including the Nygma, or old school, the Gelugpa, or monastic, which is where the Dalai Lama comes from. The Nygma is the only school of the four that allows lamas to be married...so that is one type of lifestyle inconsistency.

Then there are various belief systems. For instance, there is the mind only school, which believes, as you can imagine, that the only reality is mental experience. The Dalai Lama is part of the madyamaka school, which is more like a middle way, between mind only and materialism...the basic idea, if I can condense it, is that everything has relative reality...things as well as mental phenomena are real as they are perceived, but not in an absolute sense.

So yes, there are a lot of inconsistencies, and Buddhist philosophers and scholars revel in exploring and analyzing these, which in itself is a spiritual practice. On a basic level, my college professor of comparative religions, who was also a kind of guru to me, said, "I don't think the Buddha said 'There is no self.' I think he said 'there is no self?'"

Answer 8

Just because Buddhism does not have a God, doesn't mean its not a religion. Religion doesn't entail a creator, and a bible, and whatnot. Religion is about having some sort of belief structure and spirituality.
And what difference does it make if it is a religion or not? Are you making a difference by protesting this?

Answer 9

definite....and definite. Buddhists in Thailand are being persecuted via Muslims, who're informed via the Holy Koran to kill polytheists. additionally, they have in lots of cases suffered political persecution which includes presently in Myanmar, the place the clergymen protested for freedom and the protection stress had a crackdown. There has by no ability been large scale persecution of Buddhists, nonetheless. a minimum of not in modern cases. of direction the preliminary wave of Islam, and additionally the unfold of Islam in the time of SE Asia and Indonesia in touch relatively some loss of existence and conversion. The Buddhists who persecute at the instant are not being "stable" Buddhists. a stable Buddhist is non-violent of direction. even nonetheless, racist and nationalistic Buddhists are committing some genocidal acts against minority race and faith tribes (such because of the fact the Karen tribe) in South East Asia. This genocide is very glaring in Myanmar, and additionally in Vietnam. They sense that the impure ethnicity or the Christianity is a danger to the classic way of existence, and that's met with violence. yet that's relatively a minority of the Buddhists, for the main section their doctrine emphasizes which you will not care too lots approximately something.

Answer 10

I believe Buddhism does qualify as a uniquely godless religion. It qualifies in pretty much every other sense of the concept.