The Main Principles and Directions of the Activity of Socially Engaged Buddhism

Nesterkin Sergei Doctor of Philosophy Leading Scientific Associate, Institute of Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies of Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 670047, Russia, Republic of Buryatia, Ulan-Ude, Sakhyanova str., 6 sn3716@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

“Socially Engaged Buddhism” or simply “Engaged Buddhism” in Buddhist literature is usually understood as a movement in modern Buddhism that aims to apply the teachings of the Dharma and the experience of meditation practice to addressing social, political, environmental and economic issues in order to reduce suffering and injustice present in these spheres.

The term "Engaged Buddhism”(or socially engaged Buddhism) was introduced by the Vietnamese Thien (Chinese Chan, Japanese Zen) Buddhist Master Thich Nhat Hanh, who in a series of articles drew attention to the need for the Buddhist Sangha to take a more active position in addressing urgent social issues. He was inspired by the ideas of the Buddhist reform movement in China, developed by the Chan teacher Tai Hsu (Tàixū, 1890–1947) and the San lun teacher Yin Shun (Yìnshùn Daoshī, 1906–2005) (this movement in China was called "Humanistic Buddhism"). Subsequently, these ideas spread to Taiwan thanks to the efforts of Cheng Yen (Zhèngyán Fashī; b. 1937) and Hsing Yun (Xīng Yún; b. 1927).

Describing the social aspect of Buddhism as something new to Buddhism (which was typical in the early stages of the development of engaged Buddhism in the West) would be incorrect. In Buddhist canonical texts, a significant place is given to the teachings on the need to act for the benefit of others and to concepts of socially oriented personality types such as a bodhisattva (a being striving for enlightenment for the benefit of all) and chakravartin (an ideal king who rules the country through the Dharma – the Buddhist teachings). However, even with all the attention to the social sphere that we find in canonical texts, social service in Buddhism has never been the main goal. As Bardwell Smith correctly notes, “The primary goal of [traditional] Buddhism is not a stable order or a just society but the discovery of genuine freedom (or awakening) by each person. It has never been asserted that the conditions of society are unimportant or unrelated to this more important goal, but it is critical to stress the distinction between what is primary and what is not…. Even the vocation of the bodhisattva is not as a social reformer but as the catalyst to personal transformation within society” ^{[1, 106]}.

Nevertheless, traditional Buddhism has always paid great attention to the social sphere and actively participated in it ^[2]. Thus, in the countries of Theravada Buddhism, the role of the Buddhist Sangha in society has always been quite significant. Addressing any significant social issue was not undertaken without the Sangha’s participation. Mahayana Buddhism in Central Asia (Tibet and Mongolia) has long been the state religion. Its hierarchs (the Dalai Lama, Bogdo Gegen) were the heads of the central government, and monasteries played a crucial role in regional government. Far Eastern Buddhism also played a significant role in the social life of the peoples ofits region, including in areas of social activity that are controversial from the point of view of canonical teaching, for example in the military: “Japanese military force shave used Buddhist symbols, banners, mudrās, and mantras to empower their actions and intimate opponents” ^{[3, 263]}. In medieval Japan, large monasteries maintained regular armies, which were a formidable force and had great potential for intervening in resolving social conflicts. During the Second World War, Zen temples organized meditation training for the armed forces, raised money to buy new aircraft, and so on ^{[4, 128–129]}.

A logical question arises: if the doctrinal teaching of Buddhism, especially of the Mahayana tradition, was to a large extent socially oriented, and the social practice of Buddhists demonstrated their extensive involvement in social processes;then what is the reason for the emergence as well as the specificity of "socially engaged Buddhism," differentiated from traditional forms of involvement?

We might postulate that as the influence of the ideology and social practices of modernity on the life of traditional societies practicing Buddhism intensified and as the world of traditional Buddhism encountered the processes of globalization, the traditional forms of social activity of the Sangha ceased to meet the challenges of modernity, which led to the need to develop new forms ^{[5, 15-21]}. In speaking about realities of Buddhist communities in countries of its traditional existence, Ian Harris validly notes: “It is difficult to point to any part of the contemporary Buddhist world that has not been massively transformed by at least one aspect of modernity, be it colonialism, industrialization, telecommunications, consumerism, ultra-individualism, or totalitarianism of the left or right. In this radically new situation, Buddhists have been forced to adapt or risk the possibility of a substantial decline” ^{[6, 19]}. Subsequently, when Buddhism became widespread in Western countries, the need to developsocial practices that addressed the agenda formed by Western societies became even more urgent and developed into a goal in and of itself.

Initially, Thich Nhat Hanh referred to the approaches he was developing as "lay Buddhism." During the Vietnam War, he and his Sangha sought to respond to the suffering they saw around them and worked hard to do so. They saw this activity as part of their meditation and mindfulness practices. Thich Nhat Hanh outlined his vision of what needs to be cultivated internally in the new conditions of the Buddhist community through the fourteen precepts of socially engaged Buddhism. In view of their importance to the movement, what follows is their full citation: “(1) Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or ideology, even Buddhist ones. Buddhist systems of thought are guiding means; they are not absolute truth. (2) Do not think the knowledge you presently possess is changeless, absolute truth. Avoid being narrow-minded and bound to present views. Learn and practice nonattachment from views in order to be open to receive others’ viewpoints. Truth is found in life and not merely in conceptual knowledge. Be ready to learn throughout your entire life and to observe reality in yourself and in the world at all times. (3) Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrowness. (4) Do not avoid contact with suffering or close your eyes before suffering. Do not lose awareness of the existence of suffering in the life of the world. Find ways to be with those who are suffering, including personal contact, visits, images, and sounds. By such means, awaken yourself and others to the reality of suffering in the world. (5) Do not accumulate wealth while millions are hungry. Do not take as the aim of your life Fame, profit, wealth, or sensual pleasure. Live simply and share time, energy, and material resources with those who are in need. (6) Do not maintain anger or hatred. Learn to penetrate and transform them when they are still seeds in your consciousness. As soon as they arise, turn your attention to your breath in order to see and understand the nature of your hatred. (7) Do not lose yourself in dispersion and in your surroundings. Practice mindful breathing to come back to what is happening in the present moment. Be in touch with what is wondrous, refreshing, and healing both inside and around you. Plant seeds of joy, peace, and understanding in yourself in order to facilitate the work of transformation in the depths of your consciousness. (8) Do not utter words that can create discord and cause the community to break. Make every effort to reconcile and resolve all conflicts, however small. (9) Do not say untruthful things for the sake of personal interest or to impress people. Do not utter words that cause division and hatred. Do not spread news that you do not know to be certain. Do not criticize or condemn things of which you are not sure. Always speak truthfully and constructively. Have the courage to speak out about situations of injustice, even when doing so may threaten your own safety. (10) Do not use the Buddhist community for personal gain or profit, or transform your community into a political party. A religious community, however, should take a clear stand against oppression and injustice and should strive to change the situation without engaging in partisan conflicts. (11) Do not live with a vocation that is harmful to humans and nature. Do not invest in companies that deprive others of their chance to live. Select a vocation that helps realize your ideal of compassion. (12) Do not kill. Do not let others kill. Find whatever means possible to protect life and prevent war. (13) Possess nothing that should belong to others. Respect the property of others, but prevent others from profiting from human suffering or the suffering of other species on Earth. (14) Do not mistreat your body. Learn to handle it with respect. Do not look on your body as only an instrument. Preserve vital energies (sexual, breath, spirit) for the realization of the Way. (For brothers and sisters who are not monks and nuns:) Sexual expression should not take place without love and commitment. In sexual relationships, be aware of future suffering that may be caused. To preserve the happiness of others, respect the rights and commitments of others. Be fully aware of the responsibility of bringing new lives into the world. Meditate on the world into which you are bringing new beings.” ^{[7, 24-25]}.

Each of these precepts in and of themselves are not something innovative for Buddhism. They describe the three-fold training quite traditional for Buddhism: morality, concentrationand wisdom. However, it is of note that the list opens with precepts related to the cognitive sphere and to wisdom, while only one point (8) is devoted to the practice of concentration, and the points related to morality complete the list. If we turn to the order of enumeration (and, accordingly, practice) accepted in the tradition, we will see that this list opens with morality and ends with wisdom, and this is a fundamentally important difference. In the precepts describing the normative attitude to wisdom, the conventional (and therefore false) nature of its verbal expression is emphasized, which is quite consistent with the precepts of the Chan school on the inexpressibility of truth in words; in contrast, the teachings of the Tibetan Gelug schoolrecognize the possibility of a correct formulation of absolute truth through words. Traditionally, however, such an attitude is developed as a result of the practice of morality and concentration. The formulation of this precept outside the context (or rather, ahead of it) of traditional practice can be understood as a denial of the absolute, unconditional foundation of knowledge and morality, which, of course, does not correspond to the traditional interpretation.

Outside of the traditional context, the above points regarding the conditionality of truth can be read as very similar to postmodern statements about the conventionality of truth and morality, so that the fourteen precepts formulated by Thich Nhat Hanh fell quite naturally in line with Western post-traditional mentality. In addition, the lack of attachment to traditional school teachings greatly contributed to the popularity of the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanhas a foundation for social practice, in which schools of different doctrinal orientations, and even followers of different faiths, can be united.

In the new socio-cultural environment of the Western world, the forms of social activity that had developed in traditional societies where teachers of Buddhism came from, could not be reproduced unchanged. This was both due to the difference in social structures as well as the fact that Buddhist schools in the West occupied a very modest and even marginalized place. For example, in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, Buddhism was actively involved in the problems of war and social violence, and in peacetime it traditionally played an important role in the implementation of social programs. When these traditions of Buddhism moved to the West, they were forced to radically change the scope of their social activity ^[8].

The areas of application of the forces of the movement of socially engaged Buddhism were: 1) environmental problems ^{[9; 10; 11]}; 2) problems of racism and ethno-cultural diversity 1^{[12; 13; 14]}; 3) volunteer and educational work with prisoners ^[15]; and 4) women's movement and gender issues 1^{[16; 17; 18]}.A typical example of applying the traditional Buddhist worldview to address contemporary problems is the movement of Buddhist environmentalism. Although the Buddhist teachings on the wheel of samsara and dependent origination do not correspondto modern theories of evolutionary biology, these concepts resonated strongly with environmental activists of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. To illustrate how the language of describing the processes of "awakening" and "liberation" of an individual can be applied to the study of ecosystems that unite many living beings, Joanna Macy invokes the general systems theory of Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Ervin Laszlo and the image of "Indra's network" from the Avataṃsaka Sūtra: “Far from the nihilism and escapism that is often imputed to the Buddhist path, this liberation, this awakening puts one into the world with a livelier, more caring sense of social engagement. The sense of interconnectedness that can then arise, is imaged — in one of the most beautiful images of the Mahayana — as the jeweled net of Indra. It is a vision of reality structured very much like the holographic view of the universe, so that each being is at each node of the net, each jewel reflects all the others, reflecting back and catching the reflection, just as systems theory sees that the part contains the whole.” ^{[19, 61]} Thus, the concepts of canonical Buddhist texts along with contemporary theory are applied to formulating eco-philosophy and addressing environmental issues.

The areas of activity as noted above of socially engaged Buddhism include themes common to liberal activism. One of the reasons for this isthatthe sphere of liberal activism is apparently one of the main environments where this movement is spreading. Many engaged Buddhist organizations partner with secular social activist non-profits around common goals.

The "Engaged Buddhism" movement quickly took on institutionalized forms. Moreover, while initially its activity developed within the framework of Asian Buddhist organizations with branches in Western countries, over time Western communities themselves appeared, such as the California-based BuddhistPeace Fellowship, which was founded in 1977 by the Zen teacher Robert Aitken. Itcoordinates community development and prison reform programs through its US chapters and quarterly journal, “Turning Wheel: The Journal of Socially Engaged Buddhism.” Other organizations include the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, the Ecodharma Center, and Peacemaker Circle International (founded in 1996 by Bernie Glassman, a lineage holder in the Sōtō Zen tradition; it sponsors "bearing witness retreats" in areas of suffering and violence).

The "Engaged Buddhism" movement originally arose among the most socially active part of the traditional Buddhist sangha in Asian countries in response to the negative phenomena brought by colonialism, wars and social upheavals of modern times. In countries where Buddhism is traditionally practiced, it continues to play a significant role in the process of liberation from the colonial legacy and in the transformation of society toa more just foundation, and it receives significant support within the Buddhist community. Having gained popularity in Western countries, this movement has largely become a form of social activism among Western converts. Its activity has turned primarily to the spheres of social problems formulated in the discourse of postmodernity and kept current primarily by Western liberal activists. At present, the movement of "Engaged Buddhism" is well institutionalized, and its structures are quite active in publishing, educational and training activities, so that at present the movement is one of the most influential forms of social activity of Buddhism in Western countries.