4 ms·

A denomination is not a cult. Protestants go to church, not to work, every sunday.

krapp 3y ago
OK I guess I have to put some more effort in. Buddhism does not lend itself to cults and abuse any more or less than any other religious system, and certainly not compared with Abrahamic religions. Yes, Christian denominations are the same as Buddhist cults. We call them cults because, from the Christian point of view, all non-Christian religions are cults. But it is, in all practical purposes, the same. Buddhist "cults" and Christian "denominations" are differing schools of thought, worship and ritual which diverged from a common religious and philosophical core. "All is one" is something you find on a fortune cookie, not a description of Buddhist philosophy. The article doesn't describe the practice of Buddhism, rather the incorporation of vague concepts such as “authenticity,” “purpose,” and “passion,” which it ascribes to Buddhist thought but which could just as well be affixed to Judeo-Christian ideals. Your further implication that Buddhism recognizes no clear distinction between the sacred and the profane is absurd, and based on no apparent knowledge of Buddhism, much less anything evident in the article. The conclusion you seem to want to reach is that the Judeo-Christian religions teach a better work life balance than Buddhism, but this is patently absurd given that American work culture is based on Christian ideology, and the entire premise of Buddhism is balance. The Protestant work ethic is a thing. That Protestants go to church on Sunday doesn't contradict this. The "theocracy of work" presented in the article is not Buddhist, it is Capitalist. That some small part of a particular movement within some part of it uses superficial Buddhist trappings says nothing about Buddhism as a religion. The premise that one must devote oneself wholly to work is explicitly a Christian philosophy, not a Buddhist one.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  Why are all these companies embracing some "superficial Buddhist trappings" rather then Christianity then?

OK I guess I have to put some more effort in. Buddhism does not lend itself to cults and abuse any more or less than any other religious system, and certainly not compared with Abrahamic religions. Yes, Christian denominations are the same as Buddhist cults. We call them cults because, from the Christian point of view, all non-Christian religions are cults. But it is, in all practical purposes, the same. Buddhist "cults" and Christian "denominations" are differing schools of thought, worship and ritual which diverged from a common religious and philosophical core. "All is one" is something you find on a fortune cookie, not a description of Buddhist philosophy. The article doesn't describe the practice of Buddhism, rather the incorporation of vague concepts such as “authenticity,” “purpose,” and “passion,” which it ascribes to Buddhist thought but which could just as well be affixed to Judeo-Christian ideals. Your further implication that Buddhism recognizes no clear distinction between the sacred and the profane is absurd, and based on no apparent knowledge of Buddhism, much less anything evident in the article. The conclusion you seem to want to reach is that the Judeo-Christian religions teach a better work life balance than Buddhism, but this is patently absurd given that American work culture is based on Christian ideology, and the entire premise of Buddhism is balance. The Protestant work ethic is a thing. That Protestants go to church on Sunday doesn't contradict this. The "theocracy of work" presented in the article is not Buddhist, it is Capitalist. That some small part of a particular movement within some part of it uses superficial Buddhist trappings says nothing about Buddhism as a religion. The premise that one must devote oneself wholly to work is explicitly a Christian philosophy, not a Buddhist one.

amadeuspagel 3y ago
Why are all these companies embracing some "superficial Buddhist trappings" rather then Christianity then?