Religion is distinct from isms in the differences that emanate from the sources. The source of an ism is not God, while the source of a religion is God. And in between there is some no-man’s land in which you find cults and tribal concepts and things which have some sort of a contact with God, but either they were originally shown some light and deviated so much beyond the source that they lost touch with reality, or something else might have happened.
So they are found today in a form where they can neither be considered an ism nor a true religion. And sometimes they negate the concept of God, yet we know that originally they had emanated from God and we still conksider them religion, and they themselves also claim themselves to be adherent of our religion. For instance Buddhists. Apparently the majority of the Buddhists do not believe in any God, yet they prefer to call Buddhism a religion, and we also accept their claim and we call it a religion. Though in English phraseology it is called Buddhism, but then they call every religion an ism.
For instance Mohammedanism, for instance Zoroastrianism and Confucianism and so on and so forth. So this ism as applied to religions in English language, that is not what I have in view. According to me, isms are socialism, communism, fascism, all these philosophies which are man-made. And religions are those ways of life which have been revealed by God. But as I told you, there are certain no man’s land where people have lost touch with the original source and they don’t know that originally their philosophy was expounded by God. So they have fallen into a place where they can be neither called an ism nor a religion. In Buddhism for instance they say that Buddha reached the truth by delving deep into himself, and he reached the source of wisdom, and ultimately he drank deep of that fountain of wisdom. And yet they worship Buddha, yet their behaviour, their conduct is exactly that of a religious people.
And they hold him in such esteem as only a religious person can be held. And they die for the honour of Buddha and everything, while he is predicted as a completely impersonal phenomenon. No normal person with that concept should have a deep attachment to him for whose sake one should kill and be killed. But their temple, their way of life, everything is governed ordinarily like any religious followers.
And also we have another sect among Buddhists who really believe in God as well. So my claim is that they have deviated very far away from the original source, so they are not recognisable. But I would put them under the title of a religion. So this is the general distinction between ism and a religion as I see it.
