Viach wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:58 pmAmazing. What's so incomprehensible? On the one hand, Buddhists claim that Buddhism is a religion, on the other hand, I quoted a clearly anti-religious statement of Buddha. Is this not a paradox?jake wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:45 pmOkay, but then what was the point of your original post?If you would write more than one sentence it might be easier to have a more productive discussion.Viach wrote:How do buddhists who consider Buddhism as a religion avoid cognitive dissonance? For a religion is a faith...
Religion has more than one definition, it's a fairly complex term.
Also, stop trolling. Either engage with what people are asking you, or I will close thread. If you are posting just to pontificate and don't want to actually interact, consider the points of others, etc., there is no reason for the discussion to continue, consider this the last warning.
Dharma has elements of both religion and rational philosophy/analysis. You are stuck in following conventional definitions for something which (from the Buddhist perspective) eschews those very definitions. The Buddha would not have care a whit for present-day definitions of worldly philosophers about what is "religion" and what is "science", and you can find pretty much direct refutations of the assumptions behind both if you bother to study Sutra, etc. The Lankavatara has an entire section breaking this down.