Eastern and Western ideas of 'religion'
I think there is a real difference between the Eastern and Western ideas of what a 'religion' is.
In the West (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism) the truth is revealed by a great prophet or teacher, and religious practice is a response to believing that truth.
In the East (Daoism, Zen, some forms of Buddhism) the practice or tradition comes first, by following certain practices (Budo, Tai Chi, meditation, yoga, etc.) the follower develops body and soul until at a certain point they are able to attain some kind of enlightenment, the process is in some ways more important than the outcome.
Some Christians have suggested that this implies a satanic/demonic agenda in the Eastern religions (i.e. if the devil revealed himself straight away, nobody would accept it, but if he gets people to slowly change through esoteric practices, eventually they will be ready to embrace him). I cannot agree. If the process is as important as the outcome, then a bad person will just become worse, a good person better, through that process. Martial Arts are just that, arts.
For example, Michealangelo is famous for his painting/sculpture, Mozart for his music, Mas Oyama for his punches and kicks. Religious practice is different, a great religious figure like Francis of Assisi isn't famous for their teaching or prayers alone, but their whole life.
I suppose a martial art becomes a religion at the point that it becomes about the whole of life instead of about the techniques. To some extent this can be a good thing, but if taken too far it can be dangerous, as can any other kind of cult or fundamentalist religious behaviour that has its' origins outside of the individual's relationship with God/Reality.
_____________________
David Lundie
"Your greatest enemy is your own self"
- St Josemaria