Engaged Buddhism

[camerata]

I don't think we've ever had a topic relating to "engaged Buddhism," which I think of as using Dhamma to improve society for the better (as opposed to simply making merit or doing charity work).

Taking action might mean writing a letter to newspapers, signing a petition, joining a protest rally or any number of things. Most of us don't have the right to vote in Thailand. But if you could, would you vote for (or support) a government that:

1. Wanted to legalize abortion. Legalizing it (it's illegal in Thailand except for special cases where the mother has been raped or pregnancy poses a serious risk to her health) would save some women's lives because they wouldn't go to backstreet abortionists, but it would increase the number of "potential" human beings whose lives are terminated. Such a bill was proposed in the 70s and defeated largely through the efforts of Chamlong Srimuang, deputy interior minister, who opposed it on moral grounds.

2. Wanted to legalize gambling. The current government seems to want to do this so it can get its hands on the tax revenues. Pros are that presumably it would be regulated and debtors wouldn't get blown away. Cons are that possibly it would make it easier for people to gamble.

3. Allowed alcoholic beverage companies to list on the stock market. Currently this is opposed by Chamlong Srimuang, advisor to the PM, and many other people, presumably on moral grounds and its being against the spirit of the social order policy. The principal objection seems to be that retail investors' money would be used to increase production of intoxicants.

4. Supported the death penalty for criminal offences.

Supporting or opposing government decisions is a democratic right, but I wonder if Buddhists concerned with ending their own suffering should get involved in trying to impose their religious standards and ideas on others?

[sabaijai]

Buddhist thinker and social critic Sulak Sivaraksa has a lot to say on this topic, as do the supporters who manage his website

Excerpt:

"Buddhism teaches us that the transformation of society must first begin within the self. We must nurture and cultivate compassion, wisdom, and loving-kindness in our hearts so that we can help others do the same. By practising mindfulness we awaken ourselves to the present moment and become aware of the suffering that surrounds us. The reconstruction of a spiritual, green and just society begins with this clarity in the individual mind. By awakening ourselves to suffering, we can work to change it.

To reduce suffering in the world we must also awaken to the structural causes of suffering. These work hand in hand with the causes from within. Personal change and structural transformation are invariably linked. One without the other is similar to a bird trying to fly with one wing."

Sulak

[Gohonzon]

I think that the Engaged Buddhist movement is the form of Buddhism most worthy of respect amongst all Theravadans (I think it mainly a Theravada tradition, or is it that I just first encountered EB in Thaialand?)

It is very much like the SGI which engages in society for the betterment of humanity. Whether that be in tackling poverty, human rights or environmental issues, or whatever. As Nichiren Daishonin once wrote:

'The true path of life lies in the affairs of the world.'

There's a fairly lively, non-sectarian, Engaged Buddhist forum on

http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showforum=36

[camerata]

I think building schools, donating blood, etc, are all pretty much no-brainers in the sense that there's a high expectation that the outcome will be good and the whole of society will approve. What I was wondering about was the advisability of getting engaged when there is no clear outcome, some moral dilemma existing, and all of society does not necessarily approve.

For example, whether abortion is declared legal or not, someone is going to die as a result of the decision, and society (Buddhist or not) is usually split on questions like this. So is our good intention sufficient reason to get involved and support one position or the other, even though we know it will create some suffering for someone somewhere?

[Nordlys]

Supporting or opposing government decisions is a democratic right, but I wonder if Buddhists concerned with ending their own suffering should get involved in trying to impose their religious standards and ideas on others?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's a well known fact in Japan that Japan's #3 (or #2?) political party "Koumeitou" (New Clean Government Party) which forms coalition with Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) as a ruling party today was formed by Soka Gakkai (parent body of SGI). Although I heard today's Koumeitou has split from Soka Gakkai as they try to adhere to the rule of separation of the state and church, Soka Gakkai is still the main back-up body of the Koumeitou. I understand Koumeitou has approved and supported the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan and believe it was part of the force behind passing the resolution to clear the path for Japanese self defence force to be sent to Iraq as a member of the "coalition of the willing".

[Gohonzon]

Supporting or opposing government decisions is a democratic right, but I wonder if Buddhists concerned with ending their own suffering should get involved in trying to impose their religious standards and ideas on others?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's a well known fact in Japan that Japan's #3 (or #2?) political party "Koumeitou" (New Clean Government Party) which forms coalition with Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) as a ruling party today was formed by Soka Gakkai (parent body of SGI). Although I heard today's Koumeitou has split from Soka Gakkai as they try to adhere to the rule of separation of the state and church, Soka Gakkai is still the main back-up body of the Koumeitou. I understand Koumeitou has approved and supported the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan and believe it was part of the force behind passing the resolution to clear the path for Japanese self defence force to be sent to Iraq as a member of the "coalition of the willing".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Soka Gakkai oppose all war irrespective. Also there are many things that happen in Japan that are specific to their culture. The SGI , being non-authoritarian, adapt to whatever of the 190 cultures that they are established in--and respect that. There are also futile (from our perspective) arguements between various Nichiren sects within Japan, that we neither know anything much about, let alone involve us. So as with Japanese politics, it's all best left alone for them to sort out. Otherwise we may begin treading very close to slander for lack of any real knowledge; which is never a particularly wise thing for any Buddhist to engage in.

Edit

More of a well known fact--I'd have thought--is that Soka Gakkai is not a ''parent body of SGI'' , but are one of the same thing. SGI is simply an abbreviation of Soka Gakkai International.

Edited August 2, 2005 by Gohonzon

[Nordlys]

It's a well known fact in Japan that Japan's #3 (or #2?) political party "Koumeitou" (New Clean Government Party) which forms coalition with Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) as a ruling party today was formed by Soka Gakkai (parent body of SGI).  Although I heard today's Koumeitou has split from Soka Gakkai as they try to adhere to the rule of separation of the state and church, Soka Gakkai is still the main back-up body of the Koumeitou.  I understand Koumeitou has approved and supported the US war in Iraq and Afghanistan and believe it was part of the force behind passing the resolution to clear the path for Japanese self defence force to be sent to Iraq as a member of the "coalition of the willing".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Soka Gakkai oppose all war irrespective. Also there are many things that happen in Japan that are specific to their culture. The SGI , being non-authoritarian, adapt to whatever of the 190 cultures that they are established in--and respect that. There are also futile (from our perspective) arguements between various Nichiren sects within Japan, that we neither know anything much about, let alone involve us. So as with Japanese politics, it's all best left alone for them to sort out. Otherwise we may begin treading very close to slander for lack of any real knowledge; which is never a particularly wise thing for any Buddhist to engage in.

Edit

More of a well known fact--I'd have thought--is that Soka Gakkai is not a ''parent body of SGI'' , but are one of the same thing. SGI is simply an abbreviation of Soka Gakkai International.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Ghonzon,

I thought Soka Gakkai and SGI are different organizations while of course they may share the same president, same value, agendas, etc. For instance, I heard there are both Soka Gakkai and SGI centers in Japan and while as a Japanese I can join the Soka Gakkai, heard I can't become an active SGI member in Japan (well doesn't really seem to make so much sense, am I wrong on this?).

As to Koumeitou approving US war in Iraq and Afghanistan, I do not know how much of their decision has been endorsed by Soka Gakkai (if any), but I'd assume for Soka Gakkai to approve Koumeitou to pass the resolution that sent Japanese troops to Iraq for non-combatant roles (strictly non-combatant roles, providing drinking water, medical assistance, building/reparing schools and roads, etc) isn't really inconsistent with Soka Gakkai's doctrine/principle of "betterment of humanity" as you have mentioned, and it's a resolution I for one, as a voter, would approve.

[Gohonzon]

Hello Nordlys

although I know very little about Japanese politics, it is part of the SGI charter to work for world peace and prosperity through dialogue. Recently in Thailand ,for instance, SGT has been engaged in dialogue with Muslims in order to create a better understanding.

As I've already said (above) Soka Gakkai does operate slightly differently in each country. But I'd be very suprised that ,if in Japan, when one became a member of SGI that one wouldn't also become a member of Soka Gakkai, as they're entirely the same organisation.

[sabaijai]

From a July 1999 issue of the Economist:

"He has been called the most powerful man in Japanese politics, yet he is not even a politician. Daisaku Ikeda is the spiritual leader of the Soka Gakkai, a lay Buddhist group that can muster nearly 7 million votes - a tenth of Japan's voting population (and a fifth of those who turn out in most elections). The Soka Gakkai's political arm, the New Komeito, is the second-largest opposition party in the Diet (parliament) and is notably influential in the upper house. That is a measure of Mr. Ikeda's power.

Now he is about to have more. On June 28th, the prime minister, Keizo Obuchu, took the first steps to get the New Komeito to join his coalition government. Since January, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has governed with the help of Ichiro Ozawa's small right-wing group, the Liberals. But though the coalition has a majority in the lower house of the Diet, it is nine seats shy in the upper house, making it difficult to pass controversial legislation. With its 52 members in the lower house and 24 in the upper house, the New Komeito would give Mr. Obuchi a comfortable margin in both chambers -- and, in the process, allow him to ignore Mr. Ozawa's hectoring demands.

On paper, the deal makes sense for the LDP. But many within his party are queasy about Mr. Obuchi's willingness to team up with the Buddhists. The last time the Komeito tasted power -- during a brief (non-LDP) coalition government headed by Morihiro Hosokawa in 1993 -- it was quick to block efforts to enforce the separation of church and state, as required by the constitution.

[...]

Nowadays, however, the Soka Gakkai realises that it went too far in 1991 when it allowed 300 of its young zealots to storm a temple in Fukuoka and beat up a worshipper and a priest who had criticised the group. That was the start of a war between the Soka Gakkai and Nichiren Shoshu, which later severed its ties with the Soka Gakkai and excommunicated Mr. Ikeda.

[...]

Clearly, the society provides an attractive support system for people in need. It has around 9 million members (mostly housewives), almost 1.3 million of whom are abroad. It is particularly strong in Osaka and Tokyo. Well-informed outsiders put the group's wealth at more than 10 trillion yen ($82 billion). The money comes from donations, the sale of burial plots, rent from property, and its newspaper, Seikyo Shimbun, whose circulation is 5.5 million.

But, like many organisations that have grown fat and lost sight of their original purpose, the Soka Gakkai protects its interests with a ruthlessness that has frightened off critics and cowed the Japanese mainstream media into silence. It tolerates no criticism whatsoever of Mr. Ikeda, who elevated himself to honorary chairman after a series of scandals in the 1970s. Detractors claim that the organisation acts like a cult, threatening people with ###### and damnation if they try to leave. In inviting the New Komeito into the coalition, Mr. Obuchi may find he has more on his hands than the couple of dozen upper-house votes he bargained for."

The entire article is available at:

SG/Economist

You need a subscription to the Economist for the full text. I subscribe, and can post the piece if anyone's interested (in a separate thread, as we're veering off topic from a general thread on engaged Buddhism).

I don't know how accurate this article is, though I would usually trust reporting from the Economist. It seems to jibe with my studies on Japanese politics back in uni.

No offense meant towards SGI member Gohonzon, who apparently doesn't know what's been going on in Japan since the 60s.

[sabaijai]

I think building schools, donating blood, etc, are all pretty much no-brainers in the sense that there's a high expectation that the outcome will be good and the whole of society will approve. What I was wondering about was the advisability of getting engaged when there is no clear outcome, some moral dilemma existing, and all of society does not necessarily approve.

For example, whether abortion is declared legal or not, someone is going to die as a result of the decision, and society (Buddhist or not) is usually split on questions like this. So is our good intention sufficient reason to get involved and support one position or the other, even though we know it will create some suffering for someone somewhere?

These are really tough questions. I suppose you act according to conscience, all the while knowing your conscience may be conditioned by anger, greed or ignorance. As long as your intentions are correct (from a Buddhist perspective), your actions should be kusala kamma, i.e., wholesome/skilful karma, and will result in wholseome/skilful 'payback' (kusala vipaka).

I suppose we must examine our intentions very closely, not to mention analysing the situation for negative knock-on effects.

[Gohonzon]

It's a pity that you have not yet learnt Sabai Jai, that if we look deeply enough we can dig dirt on any Buddhist organisation and tradition from the outside Whether that be that be in Thai Theravada, Tibetan Mahayana ,SGI , FWBO,or wherever. Not having much of a life though to actually spend the time and energy in cutting and pasting articles from the Economist to prove some obsure kind of point though. Is it? Surely there must be more creative things to expend your time on?

As for me,I always question where so called Buddhist are at within their own personal practice to bother with such mundane and banal gossip mongering. Not too far along any discernible path of wisdom I would assume? Sad really.

I personally wouldn't even bother to get involved with even pointing out the inaccuracies printed in some right wing magazine, but there you go.

I would,though, gain far more benefit in examining the benefits from my own practice, and the realities of my own sangha (if you have one) from within, than to engage in muck slinging based upon articles from outside of Buddhism. The motives behind such behaviour is highly questionable,and not a litte disappointing...to say the very least.

Still,even moderators are prone to the most human of judgemental frailities--or fundemental darkness--as us all I suppose

Mara must be having a fied day.

Edited August 3, 2005 by Gohonzon

[sabaijai]

Gohonzon, I was only trying to respond to the question about SG's link with the New Komeito. The views and facts presented by the Economist article pretty much go along with the consensus knowledge about Soka Gakkai among non-SG members, as far as I know. I took a degree in political science with an emphasis on East and Southeast Asian politics, and the article was pretty consonant with what I was taught (at a Quaker college, and of course the Quakers are known to be right-wing ).

Rather than mount an ad hominem attack on me or The Economist, it might be more fruitful for us all if you were to respond to the article's thesis, point by point, if you think it's inaccurate.

[camerata]

You need a subscription to the Economist for the full text. I subscribe, and can post the piece if anyone's interested (in a separate thread, as we're veering off topic from a general thread on engaged Buddhism).

I'd like to read that one. The Economist is one of the most reliable sources available. And thanks to Gohonzon for mentioning the FWBO. The FWBO Files and the Guardian article make fascinating, if depressing, reading. I was surprised to see Christmas Humphreys' name come up in all the skullduggery.

[sabaijai]

You need a subscription to the Economist for the full text. I subscribe, and can post the piece if anyone's interested (in a separate thread, as we're veering off topic from a general thread on engaged Buddhism).

I'd like to read that one. The Economist is one of the most reliable sources available. And thanks to Gohonzon for mentioning the FWBO. The FWBO Files and the Guardian article make fascinating, if depressing, reading. I was surprised to see Christmas Humphreys' name come up in all the skullduggery.

The FWBO saga is a case of what can happen when an individual takes it upon himself to reinvent Buddhism (and it happens in other religions as well, eg the Church of Latter-Day Saints) according to his own plan, thus becoming a messiah figure to a rising cult.

I'll post the full text of the Economist article under a new topic.

[camerata]

Apparently, donating blood often falls under the category of "engaged Buddhism." In Thailand, only 0.3% of the population has Rhesus negative blood, compared to about 20% in Western Europe. If you live in Thailand and have Rh-neg blood you can register with the Central Blood Register, run by farang volunteers. This means you don't donate unless someone actually needs the blood, but when you do it'll probably save a life.

The registration form is online.

[cdnvic]

I find it nearly impossible to dis-engage buddhism from everyday life. It's not that I follow buddhist teachings so closely, rather that everything I do is coloured by my beliefs to varying degrees.

I think part of the reason this is the case is that I never really made a choice to be a buddhist, but rather discovered that I was one. Studying buddhism, and Zen in particular has always felt to me like a discovery of myself, revealing to myself the reasons behind many of my actions and beliefs in ways I would never have thought to look at it before.

Doing good things, and refraining from bad come down to a very simple equation by which I try (and fail near as often as succeed) to live by; Decrease suffering, increase joy(somewhere in the middle is peace). The perfection of that simple equation is my goal.

cv