In addition, Buddhism monasticism in at least the first millennium and a half of its life was simultaneously cloistered off from the laypeople, but also very much of it - individual monks owned and invested property and so did the monasteries themselves. Buddhism did not glorify poverty for laypeople - instead the idea was to be wealthy and support the monastics. That's why Buddhism was so popular among merchants, who spread it from India into Afghanistan, and through the Silk Road on to China. (A sea route south-east was also taken at the same time.)

In first millennium China, Buddhist monasteries owned up to 20% of the country's land. Enormous tracts of forest were cut down to supply the wood to build monasteries, temples, towers, and more. Buddhist monasteries even owned slaves to work their lands.

For much of this period, certificates of Buddhist monk-hood were sold by the state or sub-state actors like dukes and princesses to quickly raise money. These certificates got one out of forced labor, which was often used to build Buddhist structures. (Forced labor was a common state inducement for all sorts of reasons in this time.) The explosion of "monks" led to crackdowns, stripping those who couldn't recite sutras or hadn't shaved their head of their privilege. Those with certificates were often exempt from certain taxes, though this privilege was only certain for those at imperial monasteries.

Sources:

"Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History From the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries" By Jacques Gernet

"The Buddha's Footprint: An Environmental History of Asia" By Johan Elverskog

The same also happened with Daoism. The West took the philosophical part and ignored for many years the cultural aspects, belief system, and worshipping rituals (i.e., the religion) behind it. Until some scientists pointed out (quite recently actually, if I remember correctly) that you cannot just do that.

I don't know much about Daoism and Buddhism, but I know a guy who compliments people in the West who claim to be Daoists on their excellent Chinese. Most of them don't get the joke (it seems many important texts have never been translated).

Concerning Buddhism, don't certain sub-branches of Zen buddhism come quite close to the Western "no magic" version?

I am not super familiar with Zen, but my understanding is "yes, sort of". Zen come from Mahayana path and I believe it retains those teachings and cosmology, but it's not as central. Looking at it on Wikipedia, it looks like Zen is all about teaching enlightenment with very little importance placed on much else, so in that regard, yes.

Equally, the branch of Protestant Christianity commonly practiced in North America is pretty far from the Christianity practiced in the the Middle East, or Africa, or even big swathes of Europe. Disparate cultures often put their own spin on things, and it's no surprise the relatively rational-secular West put a rational-secular spin on Buddhism.

Indeed, it stretches the imagination to suggest that Jesus would even be welcome in many American churches... he provided free health care for sex workers, for crying out loud

> Hell and heaven realms where you can get reincarnated into if you've lived an especially bad or good life

The hells (there are many cold hot and cold hells) and heavens and other realms of the dharmaic cosmology are important metaphors making a lot of philosophical/psychological sense. You can easily tell where are you supposed to reincarnate if you are sufficiently self-aware. Once you practice enough you can become more or less free from the tendencies of your mind which are meant to put you there or there and this will improve your overall health, mood and productivity. You can even realize that you already are living in particular realm actually despite living in the same world everybody else is from the physical point of view.

> Enlightenment is now impossible in this world because it's too corrupt. If you chant enough, this or that Buddha will reincarnate you into their personal realm where you can become enlightened.

Also makes sense: it indeed is very hard (if at all possible) to become completely free from how your neural system is preconditioned to react to what happens around. And if you feel bad about this you better chant than panic or do unpleasant things other religions followers might believe they should to do.

Also, no matter how much mythology does Buddhism contain, that comes packed with very practical and objective goodies, readily available to everybody interested. Buddhists would teach you to maintain mental health and wouldn't label you a heretic if you ignore parts of the teachings or interpret them your own way (unless you start propagating your unorthodox views too aggressively). Isn't this nice?

In reading the pali cannon I was struck by how the society the buddha lived in seemed so tolerant of different religions and thought. he was a bramin, he was an ascetic, he was able to leave and join these groups freely without suffering any consequences, and it didn't seem like others particularly cared if he were a bramin or an ascetic or following the teachings of some other holy man. Everyone he studied under basically levels with him that they are on the same quest, looking for a decent philosophy to subscribe to, sampling the field in the process and trying different things, engaging in discussions with people of different ideas. It read almost like the situation in western countries today, where people might try out different churches or take classes covering different religions freely, without societal judgement, or even have no strong religious convictions at all. The teachings described are basically cognitive behavioral therapy, but framed in the philosophical language they were using back then which was theological. It almost reads like the budhha was a depressed person in existential crisis until he had his moment of enlightenment, and the other teachers and followers he met along the way were similarly depressed people looking for a treatment in a world where there wasn't one.