[Buddha-l] Buddhism, the second largest religion in the world

[jkirk]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "L.S. Cousins" <selwyn at ntlworld.com>
To: "Buddhist discussion forum" <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Buddhism, the second largest religion in the world


> Joanna,
>
> Of course, what I meant to write was:
>
> There we constantly see figures for nominal adherents to Christianity and 
> Islam set against figures for committed adherents to other world 
> religions.
-----
>>I'm glad you came forth with those figures, Lance, because I was also
>>skeptical of the US government's estimates as to numbers of Buddhists but
>>had no data.
>
> On one level, of course, it doesn't really matter. I just feel that if it 
> is going to be done (and it is), it should be done properly.

JK. Yes, but then on what level does what really matter?
Of course it should be done properly, but in the case of US government 
census routines, not likely. I participated in several censuses and was 
dismayed at some types of questions that were asked.
>
>>However, I wouldn't agree to use the term "highly committed"
>>for people who belong to sanghas, or churches, temples, mosques etc as
>>opposed to the large numbers of folks who practice their paths without
>>belonging to any membership organization. There is no way to demonstrate
>>that they are not committed, while there is much evidence that many who
>>belong to religious organizations are the world's best hypocrites.
>>Cheers, Joanna
>
> I don't think I offered any definition of 'highly committed' but I suppose 
> in the context what is perhaps meant is 'visibly committed'.

JK. How about the word "members of" rather than highly or visibly or anyhow 
committed? This would of course get to organization stats if they existed.

> In a way, that is reasonable in that it offers something you could in 
> theory measure.
      Yes
>  So I would prefer to use Census figures which generally constitute the 
> individual's own assessment.

JK. Based on the kinds of questions census forms ask, this type of material 
would be quite unreliable in the case of this topic.

Where that is
> not available you just have to make an honest estimate that is broadly 
> comparable.

JK.  Yes, and honest estimates will vary, an inherent limitation.
>
> But, personally,  I am not much in favour of judging others as hypocrites. 
> Probably only the person themselves can know if they are a hypocrite. Or, 
> perhaps even they will not know until they are on their death bed. Too 
> often the accusation of 'hypocrisy' is used by one type of religion to 
> attack another without any real attempt to understand.

JK. I too am a hypocrite, although I can't think of a recent example.
My comment was an experience-based observation, not a judgment.


> Lance Cousins
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.5/707 - Release Date: 3/1/2007 
> 2:43 PM
>
>