buddhist therapy

[rad!]

hi all (especially mods)

buddhism isn't a religion it's a therapy.

the first teaching the buddha gautama gave was the four noble truths: that all suffering was caused by ignorance, greed and anger and that if you removed the causes of suffering you could be free of suffering. the forth noble truth was the prescription of how to do this.

can we have buddhism moved to the therapy section please?

peace and love

norbu

 

[Catelehas]

Hiya Norbu,

If I was looking for a topic on Buddhism, I would expect to find it in the religion section, and not therapy.

 

[**Baby_Gurl**]

What may be going on here is that every religion is different (obviously), so it's easy to feel "my beliefs don't equate with those beliefs, so should be in a different category."

From a helpful "norm" kind of way I can't see Buddhism being moved just on HealthyPages. Buddhism is listed along with the other "major world religions" in UK religious education, by scholars of "world religions", on other websites such as www.bbc.co.uk , www.beliefnet.com , www.religioustolerance.org and etc., etc. Wikipedia presently begins on it: "Buddhism is a dharmic religion and a philosophy."

It's true that what are called 'religions' now in the West may not always conform to the Western shape of one. Having studied Religious Education at post-grad level, it's actually Hinduism which is mostly discussed along the lines of "Is it really a religion?" - because Hinduism is so varied and has few (if any!) universal tenets. But Taoism and Confucianism seem to sit a little uncomfortably in the 'religion' category too.

The point really, to me, is that there's a conformity which is just about universal by which all of these are called 'religions' in the broad sense; and are: otherwise we may as well dispense with the word?

V

 

[Billy G]

Norbu,

I can understand you reasoning, but Healthypages, whilst used by members from across the world, is based in the UK and the UK governement recognises Buddhism as a religion and not a therapy (occupation).

On any official government documentation that requests details of your occupation or religion, you will find that Buddhism is listed under Religions.

Also, Buddhism can be said to be a matter of beliefs and faiths, and therefore having this forum under the Religions and Faiths forum, where it has always been, is a suitable place.

Another point is that the majority of the populous would look under religions for Buddhism as their first port of call when seeking such a forum.

I'm sorry, but there is no justification for moving the forum.

Love and Reiki Hugs

 

[Pompal 09.]

hi

of course i understand your reasoning but there just seems to be so much anti-religious feeling and it would seem that so much of this feeling is directed at what comes over as a certainty about right and wrong that often seems to come from a belief in god.

the funny thing is that the whole basis of buddhism was to be a karma therapy and to challenge the insitutionalised injustices of brahminism by establishing the buddhist middle way; rejecting eternalism (brahman, the universal god and atman, the eternal soul or self) and, on the other hand, rejecting nihhilism (a very postmodern "religion" one could say).

of course, the buddha set up the institution of ordination and further institutions established themselves but, essentially this has little difference sociologically with other societies of practitioners within many therapy systems. the only thing that the buddhist approach has that no other approach has, religious or otherwise, is the philosophical manefesto of refusing to enter into speculation about the nature of what exists but, wrather, to only provide means for the alleviation of suffering. i suppose this makes it a special case.

when it comes to shamanism that you classify as a therapy, the bulk of dictionary definintions describe shamanism as a religion (and none that i can find classify it as a thereapy) and most shamanic traditions believe variously in the existence spirits, deities or enven the one god for example. this would make shamanism more closely religious that therapeutic. it is also false to say that shamanism does not have institutions of societies and rites and rituals that are also all generically common to all religions (and therapies).

i do accept that systems of classifications in any field have to draw artificial lines for the practicalities of convention, but the reason for my starting this string is that i think it useful to try to look a little deeper into what is really going on in peoples minds when they avow: "shamanisms is not a religion, it is its a way of life" or that "religion is the cause of so much war and injustice" or "don't dable... it's dealing with powerful energies that can harm" or "new age therapies are a load of backward superstitions just like religion".

so, over to you dear reader.

peace and love

norbu

 

[liya79]

Like I said, I can see your point, but also as you say, we have to draw lines somewhere. You could argue that many religions use prayer, and some use laying on of hands for healing, so should they all be taken out and put in "therapies"? No.

The governments Corporate Data Model lists the following as religions:

Methodist
Presbyterian
Mormon
Protestant
Adventist
Hindu
Atheist
Agnostic
Buddhist
Lutheran
Anglican
Shintoist
Zoroastrian
United Reform
Salvation Army
Congregational
Jehovah's Witness
Quaker
Pentecostal
Apostolic
Evangelical
Roman Catholic
Christadelphian
Pagan
Scientologist
Moonie (Krishna Conciousness Movement)
Spiritualist
Unitarian
Christian
Sikh
Rastafarian
Church of England (Anglican)
Jewish
Muslim
United Reformed
Unification
Hare Krishna
Ba’Hai
Black Muslim
Calvinist
Celestial Church of God
Christian Scientist
Islam
Church In Wales
Church of Ireland
Church of Norway
Church of Scotland
Church of Sweden
Druid
Dutch Reform Church
Episcopalian
Ethiopian Orthodox
Gospel
Russian Orthodox
Jain
Non Conformist
Non Permitted Religions
Parsi
Satanism
Seventh Day Adventist
Shia Muslim
Sunni Muslim
Taoist
Greek Orthodox
Welsh Independent
Coptic
Baptist

Interestingly, I just noticed that Atheism and Satanism are listed in there.

Love and Reiki Hugs

 

[Thrysodeue]

Hi Giles,

Minor points:

I take it you can't have typed that list out, but cut and pasted? That's interesting. Haven't the government got a minor little thing wrong? Surely the "Krishna Consciousness Movement" is ISKCON, not the Moonies? Or am I wrong? Further, "Moonie" isn't an official name but a derogatory one! (The same with "Hare Krishnas".) Not that I know much about Moonies' beliefs, but I wonder exactly where you got this list from? It can't exactly be official, surely, with these mistakes???

On Buddhism rejecting the notion of the eternal soul or self, I'd have to re-read Sogyal Rimpoche on living and dying. And I intend to do so in time. But his book is basically all about the cycles of reincarnation. For example, I dipped into it last night on a portion about how, after "death", we can learn to try not to be reborn to some parents, but rather to others. And of course Buddhism believes a lot in Incarnations or reincarnations of Masters. But I'd have to re-read it: I seem to recall some schools of Buddhism have some let-out clause along the lines of "the kind of personality is reincarnated, but it's not exactly you". However, I'm not sure that's what Sogyal's Tibetan Buddhism is saying: it seems just like typical reincarnation belief. ...

V

 

[knexsugqimkidhenc]

No I didn't type it by hand, and yes it was a copy and paste from an official list used in computer systems as defined by a government body, so if things are derogatory etc. then don't look at me, plus I'm no expert on many of them.

Trust me, I have to work with these lists of things in my computer programming job, and there are some mistakes in them, but they are constantly being updated, however Buddhism is one that's always been around in the Religion list.

 

[Sherry]

thanks for the list energylz

for a view of the questions v is puzzling over about no-soul in buddhism, i have posted this thread.



peace and love

norbu

 

[Blah B]

Thanks, Norbu. I'll read the link later as I can only dip quickly in and out of HP right now.

That's really puzzling, Giles. It's a bizarre list. Not only does it contain errors, and errors the movements would demand be corrected, but it's only the tip of the iceberg. There are many, many more organisations listed as being 'religions' in the UK I'd have thought. At least, there used to be many more listed as "Religious charities", and not associated with anything in your list. (I wasn't implying that the mistakes were yours.)

V

 

[Breeana]

There's one that I didn't include in the list... go on have a guess what it is.... yep it's "other". For all those other religions that obviously they deem don't come up that often.

 

[peyffdoo]

lol, what a strange list. Stranger the more I look. It actually has "Christian" listed! But why? - look at many of the others! (What are they then?)

From the "other" side,

V

 

[vienoldided]

You have to bear in mind that when recording information on a computer system, if someone is asked their religion, they may be general i.e. "Christian" or they may be specific "Christian Scientist". It can't be expected that the persons using the computer system have the knowledge of all religions such that if a person is specific they can categorise it to a general one or to know that someone is being general and ask more specifically. So yes there will be some overlaps. They joys of computer programming.

 

[odeqiuzdikpihieih]

Hi Giles,

That explains it to a degree. I didn't know it was compiled by computer. Other government systems are more elaborate and scholarly.

But what member of the Reverend Moon's organisation would put a tick to "Moonies"?? Anyway, not a subject of huge importance - I was just wondering.

V

 

[TONY S]

Hi norbu,

While I can't comment on your request about the category of Buddhism, my Dictionary of Beliefs and Religions has devoted over 3 pages to it.

Re that list - it is bizarre! No fault of yours though Giles! They seem to confuse the religion with the adherents again and again (like in my case!) and instead of Parsi for example, it should be Zoarastrianism (trust me to choose the most difficult one for spelling!)

These are curious:

Non Conformist
Non Permitted Religions

Judy

 

[The Skybird]

Giles might have started a whole new thread-subject off here! I missed those! What in the UK is non-permitted?? However this list was compiled, it's tres bizarre. And it's official??? I'm also still thinking of the many omissions.

 

[Mike A]

hi judy

as you proabably can imagine i was just throwing the cat among the pidgeons.

peace and love

norbu

 

[zickfeby]

In programming you 9or the customer) have to draw the line somewhere and there's always going to be omissions (is it for a drop-down list, Giles?) This makes sure that everyone spells things the same way, so you can later pull out all the information for "non permitted religions" without someone (as Venetian did) putting in the odd hyphen!! That's also why I hate computer generated forms - I always want to say "yes but...." and there isn't a way that you can do that!!

I used to write Cancer Research's donation web site (amongst others - as it's a charity I hope that it's ok to mention it!!) - and the list of titles that they wanted in "other" was enormous and also bizarre!! But the customer is always right so I had to use them!!

LR

 

[imilsbem]

Depends on the application, we have many.
Some applications are "behind the scenes" ones that are taking all sorts of data and processing or "mapping" it to the required constrained values.

At the end of the day there are over 500 constrained value lists that we have to work from and I don't think those in power considered (or would consider) paying for specialists in each of the areas to be brought in to draught up the lists. I think they are just created by "techies" doing their own research into each area.

It's all fun.

Love and Reiki Hugs