Dear Paul,

It is in our culture that one can only have one religion at a time not in other cultures. Japanese may consider themselves Buddhists, have a Christian wedding in Australia and go back to Japan and observe the Shinto rites. Religions can encompass philosophy and vice versa. The categories are not mutually exclusive.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

«The Oxford University Press began writing and releasing the Oxford English Dictionary in short fascicles from 1884 onwards.»

Yes, I tried in vain to find earlier definitions of "religion" in earlier versions of the OED, but I could not gain access, not without paying large sums anyway.

So I could only look at the latest version of the OED. Perhaps you have access to earlier versions?

«The OED generally offers a more precise, objective, and universalist definition than all the other English dictionaries.»

Possibly so, GENERALLY.

They may be popular, they may be good on other entries, but all I can say is that their definition of "religion" is a mockery, not objective at all and seems to be written by anti-religious author(s).

The purpose of that mockery is to tell the reader that religion has no real substance and consists only of some silly intellectual veneer, just a set of beliefs would suffice, thus if you change your opinion about the "cause, nature, and purpose of the universe" every minute, then in one hour you would have been 30 times religious and 30 times non-religious... and when you sleep deeply you must be non-religious because you do not believe in anything at that time... what a joke!

---

Dear Paul,

Different people make different uses of both Buddhism and Christianity - as a political tool, for tribal identity, for philosophy, for religion, or for some combination of the above.

The rewards come accordingly:

When used as a political tool, one can gain power but becomes cynical and deluded.
When used for tribal identity, one gains both friends and enemies and can temporarily cover up the feeling of emptiness inside.
When used as philosophy, one can gain intellectual satisfaction, lasting for as long as they have a sound mind and relatively good health.

When used as a religion, one gradually moves towards eternal peace, absolute joy and the cessation of all suffering.

Both Buddhism and Christianity are a religion for those who use it as such, not for others.

.

Dear Paul,

.

You raise the question of the difference between philosophy and religion, with reference to Buddhism.
.

I tend to see philosophy as a constant interrogation and religion as a definitive reply.

I am by no means an expert on Buddhism. Perhaps I am wrong, but my impression is that after a long period of meditation on the question of the human earthly condition, Siddhartha Gautama, alias Buddha, came up with a definitive reply – to which his followers adhere largely without question, and have perpetuated from generation to generation for the past 2,500 years and continue to do so with no end in sight.

Looks like a religion to me.

.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

You wrote :

« … I could only look at the latest version of the OED. Perhaps you have access to earlier versions? »
.

I have the 1988 second print version of the 7th edition of the Concise Oxford Dictionary, which is complete despite being concise, and only weighs 1.25kg – obviously much more practical than the 12 volumes of the full, unabridged version of the OED I mentioned in my previous post.

I looked up religion for you and here’s what it says :

1. particular system of faith and worship

2. human recognition of superhuman controlling power and esp. of a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship; effect of such recognition on conduct and mental attitude

3. thing that one is devoted to or is bound to do (make a religion of football, of doing physical exercises)

4. life under monastic conditions (enter into, be in, religion; her name in religion is Sister Mary)

5. hence religion less

From Latin religio -onis obligation, bond, reverence ».
.

That was the OED definition for the English-speaking (Western) world in 1988.
.

And Wikipedia tells us :

The concept of religion originated in the modern era in the West. Parallel concepts are not found in many current and past cultures; there is no equivalent term for religion in many languages. Scholars have found it difficult to develop a consistent definition, with some giving up on the possibility of a definition. Others argue that regardless of its definition, it is not appropriate to apply it to non-Western cultures.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

An increasing number of scholars have expressed reservations about ever defining the essence of religion. They observe that the way the concept today is used is a particularly modern construct that would not have been understood through much of history and in many cultures outside the West (or even in the West until after the Peace of Westphalia). The MacMillan Encyclopedia of Religions states:

« The very attempt to define religion, to find some distinctive or possibly unique essence or set of qualities that distinguish the religious from the remainder of human life, is primarily a Western concern. The attempt is a natural consequence of the Western speculative, intellectualistic, and scientific disposition. It is also the product of the dominant Western religious mode, what is called the Judeo-Christian climate, or, more accurately, the theistic inheritance from Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The theistic form of belief in this tradition, even when downgraded culturally, is formative of the dichotomous Western view of religion. That is, the basic structure of theism is essentially a distinction between a transcendent deity and all else, between the creator and his creation, between God and man »
.

A definition that aspires to universality, though highly reductionist, was coined by Friedrich Schleiermacher in the late 18th century who defined religion as "the feeling of absolute dependence".

.

In fact Australia has never got rid of the death penalty. When some people in a far off land fail to bend to our demands, we simply send in our mercenary army to murder their innocent men, women and children.