Is Buddhism a Religion or a Philosophy?
It's both, or it can be one or the other. The more I read about it (seven books certainly doesn't make me an expert, but that's a lot of books on the same subject for me) the more I think that whether it's a religion or a philosophy depends entirely on how one interprets it. That is, you can take the ideas of Buddhism on faith and deal with it in an entirely religious way, or you can take the ideas of Buddhism philosophically or psychologically and think them through very deeply. Either approach seems to be entirely valid and rewarding. You can't take western religion entirely philosophically, but it appears, based on my admittedly limited experience, that you may be able to do this with Buddhism.
Western religions contend that faith is essential, and if you take a philosophical approach, at some point there are just no real answers for the questions you ask, the matter is labeled a "mystery", and you are simply told that you must have faith (Three persons in one God and transubstantiation, for examples. Can’t explain those. Just have to have faith.). That's not an answer, not a satisfying one anyway. It seems though, that when similar questioning gets to this point in Buddhism, they just tell you they don't know. That no one knows. Actually, 'not knowing' is a big thing in Buddhism. Admitting what you do not know and becoming intimately comfortable with the reality that there are many things you don't know is one of the major teachings of Buddhist meditation practice. Humiliation and embarrassment are inevitable, the Buddha taught, no matter how much of an expert you are in something or how wise you are in general. Even the most respected world and religious leaders, the most respected scientists and medical researchers, can slip on the proverbial banana peel. So one aim of Buddhist meditation practice is to become comfortable with not knowing, in general.
British Buddhist Stephen Batchelor contends that the body of teaching the Buddha created was at first a humanitarian philosophy, very practically aimed at removing people's suffering, and that only after his death was it made into a religion by his followers. The Buddha told people not to take anything he said just on faith in him, but that they should try it out and see if it works for them, and if it didn't, no problem. The Buddha would not be offended if anyone, having tried out his teaching, decided it was not for them and left it behind. Heck, the Buddha was at first extremely reluctant to even try to teach what he had realized, his enlightenment -- he didn’t think anyone would understand. Batchelor also says the best translation for what the Buddha called his teaching was "Check it out", or "Try this and see if it works for you".
Joseph Campbell says that the reason it seems that a line was never drawn in the east between religion and philosophy is that the reason we have a line between them in the west is basically artificial. "Philosophy" and "Religion" are how the ideas of the ancient Greeks and the ideas of Christianity were reconciled. The ideas of the Greeks, where seemingly nothing is immune to questioning, became "Philosophy" and Greek "Mythology", whereas the ideas of Christianity, where faith is the unquestionable foundation became "Theology". Theology seems philosophical in nature, but the key difference is that Theology takes faith as its foundation and starting point. Theology is “Faith seeking understanding”. Philosophy on the other hand relies purely on reason.
I prefer to take Buddhism philosophically.