An Experimental Approach to Buddhism and Religion
Nelson International Journal of Dharma Studies
An Experimental Approach to Buddhism and Religion
Adaptations, modifications, and realignments of religious doctrine and practice can be found in any period of social history. It can be official and highly orchestrated (as in Vatican II) but more often it takes a subjective and reactionary form (as in the Hindutva movement). This paper promotes the idea of “experimental religion” as both an analytical concept and an observable set of behaviors that help identify how contemporary trends (such as individualism, secularity, information technologies, and market economies) reconfigure attitudes and motivations regarding the relevance and applicability of religious resources. Drawing from Buddhist-related case material in Japan and other liberal democracies, we see lay practitioners, priests, and occasionally institutions as well using innovation and activism to reposition and reboot existing paradigms. The intention is to fashion a religious practice responsive to individual concerns as well as to pressing environmental, political, and economic issues.
-
Most academic essays begin by referencing the topic at hand, citing relevant
literature, or provoking thought through some telling anecdote. This article takes a
slightly different approach and focuses instead on the intellectual history of each
reader as its point of departure. In particular, I assume that anyone reading this essay
has developed (or is in the process of doing so) a set of understandings about religion
that draw upon a unique social moment in the second decade of the 21st century.
This is a time characterized by tremendous social change precipitated in part by
technological advances, market capitalism, and liberal democracies, as well as
political orders opposed to democratic principles. News headlines and current events
remind us daily that we are living in a bipolar era of global integration (via social,
economic, political and cultural networks and organizations) as well as one of
unprecedented fragmentation and marginalization of huge populations
(Dirlik 2003: 149)
.
To fine-tune the previous statement, this is also a time when higher education,
immigration, travel, and shifting moralities have led to more parity among genders in
the workplace, as well as more opportunities and risks for individuals of all social
classes. We see how normative traditions and orientations, especially those considered
“religious,” continue to react, adjust, and reformulate their basic principles in order to
accommodate some of the dynamics mentioned above. All socially-constructed traditions,
whether secular or religious, are described frequently as being in a state of perpetual crisis
as cultures, political alliances, ethnic groups, and worldviews respond to new opportunities
and challenges.
It is likely that readers have experienced directly some or all of the features just
described. It is also possible that a reader interested in this journal’s special symposium
on religious experimentation has already formulated an approach to religious practice
and belief that—similar to the selective and creative strategies she employs for other
aspects of her life—is non-traditional and interactive with the secular trends of late
modernity. Critical thought, problem solving techniques, perhaps even rational
argument based on evidence are all tried-and-true methods for shaping spiritual and secular
worlds in ways generally considered to be positive, progressive, and beneficial. Thus,
whether Catholic, Hindu, or Buddhist, many people with religious affiliations attempt
to fashion a belief system that accommodates key doctrines (such as karma, salvation,
or morality) and yet leaves room for personal customization.
While the intended audience for this journal may have sophistication in how they
personally approach and conceptualize religion, they know that a majority of people
around the world do not get their religious orientations from books, academic study, or
the Internet. Instead, it comes to them primarily through the values and structures of
their families, communities, schools, and religious institutions—even when they may
not participate as a member of a religion. This is not to say that individuals passively
accept the religious heritage of their home communities because ethnographic and
historical research (such as we find in this volume and elsewhere) shows otherwise.
Meredith McGuire’s concept of “lived religion” reminds us to challenge the notion that
religion is unified, coherent, “organizationally defined, (and a) relatively stable set of
collective beliefs and practices”
(McGuire 2008: 200)
. She emphasizes there can be
tremendous “within-group diversity” that destabilizes and appropriates organizational
doctrines for personal agendas. Thus, for the individual, “religion appears to be a
multifaceted, often messy or even contradictory amalgam of beliefs and practices” (208).
Another perspective that (...truncated)