Asian social engagement and the future of Buddhism

·期刊原文

Asian social engagement and the future of Buddhism

by Donald W. Mitchell

Cross Currents

Vol. 46 No. 4 Winter.96/97

Pp.554-560

Copyright by Cross Currents

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section: Books

Christopher S. Queen and Sallie B. King, eds., Engaged Buddhism: Buddhist
Liberation Movements in Asia. Albany: SUNY Press, 1996. 446pp. $24.95
(paper).

The Nobel Peace Prize has recently been awarded to two Asian Buddhist
leaders, the Dalai Lama of Tibet and Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar (Burma).
Slowly, people in the West are realizing that modern Buddhism in Asia is
not just a meditative vehicle for spiritual liberation, but is now also a
vehicle that includes liberation movements for social and political change.
What has come to be known as "socially engaged Buddhism," or simply
"engaged Buddhism," is a vast array of Asian movements with millions of
adherents dedicated to addressing the economic, social, political, and
environmental as well as the spiritual needs of modern humankind.

For example, in Southeast Asia, thousands of Buddhist monks work with
hundreds of thousands of lay volunteers to rejuvenate village life. In
South Asia, millions of Indian Untouchables have converted to form a
Buddhist movement for social change and an end to the misery of the caste
system. In East Asia, Buddhist lay movements have drawn millions of members
by caring for their daily needs. And throughout Asia, Buddhist nuns are
founding orders that work for institutional changes in the Buddhist
monastic communities and organize social, educational, and health services
for the poor.

Western awareness of this historic reformation and reorientation of modern
Asian Buddhism has been facilitated by two recent events. First was an
international conference on "Socially Engaged Buddhism and Christianity"
hosted by DePaul University in Chicago from July 27 to August 3, 1996. This
fifth international conference of the Society for Buddhist-Christian
Studies included such noted Asian Buddhist leaders as the Dalai Lama, the
Ven. Maha Ghosananda from Cambodia, Sulak Sivaraksa from Thailand, and A.
T. Ariyaratne from Sri Lanka, as well as leaders from the Japanese Rissho
Kosei-kai and Soka Gakkai movements, and the Korean Chogye Buddhist Order.

The second recent event that has helped introduce the West to the new world
of socially engaged Buddhism is the publication of Engaged Buddhism:
Buddhist Liberation Movements in Asia. The editors of this important
volume, Christopher S. Queen and Sallie B. King, have collected an
informative set of interpretive essays in what is the first comprehensive
study of socially engaged Buddhism in the lands of its origin. The
movements they describe in this book are not just developing new forms of
Buddhist social engagement, but are doing something much more historically
significant: redefining the nature and role of Buddhism in our modern
pluralistic world, and thereby the very future of Buddhism. I will try to
show how this is true by reflecting on the (1) origin, (2) nature, and (3)
scope of socially engaged Buddhism as presented in Engaged Buddhism.

In their introduction and conclusion the editors speculate about the
theoretical origins of modern socially engaged Buddhism. Based on my own
conversations with people like Sulak Sivaraksa and A. T. Ariyaratne over
the past twelve years, I think that Queen correctly perceives the essential
change in Buddhist social awareness that has been formative to engaged
Buddhism. In traditional Buddhism, the origins of suffering and evil are
sought in the mind and heart of the individual person. Social structures
have always been seen as reinforcing human bondage to such causes of
suffering as hate, greed and delusion. But the traditional responses to
this situation have most often emphasized the monastic life where adequate
spiritual practice could be provided for personal liberation from these
negative and unwholesome factors of human social existence.

In contrast, engaged Buddhism sets its analytical focus on the
institutional origins of evil and suffering. Then it shifts its practical
focus to addressing directly those aspects of these political, economic,
and social institutions that are what Queen calls "manifestations of greed,
hatred and delusion." For example, engaged Buddhism recognizes that the
root evil of greed in the hearts of the rich and powerful in a particular
society is given institutional form in a certain economic system that
contributes to the marginalization and oppression of the weaker members of
that society. Their response to this situation is not only to help people
practice spirituality for the sake of personal liberation, but also to
change the economic system for the sake of social liberation.

Is this something new in Buddhism? Both Sallie King and Christopher Queen
examine various answers--pro and con--to this question. My own answer is
that it is not something new. The Buddha taught, for example, that a king
has to eradicate evil not by punishment, but by rooting out the cause of
evil through providing such things as facilities to farmers, capital to
traders, proper wages to workers, and tax-exemptions to the poor (Kutanada
Suttana). The great King Asoka, who ruled much of India from 268-233
B.C.E., represents a model Buddhist ruler who always had his subjects'
economic and social well-being as his main concerns. Later in Theravada
countries, village elders consulted with local monastics; Buddhist
patriarchs had substantial court influence; and monks, when upset about
public issues, would turn over their begging bowls thus cutting the flow of
merit to the laity. At the beginning of Mahayana Buddhism, the saintly
Vimalakirti was presented as a layperson with substantial social
engagement. The great Indian philosopher Nagarjuna advised a king to govern
with a compassionate socialism that included education for the people,
fixed charges for doctors, socially supported health care, and low taxes.

How did Buddhism become disengaged? Christopher Queen gives some reasons
from the Southeast-Asian experience. For example, until the nineteenth
century Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka held influential advisory and
bureaucratic roles in the government as well as high positions in education
and the court system. These roles were curtailed by the European
colonialists under whom the governmental, legal, and educational systems
were changed, and any social and welfare roles were given to the Christian
missionaries. East Asian scholars have also shown how a budding Buddhist
social service in China was destroyed during the imperial persecution of
Buddhism beginning in 845 C.E. Other scholars have described how Buddhism
lost its political influence because of the removal of Buddhist monasteries
from population centers in Korea, and the depoliticalization of Buddhism in
Tokugawa, Japan. My own conclusion is that given more recent political
changes in the Asian world, what we are seeing today is the development of
socially re-engaged Buddhism.

If this is the case, what is new about these re-engaged Buddhist movements?
Sallie King discusses the new influence of social and political theory from
the West and from Mahatma Gandhi in the East. She also mentions the fact
that these movements have been greatly affected in their outlook by the
many human crises in Asia during this century. Seeing these crises as
linked to certain economic, political, and social forces that interconnect
on a global scale, engaged Buddhists realize that the fate of Asia depends
on the fate of the entire world. We are all part of an interconnected web
of transnational economic and political relationships. This realization has
led engaged Buddhism to what Christopher Queen calls "their vision of a new
world."

Given this vision, many engaged Buddhists see themselves as contributing
not only to the transformation of the lives of individual Buddhists in
Asia, but to the renewal of humankind as a whole. Traditional Buddhism
emphasized its insight into the nature of the human person--either in its
analysis of our human condition, or of our awakened nature, our
Buddha-nature. In the renewal movements, there is a new emphasis on the
insight that all humankind makes up one interrelated whole. Socially
engaged Buddhists have come to realize the importance of Buddhist ecumenism
and interfaith collaboration in working for this ideal of a more united and
peaceful world community. It is, I believe, in the ecumenical and
interfaith quest for this ideal that engaged Buddhists are redefining the
future of Buddhism.

This global vision of a peaceful, united, and pluralistic world not only
distinguishes engaged Buddhism from the past, it also distinguishes it from
new forms of Buddhist nationalism, sectarianism, conservatism, and
fundamentalism that are now present in some parts of the Buddhist world.
King and Queen are careful to distinguish socially engaged Buddhist groups
from the new fundamentalist Buddhist movements. I applaud their effort. In
1987, two months after I was with Michael Rodrigo in California, he was
shot by Buddhist fundamentalists while he was saying Mass in Sri Lanka.
Early the next year I was with A. T. Ariyaratne for a week. He helped me
understand how those Buddhists who murdered Rodrigo did so thinking that
they were protecting their people from non-Buddhist encroachment. While
Ariyaratne and other engaged Buddhists are concerned about the erosion of
the social values and cohesion of their people, they reject any ideology
that leads to such violent action.

For example, Ariyaratne told me that for his village reform movement, there
are certain basic human values that take priority over sectarian
ideological values. Although he is a Buddhist, when he goes into a village
to promote his renewal program, he proposes a moral and social program
based on values and ideals that are also shared by the Christian, Hindu,
and Muslim members of the village. Here we see the value of interfaith
collaboration for unity that celebrates diversity clearly lived out in
nonviolent Buddhist social engagement guided by the vision of a more united
and peaceful world community.

What are the particular characteristics of engaged Buddhism that enable it
to pursue its goals of social change, moral reform, and contributing to a
"new world?" Reflecting on the essays in Engaged Buddhism as well as
Christopher Queen's and Sallie King's phenomenological description of these
movements, I would emphasize three points: the first supports the goal of
social change; the second moral reform; and the third global
transformation.

First, the leaders of these movements have been personally affected by the
great human tragedies of the twentieth century in Asia. This has fostered
in them a deep sensitivity to the suffering condition of their peoples and
a deeper sense of its social causes. This social awareness has led them in
turn to reread their scriptures and to discover therein a concept of
liberation that includes this-worldly freedom from social, economic,
political, sexual, racial, and environmental oppression. As with Christian
liberation theology, their social critique and practical forms of social
engagement are guided by new readings of scripture.

Second, these new practices of engaged Buddhism are not monastic-centered,
as in the past, but are adapted for the laity. Engaged Buddhist movements
are presenting their members with nonmonastic models for moral
living--morality that is not pursued in monastic withdrawal, but in the
daily life of the factory, office, school room, or home. Hence, there is a
new emphasis in Theravada Buddhism on the relational virtues of compassion,
loving kindness, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. And in Mahayana Buddhism,
the bodhisattva moral ideal of altruistic care for others has been given
new social and political expressions suited for the laity.

Third, given this relational and lay emphasis, the practice of engaged
Buddhism often takes place in a broad community context. Since the focus of
praxis shifts from the monastery to the modern pluralistic world of the
laity, new forms of lay Buddhist communal life are evolving that involve
positive relationships with members of other religious communities. This
has led engaged Buddhists to seek ways of developing Buddhist ecumenism and
interfaith collaboration that contribute to the constitution of a new
family of humankind. This work is inspired by the engaged Buddhists' global
vision of what the Dalai Lama calls "the realization of the oneness of all
humankind."

Given this third goal of engaged Buddhism, the spiritual unity of
humankind, let us look at the scope of Buddhist ecumenical and interfaith
work for this ideal in Asia today. Here I must offer a modest critique of
Engaged Buddhism. It seems to me that King and Queen present South- and
SoutheastAsian forms of engaged Buddhism as paradigmatic of the whole
movement. The essays in their book cover this geographical area well,
including discussions of B. R. Ambedkar's Buddhist movement among the
Untouchables in India, A. T. Ariyaratne's village reform program in Sri
Lanka, Buddhadasa's reform philosophy and Sulak Sivaraksa's renewal
activities in Thailand, the Tibetan movement in India, and Thich Nhat
Hanh's activist form of Vietnamese Zen. However, there is only one essay on
East Asia--on the Soka Gakkai and its impressive social and political
activities in Japan.

If a more complete picture of engaged Buddhism had been painted by
including other material on East Asia, an interesting comparison could have
been made between the more grassroots Buddhist liberation movements in
South and Southeast Asia and the more internationally engaged Buddhist
reform movements in East Asia. In that comparison, the ecumenical and
interfaith dimensions of engaged Buddhism working for a united and peaceful
world could have been more clearly seen. Since I believe that it will be
precisely these dimensions that will define Buddhism in the future, let me
mention four examples of East-Asian engaged Buddhist movements that have
developed these dimensions in their global work for world peace.

The Fo Kuang Shan Buddhist Order in Taiwan is a thriving East-Asian example
of such a movement. While they are committed to reforming the nun's order
and to social action in Taiwan, they are also stimulating world-wide
Buddhist ecumenism--often hosting meetings for Buddhist leaders from around
the world. They are also active in global interfaith activities. At their
Los Angeles temple in 1988, they hosted the International Theological
Encounter Group founded by Masao Abe and John B. Cobb, Jr. At their Taiwan
Center in 1995, they were the host to the first Vatican sponsored
international theological dialogue with world Buddhism.

The Won Buddhist movement in Korea rejects shamanistic practice and
religious exclusivism in favor of compassionate moral practice in daily
life and engagement in activities of interreligious cooperation
contributing to a more united humankind based on shared human values. Like
other forms of engaged Buddhism, it seeks to help create a world of
happiness rather than to escape to a transcendent Nirvana. To aid in this
project, Won Buddhists have established centers around the world and have
been active in such organizations as the World Conference on Religion and
Peace (WCRP).

The Japanese Rissho Kosei-kai movement was organized by Nikkyo Niwano,
winner of the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion. Devoted to lay
Buddhist practice in Japan, it is also concerned with working for world
peace. Members have founded the Niwano Peace Prize at the United Nations,
and Niwano himself played a key role in creating the most effective
interfaith organization today, the WCRP. His movement is involved in many
forms of interfaith social engagement, such as working together with
Christian relief organizations in East Africa.

Another example from Japan is the F.A.S. Society, founded by Shin'ichi
Hisamatsu, who seems to embody the Dalai Lama's ideal of all religions
fostering "the genuine realization of the oneness of humankind." In his
F.A.S. acronym, "F" stands for "Formless SelL" as the Ground of all
existence; "A" for the breadth of "all humankind" in that Ground; and "S"
for creating history "superhistorically," that is, history realizing in
social form the original oneness of all humankind based on the Formless
Self. This oneness overcomes the modern evils of social injustice,
religious sectarianism, racism, sexism, etc. While the F.A.S. Society
practices Zen meditation, it welcomes persons of other Buddhist sects and
other religions. The Society has been mainly active in Japan, but in 1995
it established a branch in Europe, partly as a way to contribute to the
reconciliation of Western and Eastern Europe.

With these additions to the picture of engaged Buddhism, we can see even
more clearly how this phenomenon represents an important turning point in
the history of Buddhism. To repeat, socially engaged Buddhism is not only
about local social engagement--it represents something even more
historically significant. This development in world Buddhism indicates a
major shift in Buddhist self-definition that, on the one hand, recognizes
the challenges of the modern world, and, on the other, grasps the promise
of ecumenical and interreligious cooperation in addressing these challenges
on a worldwide scale. This attempt to define Buddhism's new role in a
global context of ecumenical and interfaith cooperation challenges other
religions to redefine their roles as fellow co-participants in the shared
task of humankind's realization of a more united, just, and peaceful
pluralistic world community in the future.

By DONALD W. MITCHELL