Wednesday, June 08, 2005

The Hermit Kingdom: All about Korean Buddhism

Friday, April 22, 2005

Buddhist Centers in Minnesota

Sam-bul Sa (Korean Budd. Assoc)
8301 W. River Rd.
Brooklyn Park, MN 55444
Phone: 763-561-7014
Buddhism

Sri Lakaramaya Buddhist Temple
2345 Stone Creek Ln
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: 952-314-4862
Buddhism

Midwest Buddhist Association
774 Mill Path
Eagan, MN 55123
Phone: 925-688-2889
Buddhism

Lao Temple of Minnesota
22605 Cedar Avenue South
Farmington, MN 55024
Phone: 651-469-1692
Buddhism

Cambodian Buddhist Society
2925 220th Street East
Hampton, MN 55031
Phone: 651-463-3101
In the News
Buddhism

Dharma Field Zen Center
3118 West 49th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55410
Phone: 612-928-4868
Website: www.dharmafield.org
Buddhism

Ganden Cho Ling Dharma Center
8 E. 25th St.
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Phone: 612-623-3474
Buddhism

Gyuto Wheel of Dharma Monastery in Minnesota
4011 Polk St. NE
Minneapolis, MN 55421
Phone: 763-789-4478
Center Profile
Buddhism

Karma Thegsum Choling Meditation Center
4301 Morningside Road
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Phone: 952-926-5048
Website: www.kagyu.org/centers/usa/usa-min.html
Buddhism

Ming-ni Su-lien Fo-Hsueh she
425 13th Ave. S.E. #607
Minneapolis, MN 55414
Buddhism

Minneapolis Shambhala Center
304 University Ave., NE, Suite 303
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Buddhism

Minnesota Zen Center
3343 East Calhoun Parkway
Minneapolis, MN 55408
Phone: 612-822-5313
Website: www.mnzenctr.com/
In the News
Buddhism

Minnesota Zen Meditation Center
3343 E. Calhoun Parkway
Minneapolis, MN 55408
Phone: 651-822-5313
Buddhism

Niem Phat Duong Thien An
c/o D.H. Dong Truc, 7732 Unity Ave. North
Minneapolis, MN 55443-3021
Buddhism

Twin Cities Dharma Study Group
3314 Emerson South
Minneapolis, MN 55408
Buddhism

Wat Lao Minneapolis
1429 NE Second Street
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Phone: 612-789-9382
Buddhism

Northfield Buddhist Meditation Center
313 Division St
Northfield, MN 55057
Website: www.northfieldbuddhists.org
Buddhism

Laotian Buddhist Society
7327 13th Ave. S
Richfield, MN 55423
Buddhism

Chua Phat An Buddhist Temple
475 Minnesota Avenue
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 651-482-7990
Buddhism

Phat An Buddhist Temple
475 Minn.Ave, Box13682, Market Place
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 651-482-7990
Website: www.phatan.org/
Buddhism

Sakya Thupton Dargye Ling
1615 Bruce Ave.
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 763-633-0019
Buddhism

Clouds in Water Zen Center
308 Prince Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Phone: 651-222-6968
Website: www.cloudsinwater.org
Buddhism

Soka Gakkai International (SGI)-USA, Minnesota Community Center
1381 Eustis Street
St. Paul, MN 55108
Phone: 651-645-3133
Buddhism

St. Paul Zendo
136 Amherst
St. Paul, MN 55705
Buddhism

Triple Gem of the North
PO Box 323
St. Peter, MN 56082
Phone: 612-227-8188
Fax: 952-314-4863
Website: www.triplegem.org
Buddhism


Sunday, April 17, 2005

Excerpt from Comfortable with Uncertainty by Pema Chodron

Selection 86: Six Ways to Be Lonely

Usually we regard loneliness as an enemy. It’s restless and pregnant and hot with the desire to escape and find something or someone to keep us company. When we rest in the middle of it, we begin to have a nonthreatening relationship with loneliness, a cooling loneliness that turns our usual fearful patterns upside down. There are six ways of describing this kind of cool loneliness:

  1. Less desire is the willingness to be lonely without resolution when everything in us yearns for something to change our mood.
  2. Contentment means that we no longer believe that escaping our loneliness is going to bring happiness or courage or strength.
  3. Avoiding unnecessary activities means that we stop looking for something to entertain us or to save us.
  4. Complete discipline means that at every opportunity, we’re willing to come back to the present moment with compassionate attention.
  5. Not wandering in the world of desire is about relating directly with how things are, without trying to make them okay.
  6. Not seeking security from one’s discursive thoughts means no longer seeking the companionship of constant conversation with ourselves.

Bell Hooks Interviews Pema Chodron

Pema Chödrön & bell hooks talk over life and all its problems
—from the Shambhala Sun magazine

Initially when I enter the classroom, I share with my students that we are there to think critically—to engage the world we live in—the world of ideas, fully, deeply, with our whole heart. Pema Chödrön's work gives me this gift. Consistently she challenges me to think beyond someplace where I have erected boundaries—where I've allowed myself to become stuck—attached—full of defences.

When I first read her, the writing irked me. I was disturbed by what I began to call its "strategic open-endedness." I wanted to be offered solutions, ways out. Instead, she kept extending an invitation to me and everyone to move into that enchanted space beyond right or wrong—to journey to the heart of compassion. And when you have stepped out on faith, straight into the heart of the matter, loving kindness appears less like a utopian dream. It becomes concrete—a place to practice wherever you are.

Beyond the challenges she makes to the stuck places within us, Pema is most seductive and exciting when she urges us to revise our notions of safety, telling us: "Real safety is your willingness to not run away from yourself." She urges us to risk, to embrace rebellion, disruption, and chaos as a beloved site for transformation. Talking with her enabled me to bring issues that trouble my heart out in the open. My hope was that she could and would shed light on the matter. Those bits of light are here in our dialogue. May their radiance reach you.

—bell hooks

bell hooks: Pema, one of the ideas in your work that really challenges me is abandoning the hope of fruition. That's really hard for me.

Pema Chödrön: The way I understand it is that we rob ourselves of being in the present by always thinking that the payoff will happen in the future.

The only place ever to work is right now. We work with the present situation rather than a hypothetical possibility of what could be. I like any teaching that encourages us to be with ourselves and our situation as it is without looking for alternatives. The source of all wakefulness, the source of all kindness and compassion, the source of all wisdom, is in each second of time. Anything that has us looking ahead is missing the point.

bell hooks: Much of the work I do revolves around racism and sexism, and on one hand, I want to start right where I am in the now. But on the other hand, I also have to have this vision of a future where these things are not in our lives. Do you think that's too utopian?

Pema Chödrön: Personally, I work with aspiration. The classic aspiration is "Sentient beings are numberless. I vow to save them." That means that I aspire to end suffering for all creatures, but at the same time I stay with the immediacy of the situation I'm in. I give up both the hope that something is going to change and the fear that it isn't. We may long to end suffering but somehow it paralyzes us if we're too goal-oriented. Do you see the balance there? It's like the teaching that Don Juan gave to Carlos Castenada, where he says that you do everything with your whole heart, as if nothing else matters. You do it impeccably and with your whole heart, but all the while knowing that it actually doesn't matter at all.

bell hooks: Yet it seems very hard for people to fight this racism and sexism without hope for an end to it. There is so much despair and apathy because of the feeling that we've struggled and struggled and not enough has changed.

Pema Chödrön: The main issue is aggression. Often if there's too much hope you begin to have a strong sense of enemy. Then the whole process of trying to alleviate suffering actually adds more suffering because of your aggression toward the oppressor. Don't you see a lot of people who have such good intentions but they get very angry, depressed, resentful?

bell hooks: Yes, you're talking to one! I get so overwhelmed sometimes.

Pema Chödrön: Well, doesn't that get in the way?

bell hooks: Yeah, it does. I'm on tour right now talking about my book about ending racism, and I hear people say things like, racism doesn't exist, or, don't you think we've already dealt with that? And I start to feel irritable. This irritability starts mounting in me, and I notice how it collapses into sorrow. I came home the other day and I sat down at my table and just wept because I thought, it's just too much.

Pema Chödrön: Well, isn't that the point? That other people and ourselves, we're the same really, and we just get stuck in different ways. Getting stuck in any kind of self-and-other tension seems to cause pain. So if you can keep your heart and your mind open to those people, in other words, work with any tendency to close down towards them, isn't that the way the system of racism and cruelty starts to de-escalate?

The thing is, once we get into this kind of work we are opening ourselves for all our own unresolved misery to come floating right up and block our compassion. It's a difficult and challenging practice to keep your heart and mind open. It takes a lot to be a living example of unbiased mind! But when you see, bell, how you feel towards these people, you can begin to understand why there is racism, why there is cruelty, because everyone has those same thoughts and emotions that you do. Everyone feels that irritability and then it escalates.

bell hooks: Is it simply a choice of will to have an open heart?

Pema Chödrön: I think it begins with the aspiration to connect with open heart, the knowledge that cultivating openness is how you want to spend the remaining moments of your life.

Openness actually starts to emerge when you see how you close down. You see how you close down, how you yell at someone, and you begin to have some compassion. It starts with compassion towards yourself and then you begin to extend that warmth to the rest of humanity. It begins to dawn on you how it could happen that people are yelling at others because they're oriental or black or hispanic or women or gay or whatever. You begin to know what it's like to stand in their shoes.

bell hooks: How do you develop compassion towards yourself?

Pema Chödrön: A big part of compassion is being honest with yourself, not shielding yourself from your mistakes as if nothing had happened. And the other big component is being gentle.

This is what meditation is about, but obviously it goes beyond sitting on a meditation cushion. You begin to see your moods and your attitudes and your opinions. You begin to hear this voice, your voice, and how it can be so critical of self and others. There is growing clarity about all the different parts of yourself.

Meditation gives you the tools to look at all of this clearly, with an unbiased attitude. A lot of having compassion toward oneself is staying with the initial thought or arising of emotion. This means that when you see yourself being aggressive, or stuck in self-pity, or whatever it might be, then you train again and again in not adding things on top of that—guilt or self-justification or any further negativities. You work on not spinning off and on being kinder toward the human condition as you see it in yourself.

bell hooks: The idea in your work I find so moving is the unconditional embrace of one's being, which allows you to embrace others at the same time. But if I unconditionally accept myself, then what's the motivation to practice further?

Pema Chödrön: That willingness to stick with yourself is just another way of saying that you stay awake. It seems what blocks seeing things truly is our tendency to self-denigrate, to disassociate continually, to edit continually. When you don't close down and shut off, then insight begins to come. This insight is the wisdom that completely cuts through the conventional way of seeing.

So when you see clearly, the motivation to practice becomes stronger and stronger because you begin to have insights that are totally refreshing and powerful. The motivation to practice becomes stronger because you are discovering your true nature and it's painful to block that in any way. It's painful to see yourself being totally neurotic, selfish, all these things, and you can't stand to do that to yourself. You don't want to cover over your openness anymore. Plus you can't bear to see the suffering it causes other people when they do the same thing.

On one level, our suffering is caused by bigotry and dogmatism and all these things, but ultimately we suffer because we don't understand how limitless we are. You could say that we live in a fantasy, that what we call reality is actually a dream. This is an important truth—that this whole thing is a fantasy and we're totally completely caught up in it. We limit what is limitless. We condition what is unconditioned, and it makes us miserable. When you begin to understand that, you can't bear for other people to keep hurting themselves that way, and you can't bear to keep hurting yourself that way. Then you are really motivated to practice.

bell hooks: You have commented that we can't smooth out the rough edges, yet as I was listening to you I was thinking, isn't she describing a sense that the rough edges get smoothed out.

Pema Chödrön: No they don't, actually. What you realize is that there's enough space to accommodate all of it. There's enough space in your own being, enough space in the whole of creation, to accommodate all of it. All of it. It's because we pick and choose, because we have biases and prejudices, because we prefer smooth to rough and then react for and against, that we suffer.

bell hooks: Can you talk about the difference between blame and accountability? Because I feel, like you, that blame isn't very useful. But you have said, for instance in reference to men teachers who abuse their powers, that you feel the issue of accountability is real. How does one maneuver between giving up blame and being able to embrace the idea of accountability?

Pema Chödrön: This is the message of the first noble truth. You are willing to see suffering as suffering.

Obviously the less that you are caught in your own hope and fear, the more you can just see suffering very straightforwardly and without aggression. So accountability seems to mean you can be honest, incredibly honest. You see that harm is being done. You see someone harming a child, an animal, another human being. You see that clearly and your strongest wish is to de-escalate that suffering. Then the question is, how do you proceed so that the person you see as the problem becomes accountable, becomes willing to acknowledge what they're doing?

You realize how hard it is for you to acknowledge what you are doing in your own life. You see what it takes to become accountable yourself, and you begin to try to find the skillful means to communicate so that the barriers come down rather than get reinforced. It has everything to do with communication: how can you communicate so that someone can hear what you're saying and you can also hear what they are saying?

bell hooks: One of the issues that I've had with the students in my American literature classes is my sense that we're all accountable, that while I as teacher am a certain kind of center from which things radiate, everyone is accountable. They were very distressed last week because I said to them, you know, these papers are really boring. And they came back this week and they said, you were really mean, you were just so raw. And I said, excuse me, was I the only one thinking these papers were boring? Am I the only person who's accountable here?

Although I did not have the pleasure and pain of meeting Trungpa Rinpoche, I've always been moved by his teaching. I have always felt myself to be embodying in my own teaching and habits of being a certain wildness of spirit that's experimental, that's willing to push the boundaries. That's why my book on teaching is called Teaching to Transgress.

Pema Chödrön: Accountability, as you're talking about it, is my understanding of the spiritual path. With Trungpa Rinpoche, my feeling was that all he was doing was getting people to take responsibility for themselves, getting them to grow up. He was a master of not confirming. Talking to him was like talking to a huge space where everything bounced back, and you had to be accountable for yourself.

Personally I feel that the role of the teacher is to wean the students from dependency, and from taking the parent/child view of life altogether. That's what I think of as non-theism. Theism doesn't just have to do with God; it has to do with always feeling that you're incomplete and need something or someone outside to look to. It's like never growing up.

To me, theism is feeling that you can't find out for yourself what's true. You take the Buddhist teachings, or any teachings and you just try to fit yourself into them. But you're not really finding out. You're not grappling with it. You're not really digging into it and letting it transform your being. You are just trying to live up to some ideal. You are still looking for the security of having someone else to praise or blame.

So accountability is pretty groundless. There is no hand to hold. It's like the lojong slogan that says, "Of the two judges, trust the principal one." No matter what other people say, when it really comes down to it, you're the only one who can answer your own questions.

bell hooks: You have taken radically different paths at different moments of your life. I'm interested in how we can use mindfulness as a way of illuminating vocation, of knowing when we need to let one path go and move towards another. Do you still grapple with those questions?

Pema Chödrön: Oh, all the time. I mean, isn't that the way? The more you really get into it, the more you grapple. Life is such a stunner. It's always humbling you and showing you how little you know, how little you understand. It continues to inspire you to go forward, but wow, it's a pretty humbling experience. I don't know if that's really what you mean here.

bell hooks: It's a part of what I mean, but I was asking more concretely how we practice in a manner that illuminates our everyday life choices.

Pema Chödrön: What do you think, bell?

bell hooks: I was thinking about work in America and work as a place of suffering for lots of people. So many people spend their lives working in jobs where they feel miserable and I am certainly one of those who feels somewhat miserable in her own job.

Pema Chödrön: Well, there's always the simple answer of moving into a different field. There's nothing wrong with that. But just changing the outer situation doesn't get at the root of the discontent. This gets down to the truth of suffering again. As human beings, we need to look directly at suffering, at what causes it, at what makes it escalate, and at what allows it to dissolve. So the first thing is to acknowledge, with a lot of honesty and heart, that no matter where we go or what we do, there are always going to be both positive and negative feelings and that this is a fertile situation.

My own experience is that I've been a nun going on twenty-three years or so, and as the years go on my life gets in some ways simpler and clearer. But you know, bell, these feelings of worry, of not enough time, still come up. Then you realize how much of it is in our minds. Whether we're in a totally overwhelming work situation or a very simplified one, we still have to work with our minds.

That's why some teachings say that no matter what is happening in your life, it's always showing you the true nature of reality. No matter what movie you're in, no matter what the plot is of the current film you're starring in, it is the vehicle for showing you the true nature of your mind.

So I feel the whole thing comes down to being very, very attuned to one's emotions—to seeing how one is attached to the pleasant and has an aversion to what is painful. You work again and again on trying to discover how to get unhooked, to open and soften rather than to tighten and close down. It comes down to realizing the wisdom and compassion that are contained in this life that we have, just as it is. No matter how simplified or complicated life gets, it can make us miserable or it can wake us up.

bell hooks: One of the things I've been thinking about a great deal is poverty. I feel very strongly that in our society people have been made to feel that you can't lead a meaningful life if you are poor. So much of the agitation in the lives of the poor in this society has to do with this disdain.

Pema Chödrön: The question is how to help people, no matter how desperate their lives are, to realize that they are worthy to live on this earth, that they do not have to feel inferior or be ashamed of themselves. And the question is how to help people to get smarter about what causes suffering to increase and what causes it to decrease.

There is a famous saying that from great suffering comes great compassion. Well, from great suffering can come great compassion, or from great suffering can come great hatred. Maybe someone like you could really work on that message right there. From great suffering can come great openness of heart, a great sense of kinship with others, or from great suffering can come hatred, resentment and despair.

bell hooks: But it isn't an automatic thing. It isn't because you suffer that you will have compassion. In the past people have felt that this is some kind of reward for your suffering, that you will have compassion.

Pema Chödrön: People need a lot of support for suffering to turn into compassion. What usually happens to people when they don't have teachers and guides and the support of people who care is that great suffering leads to more suffering. You have mothers who don't have the money to care for their kids and on top of that they get completely lost in drugs, not to mention that their kids are getting into deep trouble. So the nightmare escalates and escalates.

The fundamental question is not whether there is or isn't suffering. It is how we work with suffering so that it leads to awakening the heart and going beyond the habitual views and actions that perpetuate suffering. How do we actually use suffering so that it transforms our being and that of those that we come in contact with? How can we stop running from pain and reacting against it in ways that destroy us as well as others? This is a message that people can hear, but they have to hear it a lot, and with great heart, and from people who really care, not from somebody who is just passing through to make a few dollars.

That's why I love the lojong teachings, because the lojong slogans are accessible. Basically, they teach how we can take difficult circumstances and transform them into the path of compassion. That's the kind of teaching we need these days, that difficult circumstances can be the path to liberation. That's news you can use.

bell hooks: Well, that brings me to my final issue. I have written it in big block letters: DON'T EVEN THINK FOR A MOMENT THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DIE.

Pema Chödrön: Right. "Don't even think for a moment that you're not going to die." Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche said that to a friend of mine who had cancer and was close to death and was having trouble accepting it. And instead of it coming across to her as cruel, it came across as immense kindness, that someone was telling her the truth.

bell hooks: It does seem that so much of our longing to escape has to do with the sense that the closer I am to suffering, the closer I am to death.

Pema Chödrön: For me the spiritual path has always been learning how to die. That involves not just death at the end of this particular life, but all the falling apart that happens continually. The fear of death—which is also the fear of groundlessness, of insecurity, of not having it all together—seems to be the most fundamental thing that we have to work with. Because these endings happen all the time! Things are always ending and arising and ending. But we are strangely conditioned to feel that we're supposed to experience just the birth part and not the death part.

We have so much fear of not being in control, of not being able to hold on to things. Yet the true nature of things is that you're never in control. You're never in control. You can never hold on to anything. That's the nature of how things are. But it's almost like it's in the genes of being born human that you can't accept that. You can buy it intellectually, but moment to moment it brings up a lot of panic and fear. So my own path has been training to relax with groundlessness and the panic that accompanies it. Training to allow all that to be there, training to die continually. That seems to be the essence of the lojong teachings—to stay in the space of uncertainty without trying to reconstruct a reference point.

We can stop looking for some idealized moment when everything is simple and secure. This second of experience, which could be painful or pleasurable, is our working basis. What makes all the difference is how we relate to it.

bell hooks: Pema, I want to say how much I have wanted to speak with you, and I thank you for giving me this opportunity.


The Shambhala Sun is a lively, contemporary magazine inspired by the wisdom of Buddhism and the world's great contemplative traditions. You can e-mail the Shambhala Sun at magazine@shambhalasun.com, or write them at 1345 Spruce St., Boulder, CO 80302-4886, or call them at 902-422-8404, or pick up a copy at your local newsstand.

Shambhala Sun Magazine — http://www.shambhalasun.com
E-mail: magazine@shambhalasun.com
1585 Barrington Street, Suite #300
Halifax, NS B3J 1Z8 CANADA
Voice: (902) 422-8404 Fax: (902) 423-2701

“On one level, our suffering is caused by bigotry and dogmatism and all these things, but ultimately we suffer because we don't understand how limitless we are. You could say that we live in a fantasy, that what we call reality is actually a dream.”

Buddhist Studies Virtual Library

The School of Buddhist Studies at Geumgang University

The School of Buddhist Studies offers a B.A. in Buddhist Studies for students interested in the culture and history of Buddhism. Buddhist thoughts will be illuminated from a modern standpoint, and programs for implementing those thoughts into practice will be sought on the basis of modern methodology.

Friday, April 15, 2005

Buddhism and New Age Orientalism

Buddhism and the New Age
Vishvapani

ON MAY 25TH 1880 Madame Helena Petrova Blavatsky and Colonel Henry Steel Olcott, took the three refuges and the five precepts from a Buddhist priest in a temple in Galle, a coastal town in Sri Lanka, before a large crowd of Sinhalese. 'When we had finished the last of the Silas and offered flowers in the customary way', Olcott wrote in his diary, 'there was a mighty shout to make one's nerves tingle'.1

He and Blavatsky were the founders of the Theosophical Society, one of the most influential religious movements of the late 19th Century and in this ceremony Olcott became the first American and Blavatsky the first European 2 formally to convert to Buddhism. The twin legacies of Theosophy are the introduction of Buddhism to the West and the amorphous set of beliefs and practices which have come to be known as 'the New Age'.

Buddhism and the New Age have been associated ever since, converging spectacularly in the counter-cultural movements of the 1960's. In a recent paper Denise Cush concludes that 'there is a close, entangled and ambiguous relationship between British Buddhism and the New Age' which 'can be traced back to a common ancestor in Theosophy'.3 This entanglement has led to popular identifications of Buddhism as a part of the same movement as the New Age; the assumption on the part of many 'New Age' people that Buddhism supports their views; and the subtle influence of New Age attitudes and assumptions on Buddhists' understanding of their own tradition.

Nonetheless, Buddhism and the New Age are very different. They have emerged from very different histories, travelling on different historical trajectories and based on different philosophical assumptions. Cush identifies a changing relationship over the last two decades between British Buddhist groups and New Age activities from 'closeness to a conscious differentiation, followed by a diversification of approaches'. The initial closeness derived from the influence of the counter-cultural trends of the 1960s is thrusting both Buddhism and the New Age to prominence. The period of separation occurred as Buddhists sought, in the 1970s and 1980s to establish their own identity. But by the 1990s alienation from conventional religion, party politics and the conditions of consumer-capitalist society have generated renewed interest in both movements throwing them together once more. With the increased size and confidence of Buddhist movements in the West, Buddhists are in a position to explore ways of working alongside others and the last few years have seen a number of Buddhist initiatives in New Age venues. But what are the issues involved in this renewed encounter?

1. THE NEW AGE

THE INDEFINABILITY OF THE NEW AGE is at the heart of its nature. Is it a coherent entity, or simply a catch-all phrase describing essentially separate developments? There is no definitive set of beliefs or practices which are held in common by everyone to whom the term may be applied, but something is clearly happening. What are the distinguishing characteristics of the phenomenon we call New Age? What are the underlying attitudes and assumptions of which New Age practices are expressions?

Most commentators date the emergence of a distinctive New Age philosophy from the work of the American Theosophist Alice Bailey (1880-1949) which blended occultism, spiritualism and apocalyptic vision with the prevailing Zeitgeist. As Dell deChant comments

'The New Age is the product of mid-20th century America. It becomes noticeable in the late sixties and ever more pronounced since then as its chief carrier, the 'baby-boom' generation' continues to experiment with beliefs and ideologies which are, at best, distinct from those of capitalism, mainline Christianity and participatory democracy. Its most obvious origin is found in the work of Alice A Bailey'.4

Many New Age activities found in Britain have their origin in the USA and the UK has, in any case been subject to similar trends. But rather than attempting to account for the forms the New Age has taken or comparing New Age activities with Buddhist ones it is more important to discern their respective philosophical bases and underlying attitudes. A British New Age Creed is offered by William Bloom of St. James Piccadilly, which gives a starting-point for deducing these.

  1. "All life-all existence-is the manifestation of Spirit, of the Unknowable, of that supreme consciousness known by many different names in different cultures.
  2. The purpose and dynamic of all existence is to bring Love, Wisdom, Enlightenment into full manifestation.
  3. All religions are expressions of this same inner reality.
  4. All life, as we perceive it with the five human senses, or with scientific instruments, is only the outer veil of an inner, causal reality.
  5. Similarly, human beings are two-fold creatures-with an outer temporary personality and a multi-dimensional inner being (soul or higher self).
  6. The outer personality is limited and tends towards materialism.
  7. The inner personality is unlimited and tends towards love.
  8. Our spiritual teachers are those souls who are liberated from the need to incarnate and who express unconditional love, wisdom and Enlightenment. Some of these beings are well-known and have inspired the world religions. Some are unknown and work invisibly.
  9. All life in all its different forms and states, is interconnected energy-and this includes our deeds, feelings and thoughts. We therefore work with spirit and these energies in co-creating our reality.
  10. Although held in the dynamic of cosmic love, we are jointly responsible for the state of ourselves, of our environment and of all life.
  11. During this period of time the evolution of the planet and of humanity has reached a point when we are undergoing a fundamental spiritual change in our individual and mass consciousness. This is why we speak of a 'New Age''.5

The Religion of the Self

Bloom's creed is characterised by its emphasis on 'inner reality' as the source of meaning and value. But in what sense, one might ask, is this reality 'inner'? It must be that it pertains to experience and in this way it overlaps with the 'inner personality'. But experience has been universalised and, with the substitution of a capital letter, love becomes 'Love' and wisdom, 'Wisdom'. This implies a substratum of existence which is 'Unknowable' and indescribable, but at the same time is crucial to the philosophy which follows (which is the cause of the vagueness and indeterminacy of so much New Age discourse). These are mystical beliefs which are neither rationally elaborated nor theologically defined, but which may-possibly-be experienced. 'Spiritual' qualities are separated from the 'outer' world of actions and ethics except where that world is redefined in spiritual terms: 'All life-all existence-is the manifestation of Spirit, of the Unknowable, of that supreme consciousness'. In a similar way 'all religions are expressions of this same inner reality'.

This, then, is the 'religion of the self'. At its heart is a Rousseau-esque sanctification of 'Inner being' which is outside history, innocent, pure, but nonetheless authoritative. And there is plainly no question of examining the assumptions out of which 'inner being' might be constructed. In practice, this results in a recurrent concern with personal experience. In psychological terms, the New Age speaks the language of individualism while in philosophical terms it speaks the language of immanence, at times implying a monistic metaphysic. These characteristics underlie its remaining features.

Eclecticism
The variety and all-inclusiveness of New-Age activities is perhaps its most remarkable feature. Organisationally there is deep mistrust of institutions and a preference for non-hierarchical models of operation. This is informed by a bias against rational thought or systems of belief and towards intuition and 'holistic paradigms'. But in practice the extent of New Age eclecticism suggests that the particular activity a New Ager chooses to participate in is secondary to the question of what they get from it, what it does for them, how it makes them feel.

New Age as a Market Sector
Another factor influencing the eclecticism of the New Age is its role within consumer society. Ethnic art and music, traditional medicines, handicrafts and clothes expand the range of consumer options. Markets exist in ideas (which can be obtained via books, magazines and seminars) and in experiences (which can be bought through workshops, therapies and retreats). And market forces will define as 'New Age' whatever can be sold as such (or alternatively, whatever cannot be sold as anything else).

For the consuming New Ager these phenomena offer the prospect of perpetual novelty on one's own terms. If you don't like the goods, you find another supplier. Where there is an acknowledgement that commoditisation means a qualitative erosion there is a compensatory stress on compression and intensity:

Enlightenment in a weekend workshop.
Carrying this a stage further, one branch of the New Age discards counter-cultural orientations in favour of 'prosperity teachings' (money as energy, life and empowerment; poverty as self-hatred). As the Sanyassin slogan had it 'Jesus saves, Moses invests, Bhagwan spends'. This is spiritualised materialism masquerading as materialised spirituality.

Neo-Paganism-the Decontextualisation of Tradition
New Age-ism is predicated on dissatisfaction with Christianity and an attempt to find alternative forms of spirituality. It is informed by the revival of non-Christian spiritual traditions such as Wiccan, Rosicrucianism, alchemy, Egyptian religion and the Eastern traditions of Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism and Sufism all of which are cheerfully added to the eclectic mix.

But eclecticism should not be confused with openness. The self-orientation and spiritual consumerism of the New Age impose their own agenda and its approach to paganism as natural religion and animism is informed by modern perspectives. Thus the sense of the sanctity of the natural world augments both ecological concerns and the view of the self as natural and pure. The pagan notion of the immanence of gods, powers and spirits coheres with modern (and sometimes quasi-scientific) interest in psychic phenomena. Ancient mythologies inform psychologically derived 'personal myths' and the cult of the Goddess provides feminism with a deity. Gaia does all these things for everyone.

The New Apocalypse
A final strand is the belief that mankind is or may be entering a New Age-a golden age of spiritual awakening governed by new paradigms of thought. This can be seen as an outgrowth of Christian apocalypticism shorn of the Christian eschatological imagery-Armageddon, the return of Jesus and images from the Book of Revelation. In its place are symbols from (for example) astrology (the Age of Aquarius), biology (the evolution of the human race), parapsychology (harmonic convergence), occultism (the influence of the spiritual masters of Theosophy and Scientology who preside over the world) and science fiction (where the spiritual masters may inhabit UFOs)

. Some of the judgmental qualities of traditional eschatology live on in the notion that we are faced with a choice between a New Age and ecological or nuclear catastrophe. For the most part, however, there is a utopian and optimistic sense that the movement into the next phase of mankind's development is inevitable. In this respect the New Age is reminiscent of the Marxist and socialist utopias and indeed they have historical roots in common. However, the New Age has turned against the Marxist philosophy of revolution and socialist engagement. Alienation from conventional politics has been one of the principal factors in its development which displaces its idealism into an inconceivable future to be attained, in Bloom's words, by 'a fundamental spiritual change in our individual and mass consciousness' rather than through tangible reforms. In the UK the political movements which have influenced the New Age have mainly been concerned with protest and opposition-especially CND, Animal Liberation and the environmental pressure groups.

Philosophical Underpinnings
Christian theology distinguishes between immanence and transcendence as ways of describing the manner in which God is related to the world. Immanence denotes God's indwelling and omnipresence in the world while transcendence indicates a God who is infinitely above and beyond it. As Bloom's concern with 'inner reality' suggests, New Age discourse tends to be expressed in terms of immanence. 'Self-religion' finds meaning within; paganism sees the world as ensouled while apocalyptic utopianism envisages a variation on the theme of heaven on earth.

2. BUDDHISM AND THE NEW AGE

THEOSOPHY AND ITS NEW AGE OFFSPRING have been central influences in the construction of Western views of Buddhism which Mme. Blavatsky favoured as 'incomparably higher, more noble, more philosophic and more scientific than any other church or religion'7. In particular the esoteric interests of the Theosophists underlie the contemporary attraction of the tantra and Tibetan Lamas-whose true progenitors are perhaps the Mahatmas who communicated telepathically with Mme. Blavatsky. As AP Sinnet wrote in true orientalist fashion in Esoteric Buddhism (1883), 'Ceylon concerns itself merely with morals, Tibet, or rather the adepts of Tibet, with the science of Buddhism' 7. The Buddhist Society of London was founded in 1924 as a lodge of the Theosophical Society and Christmas Humphreys, its president, retained a commitment to Mme. Blavatsky's teachings throughout his life.8 Sangharakshita, too, was decisively influenced by Theosophy through his reading, at the age of fourteen, of Blavatsky's Isis Unveiled which brought him to a realisation that 'I was not a Christian-that I never had been and never would be'. However, enthralled as he was by the book, its effect was 'almost entirely negative' 9 and it was overwhelmed by his reading of Buddhist texts on which he realised 'that I was a Buddhist and always had been' 10. This set him on an Eastward trajectory, to encounters with Buddhism in the land of its origin.

When Sangharakshita and other experienced Buddhist teachers arrived in the West in the 1960s they had been preceded, and in some respects pre-empted, by the Theosophically-influenced versions of Buddhism popularised by Humphreys and Alan Watts and enthusiastically travestied by Lobsang Rampa and the Beats. In these ways, Buddhism overlapped with the New Age which, in many respects has continued to support its spread. Buddhist books are sold in New Age bookshops, Buddhist teachers frequently appear in New Age magazines and meditation has become widely popularised. In return Buddhism has provided New Age thinkers with a wealth of images, terms, concepts and texts.

The two movements were also connected by their counter-cultural principles. This association was deeply invigorating for British Buddhism and enabled the FWBO, for example, to cast off the staid and middle-class character of the previous generation of British Buddhists and distance itself from the ossification of much Eastern Buddhism. Buddhism is intrinsically 'alternative' in the West in that it offers an alternative to Christianity and to the many forms of materialism. For this reason a kinship exists between Buddhists and the world-views and counter-cultural experiments of the New Age. But 'identity is the vanishing point of resemblance', as Wallace Stevens says, and this kinship should not be allowed to obscure the profound differences. In an atmosphere of eclecticism, minorities can thrive: vegetarians are no longer considered cranks and neither are Buddhists. But Buddhists should beware of being added to the New Age soup-vegetarian or not.

If it is difficult to define the New Age, it is perhaps no less difficult to define Buddhism, but unless we can be clear what is distinctive about Buddhism we will be at the mercy of endless compromises and obscurations. I suggest that at the heart of the many expressions of the Dharma is a concern with the Truth, the full realisation of which is conterminous with Enlightenment. This emphasis runs contrary to the common Western perception of Buddhism as a path of progressively intensifying spiritual experience. That is to say, Buddhism is seen as a form of mysticism and mysticism is understood in terms of experience. In an address to a conference of 'scientists and mystics' Sangharakshita was at pains to stress that he identifed himself with neither party:

'To me as a Buddhist, terms such as 'mystic' and 'mystical' are in fact quite strange, even alien, not to say repugnant, and in speaking and writing about Buddhism I prefer to avoid them'11

This does not mean that Buddhism is not concerned with experience, but it does not see experience-even mystical experience-as an end in itself. When mysticism is turned into a philosophy it becomes monism-the belief in an underlying unity between all phenomena within the context of a metaphysical absolute, mysticism being the personal experience of such an absolute. Buddhism seeks to avoid all such absolutisation and reification and to understand experience in a broader, non-dualistic context:

'One might say Science represents an extreme of objectivity and reason whereas Mysticism represents an extreme of subjectivity and emotion... Science seeks to reduce the subject to the object, Mysticism to absorb the object in the subject. Buddhism, following here as elsewhere a Middle Way, represents a dissolution of the subject-object dichotomy in a blissful non-dual Awareness wherein... 'that which is exterior coincides with that which is interior'.12

In a similar vein, in a lecture on 'Enlightenment as Experience and Non-Experience' Sangharakshita proposes that we think of the spiritual life not in terms of experience, but in terms of the metaphors of growth, work and duty.13 The 'Truth' to which a Buddhist aspires has to be lived, felt and seen and it is likewise the Truth of his or her experience, but this is not the same as saying that it is experience. This is a crucial point of divergence from the New Age, as 'the religion of the Self'. For Buddhism there is no abiding Self or soul which is not subject to change.

The Buddhist concern with Truth is fundamentally at odds with the eclecticism and relativism of the New Age and Buddhists have to make distinctions between teachings and traditions which the New Age is happy to mix together. 'Truth' here does not refer to the various doctrinal expressions of the Dharma which Buddhist tradition does not consider to be ultimately 'true' in themselves. But such expressions are nonetheless considered indispensable means to Enlightenment and for this reason Right Understanding is the starting point of the Eight-fold path. It is therefore incumbent upon Buddhists to clarify their own views and to distinguish which of the views they encounter are compatible with the Dharma.

Thus a Buddhist cannot agree that 'all religions are essentially expressions of the same inner reality'. Sometimes this stance is urged on Buddhists with the coercive pressure of a theological correctness, but Buddhism does not even regard itself as 'an expression of reality'. It sees its own teachings and practices as means of creating conditions which conduce to the perception of reality and Buddhists will judge other teachings by the same criterion. Where there are differences of belief and practice Buddhists need to ask (in the ample spirit of friendly dialogue and tolerance) whether other religions, philosophies and spiritual paths are based, ultimately on one of the two essential 'wrong views': nihilism and eternalism. For example, in his belief in 'spirit' and 'the Unknowable' Bloom proposes a metaphysical substratum underlying and uniting all phenomena. A Buddhist analysis will see this, like Bloom's belief in a 'soul or higher self', as a form of eternalism-not to say as disguised theism. Alternatively, some manifestations of the New Age proceed on the assumption that true happiness is possible if we can but change to this diet, use this ethnic medicine, align these energies using those crystals, amulets, or charms, or take up a particular form of alternative medicine, martial art, or therapy. The suggestion that ultimate satisfaction can be found in a physical training or a particular form of therapy is essentially materialist and a Buddhist analysis will interpret them as a form of nihilism.

Similarly problematic is the belief that all religions are simply differing forms of 'spirituality'. Such an approach will see the Buddhist tradition as one resource among others from which an individual can draw. But why should one chose Buddhist spirituality rather than Christian, feminist or 'earth' spirituality when they are all just different kinds of experience and are all equally true/false/useful? If we simply take what we want from Buddhism we are in danger of ignoring the aspects which are uncomfortable and challenging-in other words, those parts of the tradition which will force one to change.

For this reason it is important that Buddhism is presented in a way which makes it clear that it cannot be incorporated into a life which is otherwise unchanged or subsumed innocuously into a New Age mix. Like the New Age, Dzogchen, Tantra and Zen tend to use the language of immanence: the doctrine of Buddha nature, the idea that we are already Enlightened-and the approaches to practice which follow from this-are all examples. In a cultural context which asserts subjective experience above universal values and where consumption is a primary mode of being such teachings are open to misinterpretation. An alternative approach-using the language of transcendence-asserts that we are not presently Enlightened (and, in fact that we are primordially deluded), that we need to change ourselves if we are to become Enlightened and that Buddhism is a path from delusion to Enlightenment, from Samsara to Nirvana. Some approaches will work and others will not, but one cannot say, with the New Age, that all approaches are equally valid.Buddhists cannot agree that they are helping to prepare for the Golden Dawn and the Age of Aquarius. A Buddhist approach to politics and society has to rest on pratiitya samutpaada, the principle that 'all things arise in dependence upon conditions'. Speaking of the FWBO Subhuti writes in Buddhism for Today

'there are... no millennial illusions. No golden age is at hand. The modern world is too complex and too pluralistic to be transformed in that way'. 14

However, Buddhists can work for meaningful change. As at any other time in history it is possible to create conditions which are more conducive to human well-being and allow the possibility of spiritual development. But this development takes place individually, not en masse in the manner of a totalitarian state or imperial expansion. As Subhuti says, 'empires deny individuality and breed their own expansion'. There is a Buddhist saying that 'Samsara is endless' and any belief that a utopian full-stop can be placed at the end of history will strike Buddhists as naïve escapism, speaking more of the fin de millennium fear of social collapse than of spiritual aspiration.

In spite of this the theosophical heritage lives on among contemporary Western Buddhists in the continuing idealisations of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism, which Donald Lopez dubs 'new age orientalism'. He has in mind the fantasy version of Tibet:

'exalted as a surrogate self endowed with all that the West lacks. It is Tibet that will regenerate the West by showing us, prophetically, what it can be by showing us what it has been. It is Tibet that can save the West, cynical and materialist, from itself. Tibet is seen as a cure for the ever-dissolving West, restoring its spirit'.15

This Tibet is shrouded in snows and mystery in equal measure, secreted behind the Himalayas in the most inaccessible region of the world: the last abode (now cruelly displaced in its turn by the Chinese shadow of Western materialism) of legendary beasts, magical powers and perennial wisdom. To the extent that Western followers of Tibetan Buddhism perceive it in this way they merge into New Age appropriations of that tradition. The Dalai Lama, the Bardo Thödol and, to a lesser extent, the idea of tantric initiation all figure prominently in New Age mythologizing.

As an articulation of fantasy compensations for psychic inadequacy the New Age movement is not a cure so much as a symptom. Over fifty years ago W.H. Auden prophesied a New Age apocalypse in a long work called 'For The Time Being'. Herod is contemplating the impending massacre of the innocents. He does not want to issue the order because, as he says 'I am a liberal. I want everyone to be happy'. But civilisation is already crumbling:

'I have tried everything. I have prohibited the sale of crystals and ouija boards; the courts are empowered to sentence alchemists to hard labour in the mines; it is a statutory offence to turn tables or feel bumps'.

What he fears is a future where:

''Reason will be replaced by Revelation.... Knowledge will degenerate into a riot of subjective visions-feelings in the solar plexus induced by under-nourishment, angelic images generated by fevers or drugs. Whole cosmogonies will be created out of some forgotten personal resentment, complete epics written in private languages, the daubs of school-children ranked above the greatest masterpieces.... Idealism will be replaced by Materialism. Life after death will be an eternal dinner-party where all the guests are only 20 years old... Divine honours will be paid to silver teapots, shallow depressions in the earth, names on maps, domestic pets. The New Aristocracy will consist exclusively of hermits, bums and permanent invalids'.16

This is the icy hell of subjectivity whose inmates, relativizing truth, can speak only to themselves or of themselves to each other. Is it a portrait of the New Age? So elusive a phenomenon can never be adequately defined, but the characterisation I have suggested implies an ideology of underlying assumptions-the religion of the self, eclecticism and social fantasy-whose influence extends far beyond the many-tentacled reach of its institutions and organisations. Buddhism, too, contains underlying assumptions and has a distinctive approach which derives from them. These distinctions must be insisted upon however useful Buddhism and the New Age may be to each other and however much certain formulations of Buddhism may conceal the differences. This is not to say that the people one meets in New Age contexts are necessarily definable in its terms: the New Age is where people start looking when they want an alternative to conventional society. There may well be ways in which the two can live together. Buddhists might see the New Age as a kind of contemporary ethnic religion which can co-exist with Western Buddhism as tribal and national traditions co-exist with Eastern Buddhism. But Buddhists must retain a sense of the universality of their own tradition and of the extent to which it surpasses the New Age frameworks which will seek to define it. One has only to think of the absorption of Indian Buddhism by Hinduism to see how such a relationship can break down. Denise Cush suggests that the New Age, needing to be grounded in a tradition, 'could root itself in a Western form of non-sectarian or Mahayana Buddhism'.17 One sees something of the sort already taking place in the USA. However, Buddhists will insist that what passes as Buddhism is true to its name.

Finally the New Age is not paganism. It is a modern (or even a post-modern) phenomenon; it is a symptom of rootlessness, not a restoration of roots. The New Age seeks to consume traditions such as Buddhism as resources for personal experience. In these respects it embodies a reductio ad absurdum of contemporary liberalism in the realm of religious belief and practice. A New Age Buddhism would be a reductio ad absurdum of Buddhist tradition; it would be a Buddhism constructed from Western fantasies of the East and post-Christian yearnings for salvation. As Stephen Batchelor comments:

'Today the fear of invasion is more one of psychological and social breakdown than of external invasion. instead of Theosophy, there is now the New Age, another resurgent Gnostic/Romantic fantasy that claims Buddhism as its own, just as Mani did in the Third century and Mme. Blavatsky in the 19th. But the Dharma will remain unheard as long as its voice is drowned out by the clamour of these irrational and eclectic yearnings'.18

Buddhism in the West is growing out of old traditions, but it should not simply consume those traditions according to modern agendas and discard them as worthless husks. Western Buddhists are attempting to create a new tradition - a tradition of Western Buddhism within which individuals can develop beyond subjective experience, can grow through activity and engagement and finally come not just to follow the Truth, but to embody it.

VISHVAPANI is the editor of Dharma Life magazine.

Journal of Buddhist Ethics

A Review of American Buddhism. Methods and Findings in Recent Scholarship


"
Despite this incompleteness, Asai and Williams' observations that "a kind of parallel world between Asian-American Buddhism and primarily Euro-American Buddhism" (p. 30) exists, and that "the members of Japanese-American Zen temples expect that the temple will provide them with familial and cultural identity rather than with a space to meditate" (p. 32) underscores the different understandings of Buddhist institutions according to the different strands. "

American Buddhism. Methods and Findings in Recent Scholarship. Edited By Duncan Ryuken Williams and Christopher S. Queen. Richmond: Curzon Press, 1999, xxxvii + 329 pages pages, ISBN 0-7007-1081-7, £ 40,00 (cloth)

University of Hannover
Germany

martin.baumann@uni-bielefeld.de

Buddhists in the United States are vigorously hammering out adapted forms of American Buddhism. A bewildering garden of Buddhist schools and traditions has taken root in North American cities and rural areas. Their adherents are Asian immigrants, some having come recently as Vietnamese or Laotian refugees, others now bringing up a fourth or fifth generation as Chinese or Japanese Buddhists. A second strand is made up of converts from Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, or "non-religious" backgrounds who practice Zen or vipassanaa meditation or participate in Tibetan Buddhist liturgical rituals. Only on rare occasions do the strands of convert, "white" Buddhism and family-socialized "ethnic" Buddhism meet and merge. Nevertheless, as the grounding of the Dharma occurs in the United States and Canada, this heterogeneity is subsumed under the label of "American Buddhism." The book under review is both a stock-taking and a mirror of the work-in-progress of adapting Buddhist teachings and practices to North American society.

American Buddhism assembles thirteen essays of varying lengths and strengths, half of which were presented at a conference on Buddhism in America held at the Harvard Divinity School in 1997. A nicely-written foreword by Diana Eck, a brief preface by co-editor Duncan Williams, and a sophisticated introduction by co-editor Christopher Queen precede the contributions. As Queen points out, choosing the main title "American Buddhism" instead of the conference's noncommittal "Buddhism in America," reflects the findings "that recognizable patterns of American Buddhism are emerging in every quarter" (p. xvi). Queen arranges these "recognizable patterns" into the three broad categories of democratization, pragmatism, and engagement. The range, depth, and emphasis attributed to these three touchstones or "three marks" (Paali tilakkha.na) are pointed out by Queen in a clear and very helpful way with regard to the chapters that follow.

The first of the volume's four parts is devoted to Asian-American Buddhists. Kenneth Tanaka describes and analyzes issues of ethnicity in the Buddhist Churches of America. This Joodo-Shinshuu tradition came to North America from Japan in the last century, taking its current name in 1944, a time when most of its leaders and priests had been placed in internment camps. Based on information gathered from a questionnaire survey, Tanaka interestingly points out that in contrast to prevalent immigrant integration theories, the Japanese-American third generation did not and does not take a deepening interest in its cultural heritage. Instead, a high rate of out-marriage, of dropping-out and abandoning cultural values, is recognizable among the sansei (third generation). So far, as presented in the paper, the author's results methodologically cannot claim representative status and have to be judged as impressionistic, although instructive, hints. In a somewhat similar way, the chapter by Senryoo Asai and Duncan Williams on cultural identity and economics in Japanese American Zen temples could be stronger in combining new methodological approaches and interpretation. Whereas the idea of and approach to examining temple economics is innovative with regard to Buddhist temples in the West -- though it is not new in other fields and disciplines -- the authors in the end make too little use of the multitude of data and figures collected. Unfortunately, the tables with their many numbers and percentage rates are very rarely discussed and interpreted in the text itself. Despite this incompleteness, Asai and Williams' observations that "a kind of parallel world between Asian-American Buddhism and primarily Euro-American Buddhism" (p. 30) exists, and that "the members of Japanese-American Zen temples expect that the temple will provide them with familial and cultural identity rather than with a space to meditate" (p. 32) underscores the different understandings of Buddhist institutions according to the different strands. The chapter by Stuart Chandler on the Taiwanese Hsi Lai Temple (in California) and its political entanglement in the mid-1990s provides an interesting report on the "donation scandal" and the role of the scholar's responsibility and involvement as mediator. Penny van Esterik's essay on the approximately 100,000 Laotians resident in the United States gives a condensed description of a personal ritual and a collective festival, followed by a few thoughts on adapting Laotian Buddhism in the United States.

The book's second part, on convert or "new" Buddhists, is introduced by Thomas Tweed's critical and straightforward reflections on how religious identity and belonging is defined by scholars. Abandoning essentialist definitions of religious identity by way of adherence or non-adherence to a specific religious traditions, Tweed opts to include a third category for scholarly investigation, that of "sympathizer." "Sympathizers are those who have some sympathy for a religion but do not embrace it exclusively or fully" (p. 74). The self-identification of a person as a Buddhist (or as a member of any tradition) should also be taken seriously by scholars. Suffice it to say that this fact alone should alert scholars to pay attention to these people instead of neglecting them in research. Despite the valid critique of the essentialist/normative approach concerning what kind of people have been considered for research, one could ask whether this suggestive nominal approach does not take the opposite one-sided stance. Possibly a middle way (sounds quite Buddhist!) of combining the two approaches might serve best, although on theoretical levels quite a number of problems remain. The next two chapters, by James Coleman and by Philip Hammond and David Machacek respectively, are preliminary presentations of current empirical studies on Buddhist groups and converts in the United States. Although they indicate that research has in no sense come to an end despite the current wave of studies on Buddhism in America, the results presented thus far are not really new or path-breaking.

In contrast to this, the contribution by Paul Numrich on local inter-Buddhist associations in North America breaks new ground, both with regard to the scope of research and analysis. Starting from the description of the Buddhist Council of the Midwest, Numrich develops the types of pluralist, fusionist, and assimilationist models of inter-Buddhist relations. Whereas the first type acknowledges the diversity of Buddhist schools and traditions, gathered under the umbrella of the council, the second model aims to fuse the heterogeneity into one larger body. The assimilationist model attempts to synthesize the diversity further according to the dominant or leading voice in the council. Rather than confining himself to the Midwest or to North America, Numrich treats inter-Buddhist associations in other regions, such as Australia and Germany. In addition, he also sets such inter-Buddhist activities in historical perspective, referring to instances in Buddhist history such as the reign of the Indian emperor Ashoka (third century B.C.E.) or Buddhist universities in North India (300-1200 C.E.). He convincingly analyzes these early instances of inter-Buddhist meetings according to the models developed in his essay. Charles Strain then offers an interpretation of Gary Snyder's environmental ethics and Richard Hayes provides impressions from Internet and e-mail discussion groups gained during his many years of involvement. These three papers form the section on "Modes of Dharma Transmission."

The fourth and last section of the book considers the scholar's place in American Buddhist studies. In a detailed and rich paper, Charles Prebish reconstructs and documents the development of the discipline of Buddhist Studies in America. He not only surveys the current state of affairs, but through the use of a questionnaire provides a painstaking analysis of the field. In a manner similar to Numrich's heuristically fruitful method, Prebish reverts back to Buddhism's early times from a historical perspective and compares the "scholar-monks" (gantha-dhura) of the past with the contemporary Buddhist "scholar-practitioner": "In the absence of the traditional 'scholar-monk' so prevalent in Asia, it may well be that the 'scholar-practitioners' of today's American Buddhism will fulfill the role of 'quasi-monastics,' or at least treasure-troves of Buddhist literacy and information, functioning as guides through whom one's understanding of the Dharma may be sharpened" (p. 208). This point is also echoed by Hayes earlier in the volume when he urges that "we have a duty not only to study American Buddhists but also to inform them" (p. 177). Although the idea of an "impartial, neutral" observer and scholar itself is a fiction, one nevertheless should be cautious of not throwing the baby out with the bath water, that is, engaging in proselytizing and missionary activities. The line to be drawn is also considered in the paper by Robert Goss, who discusses the Naropa Institute. The Institute was founded by Chogyam Trungpa in 1974, and offers courses on Asian languages, Buddhist Studies, "Contemplative Psychology," and quite a number of other subjects. Whereas there is no doubt that a normative Buddhist point of view is basic to the institute, Goss does not shy away from comparing the Institute with long-established divinity schools (p. 233). While attributing similar functions, roles, and aims to the establishment of the Institute as "non-exceptional," he indicates to what extent Buddhism has gone mainstream in contemporary North America. The final contribution by Richard Seager is a strategically well-placed concluding chapter. This sophisticated American historian not only looks back on existing studies of Buddhism in the United States but also surveys the "Buddhist worlds in the U.S.A." From a bird's eye view the reader again is presented with the plurality of Buddhist expressions and traditions current in North America. Once again, as Numrich and Prebish did by delineating the developments and "Americanization" of American Buddhism's development in historical perspective, Seager concludes his chapter by stating that "it is too early to make a call on what American Buddhism is. And historical precedents in Asia suggest that there is a great deal more yet to come" (p. 253). Finally, Seager's references and notes provide a welcome list of existing studies and a multitude of specific internet addresses of respective Buddhist organizations and centers.

The volume's appendix contains a list of North American dissertations and theses on American Buddhism (77 of them up to 1997) and on topics related to Buddhism in general (some 850 up to 1997). This is an admirable compilation undertaken by co-editor Duncan Williams. Notes on the contributors and an index round out the book.

The book is clearly arranged. Queen's introduction is reinforced by Seager's concluding chapter, the two papers providing a frame within which a kaleidoscope of varied studies, projects, and observations is presented. Outsiders rarely become aware of the reasons why papers given at a specific conference were not accepted and why certain others had been solicited, and at times I wondered why condensed ritual descriptions or preliminary project reports had been included. On the other hand, as indicated at the beginning of this review, the book thus becomes a reflection and mirror of current developments and works-in-progress and suggests new methods being applied in Buddhist Studies and to studies of Buddhism in America in particular. For example, database sampling and survey-based studies are proven to "work" in relation to this "object" and thus suggest fruitful ideas for further related research. However, set in a broader sociological and anthropological perspective, these are in no way new and innovative methods, as pointed out by some of the contributors. Nevertheless, the editors have assembled a collection of interesting -- a few even superb -- papers which provide rich insights into the current state of a new sub-discipline in the making: American Buddhism.

Tensions in American Buddhism

"PROFESSOR IMAMURA: I think when the term "American Buddhism" is used, most Asian-American Buddhists feel outside of the dialogue."


Buddhist temple MARY ALICE WILLIAMS: Buddhism is the world's fourth largest religion, founded about 2500 years ago in India. The Buddha taught that life is suffering and the way to overcome that is to get rid of attachments. Widely practiced across Asia, Buddhism has attracted many converts in this country. They are developing forms of Buddhist practice that are often very different from the practices of Asian-Americans. Some observers believe there is a growing ethnic divide in American Buddhism. Correspondent Kim Lawton has our cover story.

Abbess ceremonyKIM LAWTON: In Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Pat Phelan is being installed as abbess, head of the Red Cedar Zen Temple. She has taken the name Taitaku Josho to demonstrate her acceptance of Buddhist precepts. She is being elevated to her new position in a symbolic "Mountain Seat ceremony," attended by the Zen Center's members. Like Phelan, all of the Center's members are converts to the Buddhist tradition and its sometimes puzzling exchanges.

A few miles across town there's another Buddhist temple, which people often mistake for a Chinese restaurant. Here Vietnamese Buddhists gather to worship in what's known as the "Pure Land" Buddhist tradition. Some members of this sangha, or worship community, have been in the U.S. for more than 20 years; others have arrived more recently.

The two Buddhist centers are in the same Bible Belt community, but virtually separate, largely unaware of each other. That's a situation increasingly common as Buddhism takes hold across America. The forms of practice are diverse, with numerous traditions. But many believe the biggest divide may be an ethnic one.

Lopon D'EstréeLOPON CLAUDE D'ESTRÉE (Chaplain, George Mason University): There is an Asian Buddhist community, and there is a Western American Buddhist community, and they don't often mix.

PROFESSOR RYO IMAMURA (Buddhist Priest and Professor, Evergreen State College): I think we co-exist peacefully, probably not interacting a whole lot.

HELEN TWORKOV (TRICYCLE magazine): There's definitely some divides, and I think we could call it a racial divide. I do not think it's a racist divide.

LAWTON: Buddhism has always traced a wide cultural path. From its beginnings -- 2,500 years ago -- in the Himalayan Mountains to its spread across Asia, Buddhism has adapted to and ultimately shaped each culture it has encountered.

Chinese immigrantsBuddhism first came to the United States more than 150 years ago with the arrival of Chinese and Japanese immigrants. Even in those days, there was interest from non-Asians.

PROFESSOR STEPHEN PROTHERO (Associate Professor, Religion, Boston University): There was a sort of Buddhist boom in the late-19th century, and there was a second one that began in the '50s with the Beat generation and those kinds of people.

LAWTON: In the '60s and '70s that boom became a virtual explosion of non-Asian conversions, among them a relatively large number of Jews. Many of those converts now lead their own Buddhist communities, also mostly non-Asian converts.

Vietnamese BuddhistsPrecise figures are difficult to come by. Experts say there are between three and four million Buddhists in the United States today. About 75% of them are of Asian heritage. But despite their numbers, many Asian Americans say they don't feel sufficiently acknowledged in this country's Buddhist landscape.

Hollywood and the media have perpetuated the impression that the American Buddhist community consists of mostly-white practitioners who follow charismatic Asian leaders such as Thich Nah Hahn or the Dalai Lama.

Prof. ImamuraPROFESSOR IMAMURA: I think when the term "American Buddhism" is used, most Asian-American Buddhists feel outside of the dialogue.

LAWTON: Ryo Imamura is an 18th-generation Buddhist priest and a third generation Asian American. His grandfather ministered to the Buddhist community in the early-20th century in Hawaii, and in the '40s and '50s, Imamura's parents began a Buddhist Study Center in Berkeley, California. The Center attracted some non-Asians. Imamura says those times have largely disappeared. He says while Asian teachers may have started Buddhist groups here, white converts now lead them.

Continue to top of next colum
Tools:
E-Mail this article
Printable format
PROFESSOR IMAMURA: Racism has to play a role because of the times. I think most Caucasian Americans have not interacted with Asians, certainly not in ways that put Asians in more authoritative roles, or roles of respect. And I don't know if you want to characterize this as racist, but I think they are much more comfortable looking up to a white, male authority figure, or maybe a female one.

Red Cedar Zen Temple membersLAWTON: Many say there are clear reasons that Buddhist groups tend to divide along racial lines. In addition to obvious language barriers, there are differences in practice. Most convert Buddhists focus on meditation. Their communities tend to be more lay oriented, with more women in positions of leadership. For some converts, Buddhism is more a philosophy than a religion.

For Asian Americans, the temple has more congregational importance, playing a key religious, social, and cultural role in the community.

LOPON D'ESTRÉE: In a sense, we have two different agendas or maybe cultural agendas. The Asian tradition is based on something they have grown up with and has more ritual aspects. Coming to a service on Sunday is like coming to church anywhere else. Western Buddhists tend to be more interested in learning how to meditate and Buddhist philosophy. So there is somewhat of a clash of cultures.

LAWTON: Cultural divides also exist within Asian-American communities, with little interaction across those ethnic lines either.

Buddhists prayingMS. TWORKOV: In some cases, you have communities of these people. I mean they really came out of the killing fields. They came to this country traumatized by the wars in Southeast Asia. Their needs are not only very different [from the] needs of white middle-class Americans, they're very different from the needs of very well educated middle-class Japanese Americans.

LAWTON: Tworkov's magazine, TRICYCLE, focuses on the needs of the diverse convert community.

MS. TWORKOV: By nature, the immigrant relationship to religion is conservative. You want to conserve your culture, your values, your heritage, your language. And that is done primarily through the church, the temple, the religious value system. We came along in the '60s and we wanted to transform everything, so everything was about, really it was like an opposite direction.

LAWTON: Experts say ethnic divides aren't unique to Buddhism.

Prof. ProtheroPROFESSOR PROTHERO: It needs to be admitted that this is the normal course of things in American religion. We have had a history of Lutheran groups in the U.S. who are Finnish or who are German, who don't particularly interact with one another. [The same can be said about] the Orthodox, Russian Orthodox Christians, and the Orthodox from Greece, for example, the Greek Orthodox.

LAWTON: But Prothero admits with Buddhism the definitions are more fluid, leading some to wonder whether all the differing strands can still be kept under one umbrella.

PROFESSOR PROTHERO: There is no central authority in Buddhism. There is no Buddhist pope, as much as some like to position the Dalai Lama as the sort of pope-designate for the American scene. There isn't anyone who can excommunicate you if you have a goofy idea of what Buddhism is all about, or if you try to define Buddhism in a way that is unorthodox.

LAWTON: Some Buddhist leaders believe all of American Buddhism would be enriched by more dialogue and interaction.

Ken TanakaKEN TANAKA (Co-editor, THE FACES OF BUDDHISM IN AMERICA): I certainly feel an excitement in the fact that you do have virtually all the Buddhist groups represented here. And not only for a conference, but living in a same community. Given that, it is always going to be a minority religion, that there ought to be much more interaction, mutual support,... to survive for one thing.

LAWTON: But others on both sides of the divide say that shouldn't be rushed or forced.

Helen TworkovMS. TWORKOV: There's a lot of concern about bringing the groups together. But frankly my own view is it's always coming from a place of being politically correct, and there's not necessarily a good reason for it. There's no reason why people should not be developing their own kinds of practice and their own forms of practice and working according to their own needs.

PROFESSOR IMAMURA: I think because of the realities of our society, our diverse society, and the need of we, who are called racial minorities or ethnic minorities, to maintain our identity and our pride in our communities, I think we need that racial divide in a way.

LAWTON: Many say the fact that this is even an issue at all shows the extent to which Buddhism has taken root and is maturing here in America.

I'm Kim Lawton reporting.