Welcome to Gaia! ::

I think of Buddhism as both, I take the religious aspect for myself; while others, whatever their religion is, can take the philosiphy of it and apply it to their everyday life.

One dosent worship Buddha, i think that is the greatist misunderstanding in the westernized world. Buddha was a person, like u and me, we are all on our way to becoming Buddha's....
Does that help???

I find it kind of...strange to do so. It'd be like me worshiping my next door neighbour. Thanking him for finding a way out of the cycle of samsara, I'm cool with. But actual, full on worship throws me a little.

And he did say on numerous occasions that he wasn't to be worshiped, because he was just people like everyone else, despite his great achievements.

In the end though, I suppose it's up to you. But be ready to let go of the concept of worship if you have to - once the boat gets you across the river, there's no need to carry it anymore. 3nodding

As for the initial topic, it's both. It's a religion of philosophy, if you take the literal meaning of philosophy - love of knowledge. heart

I believe it is important to understand whether or not you follow a religion or a philosophy, as well as being able to refute such claims as "Buddhism isn't a religion." Let's see if I can word this correctly.

Philosophy: A system wherein one states their assumptions and conclusions, following rational thought, upon which one bases their ethics and morals. The starting assumptions should be either commonly accepted or heuristically accurate. "Buddhist philosophy", the philosophy that most people refer to, bases its assumptions on the human condition and the everpresent pain in the world, which are reasonable assumptions. The rest of the "lifestyle", essentially, can be built from this assumption, and is part of why many people consider this to be all there is of Buddhism.

Religion: A system wherein there are several articles of faith and practice, accepted supernaturally, upon which one bases their ethics and morals. The key here is that articles of faith entail articles of practice, which are distinct from the moral structure of the religion. The other key is that the articles of faith are assumptions which are NOT commonly accepted or heuristically proven. However, every religion has assumptions which provide a basis for moral and ethical action, and therefore contain a philosophy within them. Every religion has a sub-philosophy, but not every philosophy has an associated religion.

In terms of Buddhism: Like I said, the "pure philosophy" part is about the pain of all action, which is heuristically proven. The articles of faith, which separate the religion from the philosophy, are those of Buddha's life, the existence of Nirvana, the evolution of Being through meditation, etc. which have moral and ethical effects. Moreover, articles like the Sutras which speak of supernatural events are articles of faith which promote purely religious practices, beyond meditation. Buddhism contains so much more than just the minor philosophy that everyone sees.

I hope that's a clear presentation of the argument.

However, I find nothing wrong with those who prefer to follow just the philosophy, as opposed to the religion. Hey, we need all the Dharma-listeners that we can get. But to me, it is *extremely* important to understand and accept that you follow a philosophy, and not a religion, if only to keep debates like this supressed.

Buddhism can be both, and it IS both, to me, it is the truth, and it can coincide with most other religions fine. So, it can be both. Everything is only what you make it, and Buddhism fits the criteria for both religion and philosophy, but, it's not your typical religion, so people tend to question. And really, it doesn't matter, as long as you are taking the Dharma to heart, and practicing Buddhism, it will have the same effect either way you take it. As far as Buddha being a God, Hinduism has accommodated (sp?) him as an avatar of Vishnu, however, we all have our opinions. What truly matters, in the words of the Buddha, is "working out your own salvation with diligence." So honestly, it doesn't matter.

Yes. wink whee

It depends on what yana.

In Theravada, he is just human, not endowed with the 3 kayas.

In Mahayana, you see his form (rupa) as being a pure, supreme nirmanakaya with 80 minor and 32 major marks of a wheel turning king.

Because of this, his physical body becomes a source of pure merit, and worshiping his body, then, one gathers the accumulation of positive karma.
That is why relics, and Stupas are so important in Mahayana.

Of course, in vajrayana, as long as you have wangkur, this becomes even more meaningful and real, but i will not elaborate due to damtsig.

I've always seen it as about 25% religion, 25% philosophy, 25% spirituality, and 25% lifestyle.