Vacula 1

Justin Vacula

Eastern Philosophy

Dr. Irwin

May 10, 2011

Should Buddhism be Considered a Religion?

Many associate the world 'religion' with dogma, organized hierarchy, divine revelation,

belief in supernatural forces, prayer, and an afterlife, but religions often do not contain all of

these elements. Individual persons within religions also have differing ideas and are often quite

diverse. Unitarian Universalism, for example, is considered to be a religion, but many non-

theistic persons and agnostic theists are members. Scientology, considered to be a religion by its

adherents and some non-adherents, is looked at by some as a cult and has failed to gain status as

a religion in countries such as Germany and Canada. Eastern philosophy seems to further

complicate the problem of what constitutes a religion and which traditions, if any, should be

considered religions. I will argue that Buddhism should not be viewed as a religion. Although it

may be difficult to distinguish religion from non-religion and there may be no objective standard

by which to define religion, the original teachings of the Buddha thought of in the light of how

the Oxford English Dictionary defines religion show that Buddhism is not a religion. Buddhists

Kasappa and Thera do not consider Buddhism to be a religion and Sam Harris believes that

people would most benefit from Buddhism if it were not presented as or viewed as a religion.

The Oxford English Dictionary offers various definitions for the word 'religion' including

“action or conduct indicating belief in, obedience to, and reverence for a god, gods, or similar

superhuman power; the performance of religious rites or observances,” “a particular system of

faith and worship,” and “Belief in or acknowledgment of some superhuman power or powers
 Vacula 2
(esp. a god or gods) which is typically manifested in obedience, reverence, and worship; such as

a belief as part of a system defining a code of living, esp. as a means of achieving spiritual or

material improvement” (religion). A key element of Buddhism is that there is a lack of deity

worship or some sort of worship involving a supernatural power. A well-known aphorism

amongst Buddhists emerging from the ninth century Buddhist master Lin Chi is “kill the

Buddha” which means that the Buddha is not meant to be treated like a God or worshiped (Harris

73). Without the element of divine worship, Buddhism lacks what several of the Oxford English

Dictionary and common definitions require for something to be a religion. What, then, are the

core tenants of Buddhism?

Classical Buddhism offers a code for living with the ideas of the four noble truths, the

eightfold path and the middle way, but these are not presented as dogma. Buddha presents the

four noble truths, claims about reality that noticeably lack supernatural content and does not say

that faith is needed or desired to accept his teaching, in order to tell others that suffering is a

problem and declare that one can be liberated from suffering. The eightfold path is presented as a

guide for living, but also lacks supernatural content, is not dogmatic, and does not require faith to

accept. The Buddha presented the idea of the middle way after he learned that his asceticism was

too extreme; he believed that balancing asceticism and physical indulgence was the way to

enlightenment. If people are purely devoted to indulgence or asceticism, the Buddha thought,

they would be slaves to their desires and would have reduced physical health (Brannigan 257-

259). From the above analysis and looking back to the proposed definitions of religion,

Buddhism still has a code of living and is interested in physical and spiritual improvement, but

the Buddha's view on metaphysical ideas might complicate or make sense of this survey.
 Vacula 3
A story involving the sage Malunkyaputta illustrates the Buddha's unwillingness to give

definitive metaphysical answers. Malunkyaputta recounts several issues that the Buddha was not

willing to answer such as whether the world is eternal or not, whether the world is finite or

infinite, whether the soul and body were identical or not, or whether there is life after death and

notes “the fact that the Blessed One [Buddha] does not elucidate them to me does not please me

nor suit me” (65). The Buddha compared the sage's situation to an instance of a man being shot

with a poisoned arrow who asks questions about who shot the arrow and what the arrow was

made of instead of focusing on other matters such as getting the arrow removed (65). Since the

Buddha did not want to answer the questions, one can view Buddhism and the teachings of the

Buddha as lacking dogmatism or totality. Many religions and adherents of religions believe that

they 'have the truth,' 'have the only true religion,' and declare absolute certainty on metaphysical

matters. The Buddha did not want to answer specific questions, but later Buddhists proposed

various metaphysical ideas.

The Sautrantika school proposes that reality is ever-changing, everything that is perceived

is just traces of things, and there is no objective reality. Mahayana Buddhists emphasize the

concept of 'sunya' which means empty and swollen. When contemplating reality, Mahayana

Buddhists believe that everything in sunja. Michael Brannigan elaborates, “Not only are things

without substantial reality, but even our ideas, concepts, and ways of describing things are sunya,

empty, and therefore hallow. This includes Buddhist teachings” (68). The Vijnanavadin school

emphasizes that reality is only a projection of mental states; therefore all that exists is the mind

and levels of consciousness. Once the nature of the mind is realized, according to adherents of

this school, true awakening occurs (70). Many of these metaphysical ideas are added to specific

threads of Buddhism and are not similar to the original teachings of the Buddha, but they remain
 Vacula 4
nonetheless. Although some of these ideas may be unfalsifiable, mere conjecture, and patently

false, there is no element in this analysis that is to be believed as dogma or must be believed for

one to be considered a Buddhist.

Bhante Kassapa Bhikkhu, a Theravada Buddhist monk, in a Lamar University talk in

2007, says that it is unfair to call Buddhism as a religion even though it is practiced as a religion

because there is no godhead. Buddhists, he notes, do not owe allegiance to any sort of

supernatural being or a group of supernatural. Buddhism, he notes, does not have a god figure;

Buddhism “has a man” (the Buddha). He also says that Buddhism shouldn't be considered a

philosophy because the biggest part of Buddhism is practice, not philosophy. Once you find out

how Buddhism works, he says, you just practice. He notes that Buddhism is, rather than a

philosophy or a religion, “rules for daily living” (Kassapa b).

In an extended version of Kassapa's speech posted as a 'Dhammacast' on April 27, 2009,

he notes that the practice of religion is commonly characterized by faith in supernatural beings

with powers beyond those of humans. “Buddhism,” he notes, “does not demand a system of faith

from its followers. The idea of faith is substituted with a confidence based on the knowledge and

experience.” Buddhists may seek refuge in the Buddha, he notes, but it is more proper to see this

as a relationship between student and teacher or doctor and patient. Followers of the Buddha

make no surrender to the Buddha and do not attain enlightenment by following him, but rather

attain enlightenment by practice; “We are the responsible parties for purification for ourself

[sic]” (Kassapa a).

Kassapa notes that a Buddhist follower is not a slave to a book or an individual and does

not sacrifice freedom. “The Buddhist practitioner,” he notes, “is fully at liberty to practice the

freedom of thought and develop the knowledge needed to attain Buddhahood for themselves”
 Vacula 5
(Kassapa a). He says that Buddhists do not accept something on the “say so” of someone else,

but rather uses his/her own reasoning to judge whether something is true or not. There is no

prayer or bargaining in Buddhism, Kassapa notes. “In the truest sense,” he says, “Buddhism is

not a religion” (Kassapa a).

Kassapa notes many crucial reasons for why he doesn't consider Buddhism to be a

religion and appears to be correct if Buddhism is compared to what is frequently attributed to

religions in the West. Rather than being a revered being which knows all the answers, the

Buddha is more accurately viewed as a teacher and Buddhism is more appropriately viewed as a

way of living. Buddhists have the freedom to 'choose their own paths' and are encouraged to do

so. No Buddhist need believe any Buddhist teachings on faith or accept them as dogma unlike

many religions in the West which praise faith and dogma. Philosopher Dr. David Kyle Johnson

believes that the discussion of what is or is not a religion is more complex than people typically

view it because there is no objective standard by which to consider something to be a religion

and assumes that Buddhism is a religion.

Johnson, in his chapter “Francis Griffin & The Church of the Holy Fonz: Religious

Exclusivism and “Real” Religion” within the book Family Guy and Philosophy: A Cure for the

Petarded, argues that distinguishing religion from non-religion is very difficult and uses

Buddhism as a counter-example to what many people consider religions to be; some people

would insist that lack of deity worship and 'truthful fictions' would disqualify something from

being a religion, but he doesn't believe this is the case because Buddhism admittedly has 'truthful

fictions' and does not revere a deity. Johnson writes that one might suggest that a religion is not a

religion because adherents don't worship a deity or deities and notes, “the fact that Buddhists

don't worship a deity or deities quickly eliminates this as a legitimate response” (Johnson 43).
 Vacula 6
Johnson mentions the tale of Buddha's four signs (the story in which Buddha sees an old man, an

ill person, a funeral procession, and a sage free from anxiety, illness, or death) which led Buddha

to seek enlightenment and notes that Buddhists, followers of other religions [besides

Christianity], would regard this story as a 'truthful fiction' (45). He notes that identifying what

makes a religion an 'unreal religion' “may be impossible because there is no objective criterion

by which one can establish something is a religion” (45).

Johnson, unlike the previous mentioned Buddhists, assumes that Buddhism is a religion

in his text and does not specifically focus on whether or not Buddhism is a religion, but rather

how people can distinguish 'real religion' from 'false religion.' Johnson notes that “we need not

be concerned about … whether other religions are real” (45). Should, then, we not be concerned

about whether Buddhism is a religion? Are we asking the wrong questions like the man shot with

the arrow in the story involving Malunkyaputta? Should we then not worry about whether

Buddhism is a religion or not, but rather be concerned with whether or not we should consider

Buddhism as a religion?

Sam Harris, in a 2006 article in Shambala Sun, a leading Buddhist magazine, argues that

presenting Buddhism as a religion is a mistake and that people would benefit more from the

insights of Buddhism if it were not practiced as a religion. Harris writes, “to turn the Buddha into

a religious fetish is to miss the essence of what he taught” (Harris 73). Harris says that it may be

true to say that Buddhism is not a religion, but many Buddhists “practice it as such, in many of

the naive, petitionary, and superstitious ways in which all religions are practiced … there are

many ideas within Buddhism that are so incredible as to render the dogma of the virgin birth

plausible by comparison” (74).

 Vacula 7
Harris believes that people can embrace the Buddha's teaching and become a Buddhist

contemplative without believing anything on insufficient evidence, much different than faith

based religions (74). While some who practice Buddhism practice it as if it were a religion, it

seems, through Harris' analysis, that this is a corruption of the Buddha's teaching because he

notes that people can follow the Buddha's teaching without accepting anything on insufficient

evidence. Narada Maha Thera agrees with some of Harris' analysis and also focuses on the lack

of faith and dogma in Buddhism that allows for Buddhists to practice Buddhism like a way of

living instead of a religion.

Narada Maha Thera, a Theravadan Buddhist monk and translator, writes, “Buddhism

cannot, therefore, strictly be called a religion because it is neither a system of faith and worship”

(Thera). Thera recounts what the Buddha said that seems to disqualify Buddhism as a religion

because many religions emphasize faith, dogma, and tradition,

Do not accept anything on hearsay. Do not accept anything by

mere tradition. Do not accept anything on account of mere rumors.

Do not accept anything just because it accords with your

scriptures. Do not accept anything by mere suppositions. Do not

accept anything by mere inference. Do not accept anything by

merely considering the reasons. Do not accept anything merely

because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions. Do not accept

anything merely because it seems acceptable. Do not accept

anything thinking that the ascetic is respected by us (Thera).

Words like these do not typically stem from religious teachers in the modern day. Generally,

believers embrace tradition, dogma, and faith and accept that which their books say without
 Vacula 8
challenging the truth content of the claims. Believers may doubt, but many often take the

existence of God for granted as a preconceived notion. Theologians work from the assumption

that God exists and try to make sense of everything in light of this assumption, but they are not

doing what philosophers of religion are doing when considering deep questions. Theologians

have preconceived notions that God exists, that he is omni-benevolent, and that God revealed

himself to adherents. Buddhists, like the Buddha said, do not do this (and do not believe in any

gods). Some members of religions may be ‘religious liberals,’ ‘culturally religious,’ or embrace a

‘mythical faith,’ thus rejecting many core tenants of their religion or interpreting their religious

beliefs quite radically in comparison with the majority of other believers, but this is not common

nor do people like this constitute a majority opinion.

The crux of the discussion ultimately falls on how one would define 'religion.' As

Johnson mentions, it is very difficult to have an objective standard by which to define a religion.

Harris notes that various adherents of Buddhism practice Buddhism as if it were a religion and

that some Buddhists endorse claims which are more incredible than the virgin birth believed by

Christians, but others can follow the Buddha's teachings without adding superstition. Kassapa

does not consider Buddhism to be a religion, but he doesn't mention elements of newer traditions

within Buddhism or the practices which Harris finds superstitious. Looking back to the original

teachings of the Buddha, Thera notes that the Buddha advised others to be critical thinkers, not

accept claims on faith, and not appeal to traditions as justification for belief. If religion is thought

of as described in the Oxford English Dictionary, there can be some standard by which to

distinguish religion from non-religion. Buddhism appears not to be a religion, but rather a way

by which to live.
 Vacula 9
Works Cited

Brannigan, Michael. The Pulse of Wisdom: The Philosophies of India, China, and Japan.

Toronto: Wadsworth Thomson Learning, 2000. Print.

Harris, Sam. "Killing the Buddha."Shambala Sun. Mar 2006: Print.

Johnson, David Kyle.Family Guy and Philosophy: A Cure for the Petarded. Malden, MA:

Blackwell Publishing, Ltd., 2007. Print.

Kassapa, Bhante. "Dhammacast Archive - From East to West." From West to East: The Journey

by Bhante Kassapa Bhikkhu. 27 Apr 2009. Web.

Kassapa, Bhante. "Is Buddhism a Religion or Philosophy?." Lamar University, Beaumont, TX.

20 Sep 2007. Address.

"religion, n.". OED Online. March 2011. Oxford University Press. 8 May 2011.

Thera, Narada. "Is it a Religion?."Buddhism in a Nutshell. Buddha Dharma Education

Association. Web.