Good Morning Everyone,
This morning I would like to address the word “religion.” Religion is a word that is like an intersection with many avenues for discussion. What does it mean to be “religious”? Some say they are “spiritual” rather than “religious.” Are “spiritual” and “religious” synonymous? Are they different? In what ways? Is Buddhism (or the Buddha Way) a religion? Is it a spiritual practice?
The Oxford English Dictionary says religion is derived from Latin roots which meant “bond,” “scruple” and “reverence.” So, the first definition of religion from the OED is, “a state of life bound by religious vows, the condition of belonging to a religious order.” The second definition suggests it means “a particular religious order or rule.” The third definition (and the most challenging): “Belief in or sensing of some superhuman controlling power or powers entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship, or a system defining a code of living as a means to achieve spiritual or material improvement; acceptance of such belief as a standard of spiritual and practical life; the expression of this in worship, etc., also action or conduct indicating such belief.” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 5th edition, emphasis mine.)
So, apparently, according to the OED, the driving definition of “religion” is that a religion is a system of belief or practice that binds us to a way of life through a vow. It also suggests a link between religion and spirituality either through a sense of a higher power or to a systematic way of living aiming at “spiritual or material improvement.”
I am impressed with these definitional terms as I believe they identify many of the avenues for discussion I mentioned above. It is significant to me that the OED has bifurcated the turning point definition. The third definition includes a fork: belief in the superhuman or a systematic code of living. It is this bifurcation that allows Buddhism to be considered a religion, especially when coupled with the first two and the Latin origins of the word.
This definition also suggests a significant point: religion itself should not be entered into lightly and is a serious thing as it involves vows, a code of conduct, and a set of practices which we must hold in high esteem and actually practice. Simple belief in something, even a higher power such as a God, does not itself, apparently, qualify. To be “religion” there must be a vow involved and a practice.
In my next post, “Spirituality.”
Be well.
This morning I would like to address the word “religion.” Religion is a word that is like an intersection with many avenues for discussion. What does it mean to be “religious”? Some say they are “spiritual” rather than “religious.” Are “spiritual” and “religious” synonymous? Are they different? In what ways? Is Buddhism (or the Buddha Way) a religion? Is it a spiritual practice?
The Oxford English Dictionary says religion is derived from Latin roots which meant “bond,” “scruple” and “reverence.” So, the first definition of religion from the OED is, “a state of life bound by religious vows, the condition of belonging to a religious order.” The second definition suggests it means “a particular religious order or rule.” The third definition (and the most challenging): “Belief in or sensing of some superhuman controlling power or powers entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship, or a system defining a code of living as a means to achieve spiritual or material improvement; acceptance of such belief as a standard of spiritual and practical life; the expression of this in worship, etc., also action or conduct indicating such belief.” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 5th edition, emphasis mine.)
So, apparently, according to the OED, the driving definition of “religion” is that a religion is a system of belief or practice that binds us to a way of life through a vow. It also suggests a link between religion and spirituality either through a sense of a higher power or to a systematic way of living aiming at “spiritual or material improvement.”
I am impressed with these definitional terms as I believe they identify many of the avenues for discussion I mentioned above. It is significant to me that the OED has bifurcated the turning point definition. The third definition includes a fork: belief in the superhuman or a systematic code of living. It is this bifurcation that allows Buddhism to be considered a religion, especially when coupled with the first two and the Latin origins of the word.
This definition also suggests a significant point: religion itself should not be entered into lightly and is a serious thing as it involves vows, a code of conduct, and a set of practices which we must hold in high esteem and actually practice. Simple belief in something, even a higher power such as a God, does not itself, apparently, qualify. To be “religion” there must be a vow involved and a practice.
In my next post, “Spirituality.”
Be well.
No comments:
Post a Comment