Cults and Religions

[Ceisiwr]

I've always been interested in cults. One cult that has fascinated me most is Heaven's Gate. I've watched a lot of what is available of their videos including their farewell ones and read some of their literature, not because I buy into the ideas but because I'm interested in understanding how someone could be so committed to something so far out that they go as far as killing themselves for it. Recently however I began to notice how they had similar views to the Jains. The specifics vary but generally both believe in a changeable soul, both believe in reincarnation and both believe in ritual suicide as a means to reach the "higher level". This then got me thinking, what is the difference between a cult and a religion? Heaven's Gate is always labelled as a dangerous cult, because it lead it's members to commit suicide, but Jains with their practice of Sallekhana are not. Why is this?

[DNS]

but Jains with their practice of Sallekhana are not. Why is this?

I've heard that the Sallekhana starvation-suicide is for only those who are terminally ill anyway, a sort of self-inflicted euthanasia. Although, not sure if that is a modern adaptation.

In general, a religion is a movement that withstands the test of time. Typically cults are run by charismatic leaders and when they die, the movement dies. If the movement has a good organization and continues, it generally gets considered to be a religion, withstanding the test of time.

[Bundokji]

I opened a thread in the "connection with other paths" forum about self fulfilling prophecies. You might find some aspects of it relevant to cults and religions.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Cults and religions (including Buddhsim) = attachment to views.

The Dhamma = non-attachment to views. Striving to understand phenomena as they truly are.

[SarathW]

Cults and religions (including Buddhsim) = attachment to views.

The Dhamma = non-attachment to views. Striving to understand phenomena as they truly are.

This is the simplest answer in my opinion.
Cult:
- The leader is a dictator
- He got his army to support him
- Followers accept the leader's word as the Gospel truth
- Suppress and intimidate or even kill the people who ask questions
- The attitude if you are not with me you are my enemy
- Rituals
-...........

[bazzaman]

but Jains with their practice of Sallekhana are not. Why is this?

In general, a religion is a movement that withstands the test of time. Typically cults are run by charismatic leaders and when they die, the movement dies. If the movement has a good organization and continues, it generally gets considered to be a religion, withstanding the test of time.

Or, it has been said, that religions are cults whose leaders died a long time ago. Withstanding the test of time (i.e. the "Lindy effect" ) might have validity in some, but not all, cases. For example, some religions' founders were not the holy beings their adherents claim them to be. I can think of one example; but it would probably fall outside the Overton window of the forums regs.

[JamesTheGiant]

. I can think of one example; but it would probably fall outside the Overton window of the forums regs.

Let me guess: the one who married a 9-year old child?

[SarathW]

Cults and religions (including Buddhsim) = attachment to views.

The Dhamma = non-attachment to views. Striving to understand phenomena as they truly are.

What if you have the right view?
Can you still call it a cult?

[cappuccino]

I'm interested in understanding how someone could be so committed to something so far out that they go as far as killing themselves for it.

They are swept away by their view

[TRobinson465]

Cult is very vague. Its basically a brainless ad hominem when you dont have a real argument nowadays similar to calling someone a Nazi, a racist, a communist, a misogynst, worships Hitler etc. Ive literally heard evangelical christians call catholicism a cult.

Essentially every religion starts as a cult and is seen as such by contemporary society at the time. The Romans saw christians as a cult for hundreds of years for instance. Even Tzu Chi, a Taiwanese Buddhist org i used to volunteer with that literally bases itself on improving the world thru community service and humanitarian aid, is seen as a cult by a lot of people in Taiwan from what I've seen simply because it is "different" than mainstream Taiwanese Buddhism and they have a devoted following.

Faith is not what makes a cult either. Many of the Buddha's followers wouldve commited suicide had he told them to, there was one devotee who literally cut flesh from her own leg to offer it to monk because he was sick and asked for some meat but there was no meat at the market.

What really makes a difference between true "harmful" cults like Heavens Gate/Jonestown and religious groups is not how recent the belief system is, if it differs from how mainstream religion (former cults) is typically practiced, or how devoted the devotees are. A true cult is run by a charlatan who abuses the people's faith either for some kind of personal gain or some kind of delusional psychotic vision.

But you have to have good primary source evidence of this to legitimately call a group a true cult. Not just base your argument on things people who dont like the group say about them, that they do this or that etc. Or any religious group can be considered a cult, since theres always going to be someone who says a religious group does this or that with no evidence whatsoever, when they dont.

This isnt restricted to religion either, political cults like communism and nazism basically run on the same mindset. So saying theres no difference between a religion and a true cult like heavens gate is like saying theres no difference between Nazism and any other political ideology.

[pulga]

In general, a religion is a movement that withstands the test of time. Typically cults are run by charismatic leaders and when they die, the movement dies. If the movement has a good organization and continues, it generally gets considered to be a religion, withstanding the test of time.

Would that make Laroucheism a religion?

[DNS]

Would that make Laroucheism a religion?

I don't think so. It is more of a political movement. It doesn't deal with other worldly (after life) issues or cosmology. Some have called his practices (while he was alive) as cult-like since it included proselytization, but doesn't fit with other worldly type beliefs of religions.

[SecretSage]

I've always been interested in cults. One cult that has fascinated me most is Heaven's Gate. I've watched a lot of what is available of their videos including their farewell ones and read some of their literature, not because I buy into the ideas but because I'm interested in understanding how someone could be so committed to something so far out that they go as far as killing themselves for it. Recently however I began to notice how they had similar views to the Jains. The specifics vary but generally both believe in a changeable soul, both believe in reincarnation and both believe in ritual suicide as a means to reach the "higher level". This then got me thinking, what is the difference between a cult and a religion? Heaven's Gate is always labelled as a dangerous cult, because it lead it's members to commit suicide, but Jains with their practice of Sallekhana are not. Why is this?

There is no scholarly consensus on what a religion is see - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_religion

Cult, religion, group, organization, movement, ideology it's all the same to me in my mind just labeled differently by some...it's just semantics.

The government and capitalism can also be considered as religions.

Based on Theravada teachings religions centered around generating painful feelings lead to hellish worlds, many of the founders of these religions probably came from hellish realms prior to their human birth, demonic.

Religions centered around generating merit and pleasant feelings lead towards heavenly realms.

Religions centered around attaining jhanas lead towards heavenly realms.

Religions centered around the destruction of taints or ending or mental fermentations or āsavakkhaya lead towards arahantship or enlightenment here and now (only the Buddhist or Buddhist-inspired religions).

[KathyLauren]

I took a course in New Religious Movements (NRMs, the academic term for cults) years ago when I was working on a religious studies degree. Essentially, there is no difference between an NRM and a cult, other than the fact that a cult generally still has its founder living. If the group survives the death of its founder, it is a NRM. The brainwashy recruiting tactics are most prevalent while the founder is alive, but often survive his death.

Plenty of denominations that we consider untraditional but relatively benign would have been called cults if we had been around when they were first started up. I won't name names, but I am sure anyone could come up with the beginnings of a list of them. Christianity itself would have been considered a NRM or a cult back when it was first founded. Obviously once it has been around for a couple of centuries, it loses its newness and is just a religion.

Regards,
Kathy

[Jack19990101]

IMO -

If there is no exit process defined and maintained with good faith, it is a cult.
If the process is more complicated than quitting a full-time job, it is a cult.