Are the activities of engaged Buddhists distinctively Buddhist? Darrell Wratten, in his essay on South Africa, tells of one Buddhist who led a peace pilgrimage in celebration of democracy, another who undertook a forty-day vigil and fast against the detention of children, and a third who established a precedent for conscientious objection to the military draft. Wratten then remarks:

It is less clear to what extent [these activities] are distinctively Buddhist examples of socially engaged practice. The actions of each were inspired by a critical and contextual reading of general Buddhist precepts, but their symbolic acts of opposition—a peace march, a vigil, a fast—were not essentially incongruous with Christian Catholic, Protestant, or Muslim anti-apartheid activities.

In recent years this issue has been raised by Helen Tworkov, who asks point-blank, “What makes engaged Buddhism Buddhist?”(34) Several possible answers can be glimpsed in these pages and kindred sources, as follows.

(1) Current activities of engaged Buddhists are not distinctively Buddhist. In 1994 Tworkov wrote:

If the essential emptiness of one's own Buddha-nature is not plumbed as the source for ethical action and compassion, and if ethics is separated from realization, then what is called “Buddhist ethics” offers nothing new to a predominantly Christian society.(35)

Five years later, Tworkov remains unconvinced that there is anything distinctively Buddhist about engaged Buddhism: “Social action, as distinct from radical political action, is sanctioned—even, shall we say, favored—by the Protestant ethic that continues to dominate this culture…. Is it possible to have anything but Protestant Buddhism?”(36)

(2) Granted, engaged Buddhism is not yet distinctively Buddhist, but superficiality and hybridity are natural, necessary stages of a religious movement's development, especially in a new culture. In Bell's essay on Britain we learn that disciples of Akong Rinpoche have established a small business, Tara Associates, specializing in “personal development for people at work.” Buddhist management consultants? At first one may be inclined to scoff. But what if a decade of experimentation yields new ways to actualize right livelihood in the workplace?

(3) Yes, contemporary engaged Buddhism is distinctively Buddhist. In this view, engaged Buddhism is a genuine expression of cardinal Buddhist teachings such as compassion and the way of the bodhisattva. Further, engaged Buddhists' insistence on linking inner and outer transformation differs from the forms of social activism that have predominated in the West. Thus Janet McLellan declares in her essay on Toronto, “Buddhists do not become Protestants (or even Protestant Buddhists) when they embrace engaged practices.”

(4) It does not matter: engaged Buddhism does not have to be distinctively Buddhist. For instance, leaders such as Thich Nhat Hanh and Sulak Sivaraksa speak of “buddhism with a small b,” a reminder not to become sectarian. It might be possible to be a Buddhist and an activist without seeking to fuse the two roles. Some representatives of this stance are unfazed by prospective influences from other traditions: Litsch, writing in Germany, entertains the idea that “Buddhism could experience an expansion by means of a central teaching of Christianity and thereby become ‘more Christian.’”

Skillful Means

An emerging field must clarify its methods as well as its subject matter. Method has always been crucial in Buddhism as well. “The Compassionate Teacher is said to have guided beings to penetrate reality through many methods and doors of reasoning,” wrote the fifteenth-century Tibetan master Tsongkhapa.(37) The use of “skillful means” (upaya in Sanskrit) is above all a matter of communicating truth, especially in the service of bringing others to awakening.(38) Method as a liberative art is where real Buddhist masters—Tibetan, Zen, all stripes—shine. The spirit of skillful means may also serve as a guide in the development of methodologies suitable to engaged Buddhist studies.

There are two broad areas to consider: social scientific modes and doctrinal modes. Social science is an umbrella term for history, sociology, psychology, and related fields. Although it is not possible to elaborate here, each field has distinctive ways of gathering data, constructing arguments, and justifying conclusions. Many of those same methods are applicable to the study of engaged Buddhism.

As in mainstream Buddhist studies, history is a good place to start. Westerners embracing Asian religions have tended to give short shrift to the cultural roots of their spiritual traditions. The perils of shallow historical understanding become evident, for example, when unwelcome realities of a tradition's past are belatedly brought to light. Most of the essays in this book conscientiously trace the history, however recent, of the group or activity under consideration. In the process, the authors demonstrate that such information is not merely informative; it also sparks insight.