It is both although we would not go far
wrong if we called it a practical philosophy so old that it has religious forms.
We meditate before a Buddha image on an altar, bow either towards the image or
towards each other and even place offerings on the altar. By contrast, we do not
practise analytic philosophy before an image of Socrates on an altar. Buddhist
teaching addresses philosophical issues:
the concept of souls;
causality;
the eternality or otherwise of the world;
the constituents of consciousness;
how to live rightly.
causality;
the eternality or otherwise of the world;
the constituents of consciousness;
how to live rightly.
As an analysis of the cause of suffering
and a way to the end of suffering, Buddhist philosophy is practical, not
academic. Buddhist practice refers neither to the gods nor to a creator. The
religious formulae of a temple or meditation hall facilitate the practice of
meditation. They do not placate deities. So far, this makes Buddhism
philosophical, not religious. In Buddhist countries, the culture incorporates
both Buddhist and polytheist practices. Further, Buddhist practice does refer
not to a transcendent being but definitely to a transcendent state. Since I
define religion basically as response to the highest transcendence, I regard
Buddhism as both philosophical and religious.
Marxism also incorporates both
philosophical analysis and practical action. Both Buddhism and Marxism address
the state of the world and what is to be done about it.
A Zen lay minister responded that Buddhism is a "calling"? I think this makes it a religion?
ReplyDelete