That Buddhism is primarily concerned with healing both of and by the mind appears to be firmly established in the popular conceptions of Buddhism. This contemporary discourse on Buddhism and psychology has generally been structured by one of three presumptions, each of which frames the discourse in a particular fashion, thereby preconditioning its development. These are that Buddhism is a precursor to psychotherapy, that Buddhism can be exploited for psychotherapeutic resources, and that Buddhism can be interpreted as a form of psychotherapy. The view that Buddhism is a precursor to psychotherapy is evident in the rhetorical glorification of Buddhist techniques as being confirmed by modern psychological sciences. This rhetorical strategy is frequently found throughout the religion and science discourse, but it can easily lead to the view that Buddhism is now outdated and irrelevant in the face of more effective, scientifically validated techniques. The second casts Buddhism as a vast resource of techniques and tools for psychotherapy. This is evident, for example, in much of the literature on mindfulness, which frequently treats meditation practice as something distinct from Buddhism (see, for example, Kabat-Zinn 1990: 12 and Siegel 2010: 31). The third form of the discourse, in which Buddhism has been interpreted in terms of psychotherapy, is more subtle and more pervasive. And it is this that is of concern here. My contention is that Buddhism has not simply been interpreted psychologically. Rather, psychotherapy, modern occultism, and Buddhist modernism arise within the same cultural milieu, and the ease with which Buddhism is interpreted as psychotherapeutic is a consequence of that common background.