Asian Buddhists

Zen Buddhism in Brazil

| arun

Dangerous Harvests blogger Nathan shares an article about Zen Buddhism in Brazil.

The author, Cristina Moreira da Rocha, writes of the history and development of Buddhism (primarily Zen Buddhism) in Brazil, beginning with the arrival of Japanese immigrant laborers in 1908 up to the present day diversity of approaches Buddhism and Buddhist communities. What I have been struck with is how many parallels there are to the North American Buddhist story.

He expands on five themes that jumped out at him, namely, the initial arrival through Asian immigrant communities, oppression of citizens and immigrants of Japanese descent during World War II, the increase of Buddhist “missionaries” and teachers arriving during the 1950’s, the issue of whether Buddhism is a religion or a philosophy, and a certain level of Christian influence. Both pieces are well worth your time, but for those of you with very little time to spare, Nathan’s post is a good summary.

Nun Est Facta

| arun

The controversy surrounding the Australian bhikkhuni ordination has provoked quite a bit of discussion and ad-hominem attacks towards various Buddhists. (Other developments include the globalization of WPP as an acronym for Wat Nong Pa Pong!) I’ve provided below a selection of related posts I’ve found interesting.

  • Shravasti Dhammika opines that “Theravada Buddhism in its traditional homelands is, for the most part, spiritually moribund, tradition-bound and retrograde”—and provides his own ideas of what a “Buddhism relevant to the West” (Buddhayana) would look like. [November 7, 2009]
  • Lim Kooi Fong at the Buddhist Channel explains the editorial decision to place a hold on discussion of the controversy surrounding the Australian bhikkhuni ordination. [November 8, 2009]
  • You can find Bhikkhu Bodhi’s revised response on Ajahn Sujato’s eponymous blog. [November 8, 2009]
  • Ajahn Sujato also discusses what the 1928 Bhikkhuni Ban really said, and what it amounted to. [November 9, 2009]
  • Phra Cittasamvaro gives his own two cents regarding the events and context. [November 10, 2009]
  • For the youthful Kester Ratcliff, recent events further demonstrate that Thai Buddhism actually isn’t Buddhist and that “the time has come to let go of our Thai heritage.” He writes well, and I look forward to seeing what sort of work he’ll produce when he grows up. [November 10, 2009]

Several pieces from the key actors are cross-posted at multiple locations, including the Buddhist Channel, the Buddhist Society of Western Australiaand Ajahn Sujato’s blog. I must note that although I always refer to this in the context of the bhikkhuni ordination… whatever the nuns involved have to say has gotten barely any publicity at all—at least on the sites that I’ve been reading. A bit sad.

This Is Not A Schism

| arun

I was stunned to view the Buddhist Channel headline: “Ajahn Brahm excommunicated for performing Bhikkhuni Ordination in Australia.”

Then on Phra Noah Yuttadhammo’s blog, he writes: “An interesting topic, and indeed history in the making; new Bhikkhunis in Australia and a schism in the Thai forest sangha… I’m not sure which is of more significance.” What schism?

The Australian bhikkhuni ordination has generated some hard feelings in the many different corners of the Wat Nong Pa Pong lineage. There’s also quite a bit of hand-wringing on the sidelines. But use of the terms excommunication and schism constitute a reckless characterization of recent events.

These words embody very serious religious implications. While Ajahn Brahm (and the world) has been notified that he is now a persona non grata in the Wat Nong Pa Pong network, he has not been excommunicated. They neither formally disputed his status as a Theravada monk nor his authority to officiate and participate in religious ceremonies—they rather informed him that he is not welcome in their club. It’s not playing nice, but it’s not excommunication.

Phra Noah’s use of schism should likewise be avoided. Anyone raised on stories of Lord Buddha is well aware that schism is often a direct reference to the Bhagavan’s scriptural antagonist Devadatta. This word ought to be used with caution. The expulsion of Bodhinyana monastery from the WPP network is no more a schism than the suspension of a nation from the Commonwealth.

This post is not meant to trivialize current events. The bhikkhuni ordination and subsequent backlash are both significant and newsworthy events. But they shouldn’t be blown out of proportion.

The gravity of this situation is more political than religious. This fracas is very much a Buddhist issue, but we mustn’t confuse it as being a spiritual quarrel. I can expect more bitter words and much awkward silence to ensue. A formal schism of the Theravada sangha, however, is unlikely.

Returning to Thich Nhat Hanh

| arun

Over on Wikipedia, user YellowMonkey has changed the page Nhat Hanhback to Thich Nhat Hanh. Thank you! Thank you! Cam on!* The whole discussion around “Thich” is one of my major pet peeves. As written by Thich Nhu Minh (former librarian at the university cofounded by TNH):

Regarding Buddhist names in Vietnamese tradition; because all monastics take the word “Thich”, a shortened form of “Thich Ca” which means “Sakya”, as their surname to indicate that they are “sons of Sakyamuni the Buddha”, and belong to the same family clan named “Thich”, we have to honor this practice. That is to accept “Thich” as a surname and record as such in the cataloguing process.

The confusion over Thich Nhat Hanh’s appellations are rooted in his ambiguous identity as a Western/Asian teacher. He uses his name in the West as he would in Vietnam, whereupon unworldly Western Buddhists impose their Eurolinguistic assumptions on a 1600 year old Asian convention… and voilà! Thich is recast from an ancient Buddhist name to a modern Buddhist title. The West has already colonized Vietnam and bombed it halfway to being a tropical parking lot. Please, at least let us have our language. (*Xin loi la van ban nay khong co dau!)

The Danger of Ethnic Buddhism

| arun

A friend recently pointed me to Ethnic Buddhism and Other Obstacles to the Dhamma in the West by Dr V. A. Gunasekara.

When ethnic Buddhism is introduced into a Western country it tends to shunt the particular manifestation of Buddhism into an ethnic ghetto. The danger here is that many people will perceive Buddhism as a ghetto religion. Indeed the mass media in Western countries have made it a fine art to present Buddhism as an ethnic religion and not a universal message of liberation. The activities of ethnic Buddhists in the West lend support to this propaganda of the mass media to the great detriment of the cause of Buddhism in the West.

The piece is riddled with patent falsehoods presented as fact, not to mention that I have a ton of issues with the way he structured his argument and examples. But there’s some interesting food for thought too.

Ready for the End

| arun

H.M. King Father Preah Norodom Sihanouk announces that he has little wish to live longer, but is not about to take his own life. (Translation below.)

Beijing, PRC, October 2, 2009.

My father, H.M. King Preah Suramarit, died at the age of 64 (diabetes). 1960.

His father-in-law, H.M. King Preah Monivong, had died at the age of 64 (died of grief in 1941—the grief of having lost Battambang, etc…—unjustly annexed by Thailand with the help of Japan).

My maternal great-grandfather, H.M. Preah Sisowath had the reputation of having lived a very long life; he died at the age of 83 (died of “old age”).

But I, who sincerely want to die as near in the future as possible, have “lived too long”: on October 31, 2009, I will be 87 years old.

This overly long longevity weighs on me like an unbearable weight.

Unaware of my mentality, an incalculable number of compatriots are wishing for me to live beyond 100 years. Some of these well-loved compatriots have gone so far as to wish me to live 300 years!!!

More out of courtesy and affection than out of hypocrisy, I thank these compatriots. But to be frank and stripped of hypocrisy, I would like to for all to know (Khmers and foreigners) that they bring me no pleasure when they wish me a long life. What I want is to die as soon as possible, without infringing on the teaching of the Noble Buddha which forbids suicide.

Sihanouk

This story also appeared last week in Cambodge Soir and in the Straits Times.

Asia v. America

| arun

On Dharma Mirror, D.Yin presents a comparison of different approaches to Buddhism in Asia and America.

This list was compiled for a group of Asian monastics to provide some understanding of the different ways people approach Buddhism from America and Asia. When just beginning to study Buddhism, the Dharma often seems contradictory. On one hand it emphasizes personal experience, while on the other hand there needs to be strong faith. What I found over the years is that although the approach to Buddhism in Asia & America are often different, they are at the same time very complimentary. Meditation & recitation go well together, analysis & faith balance each other out, and pragmatism & “miracles” play different roles in spiritual practice.

You can see the list here. I often go out of my way to emphasize that Buddhism in Asia is much more diverse than miracles, recitation and faith—but it’s all there too. We’re a big tent.

Bat Nha Back and Forth

| arun

Ven. Kobutsu Malone writes on the Buddhist Channel to offer another perspective on the events at Bat Nha monastery.

It appears the “Buddhist world” is getting behind the Thich Nhat Hanh followers without question. There are however, a lot of questions: It is obvious that the Thich Nhat Hanh people have a well-oiled propaganda machine going. The http://helpbatnha.org/ site purported to represent the monastery only represents the voice of the Thich Nhat Hanh clergy at the Bat Nha Monastery. The site is registered to Deer Park Monastery, Thich Nhat Hanh’s facility in Escondido, California. Is it possible that this perhaps inflames the local residents who may feel that the Thich Nhat Hanh followers had taken over their temple?

His thoughts drew a quick reply from Visakha Kawasaki.

Cracking down on Thich Nhat Hanh and his followers might just prove that his work for human rights and community development is proving too successful for the Communist party to tolerate. If the monks and nuns who look to Thich Nhat Hanh as their leader are being beaten and humiliated by police and mobs, does it make sense to blame them rather than see them as victims whose human rights are being violated? Perhaps the rulers of Vietnam regret loosening the rules and allowing Thich Nhat Hanh to return at all. Perhaps they just want to reassert their control and remind everyone who is really the boss.

The discussion over the situation at tu vien Bat Nha involves local, national and global issues and relationships. I am personally most concerned with the individual rights of monks and nuns. I’m much less concerned about the political exchanges between Thich Nhat Hanh and the Vietnamese authorities. But I need to have a grasp of both situations (and more) to have a better understanding of what exactly is going on at this monastery in central Vietnam—especially if I’m only reading news reports in English.

More Background on Bat Nha

| arun

Reuters’ Faithworld blog provides a broader picture behind the situation of monks and nuns at Bat Nha monastery in Vietnam.

A local government document from last month obtained by Thich Nhat Hanh’s followers and shown to Reuters stated that the group was not recognised by the state or the official Buddhist congregation and was staying at Bat Nha illegally. The roots of the problem may go back, in part at least, to Thich Nhat Hanh’s late 2007 visit to Vietnam. During that trip, he told Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet that the government should abolish the arm of the police that tracks religious groups and disband the government’s Religious Affairs Committee, which regulates religious activities.

In the same shoes, I probably would have avoided giving a Communist leader unsolicited political advice, although I heartily agree that Viet Nam would be better off without the Religious Affairs Committee.

Buddhists on Purpose

| arun

On the way home tonight I heard Craig Ferguson on the radio talking about his book American on Purpose. That title really got me thinking. Wouldn’t Buddhist on purpose be a great label?

I’ve never been a fan of the term convert Buddhist. The very word “convert” emphasizes change as an integral part of identity, which honestly doesn’t strike me as fair. In contrast, “Buddhist on purpose” asserts a meaningful and engaged claim to one’s identity without dwelling on the past. It also describes those of us who may have been born into families where Buddhism was embedded in our identity, but who later became Buddhists on purpose. In a larger context, this term underlines a common bond among people who otherwise would be separated by labels like “convert Buddhist” or “heritage Buddhist.”

Buddhist on purpose also has its own downsides. The strength of this term lies, in part, in the implicit converse: those who are Buddhist, but not on purpose. The accidental Buddhists. The purposeless Buddhists. It’s pretty insulting when it’s implying your mom was a Buddhist by accident (even if it may be true in a strict sense of “accident”). This antonymity makes a lot of otherwise great labels sound pretty bad, and probably explains why terms like “convert” and “heritage” are still in common currency for all their drawbacks. So what if it’s implied you’re a non-convert or non-heritage Buddhist?

Of course, there’s my mother’s favorite alternative label. You can always call them by their given name.