Is Buddhism a psychology, a philosophy or a world religion

[SWM]

Is Buddhism a psychology, a philosophy or a world religion?
though it is usually referred to as a world religion, it is not a religion in the same sense as christianity, islam or judaism.

Buddhism offers a system of personal development, self responsibilty and the attainment of deep realisations. is this a not more a of psychology or a philosophy than a religion?

 

[cognitive]

I must recognize that I don't know much about budhism's philosophy .must read about .

Buddhism offers a system of personal development, self responsibilty and the attainment of deep realisations

lol, I thought that Christianity offers all those and much more. for instant,in the following verses

" "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

i found one of defence mechanisms  , guess which one  ?

[SWM]

would that be projection?

the pychology of buddhism is definitely worth looking into. if you are interested in psychology and religion, then buddhist psychology is an area to explore.

i dont have many resources that i can link you to but if any body finds any while browsing you could post them back in this thread.

this one looks a good place to start http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/Pilou.html

[seekinghga]

[I know it's been a while for this post, but I only just got here!]

As to the question:
It is my opinion that Buddhism can be one or all of these things.  I would think that religion would be the least likely, due to Buddhism's non-dogmatic character.  Also its tangibility put it up there with with all the other empirical sciences.  The best site I have found:
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/intro_bud.htm

[liza123]

Is Buddhism a psychology, a philosophy or a world religion?
though it is usually referred to as a world religion, it is not a religion in the same sense as christianity, islam or judaism.

Buddhism offers a system of personal development, self responsibilty and the attainment of deep realisations. is this a not more a of psychology or a philosophy than a religion?

 

Yes, i agree with you. Buddhism is more of a philosophy. After all, Buddha was a Hindu Prince who practised the meditation principles as per Hinduism. He was enlightened during meditation and preached his philosophies which were later called Buddhism

[Enigma]

I'd classify Buddhism as a psychological philosophy that is practiced like a religion.

[voodoo scientist]

It's a religion.

[seekinghga]

It's a religion.

Why?

[voodoo scientist]

Buddhism is primarily classified as such in multiple dictionaries (including OED and Merriam-Webster).

Thus, "religion" is the most efficient description to use in terms of achieving maximum communication efficiency, and will in the most cases provide a satisfying description for people who rely on dictionaries to define their use of English.

[seekinghga]

Buddhism is primarily classified as such in multiple dictionaries (including OED and Merriam-Webster).

Thus, "religion" is the most efficient description to use in terms of achieving maximum communication efficiency, and will in the most cases provide a satisfying description for people who rely on dictionaries to define their use of English.

I quoted you before I asked my question, not the dictionary definition.  Why do YOU think Buddhism is a religion?

[voodoo scientist]

Because the dictionary defines "Buddhism" as a religion and "Religion" as a category of which "Buddhism" is part.

[liza123]

Buddhism is primarily classified as such in multiple dictionaries (including OED and Merriam-Webster).

Thus, "religion" is the most efficient description to use in terms of achieving maximum communication efficiency, and will in the most cases provide a satisfying description for people who rely on dictionaries to define their use of English.

Buddhism
/booddiz’m/

  • noun a religion or philosophy, founded by Siddartha Gautama (Buddha; c.563-c.460 BC), which teaches that elimination of the self is the route to enlightenment.

  — DERIVATIVES Buddhist noun & adjective Buddhistic adjective.

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/buddhism


What was the name of the dictionary again, voodoo scientist? Not OED or Oxford English Dictionary surely?

[anaklio]

Seems like if you FEEL it, it's "spirituality" but if you try to EXPLAIN it then it becomes "religion".

[voodoo scientist]

Buddhism
/booddiz’m/

  • noun a religion or philosophy, founded by Siddartha Gautama (Buddha; c.563-c.460 BC), which teaches that elimination of the self is the route to enlightenment.

  — DERIVATIVES Buddhist noun & adjective Buddhistic adjective.

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/buddhism


What was the name of the dictionary again, voodoo scientist? Not OED or Oxford English Dictionary surely?

You miss the broader point, which is that debating terminology is pointless - regardless of who would win this debate, the dictionary would be the easiest deciding factor, as an unbiased third party.

However, in the spirit of this: Incomplete analysis, dawg. And how do you like them apples?

[liza123]

You miss the broader point, which is that debating terminology is pointless - regardless of who would win this debate, the dictionary would be the easiest deciding factor, as an unbiased third party.

However, in the spirit of this: Incomplete analysis, dawg. And how do you like them apples?

What are you talking about? You quoted the OED. I checked it online, copied and pasted the definition as in the above post. Apparently, the OED  states "religion or philosophy" and you misquoted the dictionary! There is no debate in terminology at all. Only misquoting of the OED from you!

[voodoo scientist]

What are you talking about?

The ambiguous definition in that single entry should drive you to look at associated definitions and other dictionaries. A word can't mean several things in the same context - "x or y" is a useless definition, because it fails to define anything.

[anaklio]

One of my favorite things is to dream about bringing these pioneers back. Imagine what Mozart would think about P!nk. I suspect he'd roll with pop music and make some of it himself. I bring this up because I'm wondering what Mr./Dr./The Buddha would think about this philosophy-religion debate. I'm thinking he'd think we're wasting our time with it and missing the point.

[voodoo scientist]

The subject is an absolute waste of time, but we concluded that terminology discussion in general was a waste of time several posts ago.

The debate itself is interesting, however, because our continued engagement in an admittedly intellectually wasteful discussion and our way of doing so is more directly revealing of our personality than a discussion about a genuinely interesting subject would be. Why do we do it, what do we hope to gain? People don't do things for no reason.

[anaklio]

People often neglect the role of social interaction. Everyone wants to feel like they are being heard.

And perhaps The Buddha would be excited to have so many posts about him ;-)

[liza123]

The ambiguous definition in that single entry should drive you to look at associated definitions and other dictionaries. A word can't mean several things in the same context - "x or y" is a useless definition, because it fails to define anything.

Perhaps, you should propose to Oxford to change the English language as per your definition(including the meaning of "or"). I am sure that the English people(English language did originate from England!) would do it just for you!

[voodoo scientist]

Perhaps, you should propose to Oxford to change the English language as per your definition(including the meaning of "or"). I am sure that the English people(English language did originate from England!) would do it just for you!

Oxford does not unilaterally dictate the English language. It's an imperfect tool, especially in cases like this, used to achieve greater clarity of communication.

[liza123]

Oxford does not unilaterally dictate the English language. It's an imperfect tool, especially in cases like this, used to achieve greater clarity of communication.

 ;DIndeed. There is a saying, 'None so blind as those who will not see, none so deaf as those who will not hear!'. The above is your opinion and you are entitled to one. But, it does not mean that people have to agree with you. I have made my opinion very clear on the above matter. And the case is closed for me.

[La]

Historically, philosophy, religion, way of life, etc. all have similar roots.  When it comes to collective sharing and exchange of ideas and goods, wisdom theories show that one major area where this happened was Mesopotamia.  Before scribes people had limited writing capabilities and exchanged thoughts/knowledge/wisdom by word of mouth. So, differing languages made it possible for variations in translations which may account for the similarities of philosophical and moral sayings across different religions.  

So, in answering your question I would have to say that it is...Oh heck my ADHD made it go away cause I rambled...Oh yeah. I say both however, it seems that TRUE believers think that everybody else should think like them.  Sort of egocentric and cult-like in my opinion.

[Bill Hemphill]

Philosophy refers to the way an individual or society processes information. Attitude of deduction?

Religion is a sort of system. Typically with the aim of energy directed to God.

Diet is a system, right?

Religion = diet = philosophy? Attitude is involved, faith, energy.

[TheSandman]

seems like it's both!