Those who are not scholars of religion are often unaware of just how hard it is to define religion as a word/concept. While many people would immediately begin by talking about “God” in some sense, such a definition would leave Buddhism excluded, since although many forms of Buddhism do acknowledge the existence of deities, they are on the whole largely irrelevant to Buddhism’s core beliefs and emphases.
By way of illustration of the complexities of the issue, I mention that Sam Harris, the well-known atheist author, is a practitioner of meditation. It seems to me that one reason many atheists declare themselves opposed to “any and all religion” is that it sounds good, like “believing the whole Bible” – far more interesting and impressive-sounding than “I am opposed to the concept of God in classical theism”. But a second reason is the understanding of “religion” exclusively in terms of “Western traditions”. I wonder whether, if the breadth of the concept of religion were more widely known, such generalizations would continue to be made.
For some discussions and examples of the problem of defining religion, try visiting here, here and here.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In