Buddhist Social Institutions

[Sherlock]

I just finished Rodney Stark's books on the Rise of Christianity and the Rise of Mormonism.

His central idea is that religions spread through social networks, and the most successful religions are those that have a medium level of tension with the surrounding society, which inspire people to both convert as well as have higher fertility rates.

"Missionary" activity is actually mostly useless for its intended purpose, only a tiny percentage of random people missionaries approach convert through this approach, however it builds up confidence, independence, social skills and other positive traits in those who undertake it. Most conversions take place through forming deep relationships with people involved in a particular religion and come from those with no religious background.

One thing that struck me from his works was how early Christianity and Mormonism not only spread through social networks, but the networks themselves were/are very tight, very involved and provided benefits for everyone who took part, indeed this is part of the reason they got converts.

I think this is something that is really missing in Buddhism today, and actually was also part of Buddhism for centuries.

Buddhism, especially in the north of the subcontinent, spread through trade routes; wherever Buddhist merchants went, they could trust themselves to be safe with other Buddhists, and they brought monastics with them as well. Monastics provided banking services, healthcare, education and religious services. Probably some engaged in less scrupulous activities as well since Indian mediaeval literature makes reference to this but on the whole the Buddhist community seemed to be quite well-functioning and enjoyed patronage up through the Shaiva revival around the 9th century or so; even then, it continued on until Islam came along.

The Kalacakra Tantra calls on everyone who receives it to form a single united vajra caste, which might indicate similar tensions at the time it was first revealed.

Personally socialization never motivated me at all in religion, but I know a lot of young people in Asia who converted to Christianity precisely because of these reasons. I was motivated by magical stories and powers, and then philosophy.

It seems to me that Buddhists largely don't have this kind of concerted social structure anymore that encourages participation in some shared enterprise and rewards it. Yes of course as Mahayana Buddhists our ultimate goal is to establish all beings in complete enlightenment, but if you look at the bodhisattva vows, some of them indicate some kind of shared communal environment is ideal, even for lay practitioners. I am not saying we should try to use Buddhism in politics or whatever, but maybe things like what the Christians and Mormons do, and what it appears mediaeval Mahayana Buddhists did too would be helpful if we want Buddhism to survive in the long run?

Maybe part of the problem is the decentralized nature of Buddhism, with many sects, often with different teachers trying to create their own little empires.

I don't know, any thoughts?

[Acala]

I'm not sure I see a problem. Buddhism has spread pretty damn well...and is spreading. Its not a dying religion or something not even nowadays.

[Huseng]

There are a lot of informal social communities. This is especially apparent when you notice that your Buddhist friends and you have dozens of mutual friends on Facebook, which often crosses national boundaries and continents.

When I went to countries like Taiwan, India, Nepal, Singapore and Malaysia, I visited a bunch of people I knew from eSangha. In Nepal I could see a lot of overlapping social circles in the Boudha crowd, largely because of RYI and the long-standing Buddhist communities there.

This goes beyond mere socializing, because real life money often passes hands in gestures of generosity. Loans are also given on good faith that the fellow practitioner will repay it. If they don't, there are consequences because everyone in the community inevitably gossips and it will become known you defaulted on your commitment. Gossip for better or worse is an indication that the community is mature enough that everyone cares about your private business.

Funny thing is that with the internet there's also a lot of anonymous elements at work in Buddhist circles. I've experienced this myself in real life. Last year I was staying a place in Kathmandu and someone e-mailed the office inquiring if I was staying there and then going on to say what a terrible person I am and maybe they should reconsider letting me stay there. They even said they had asked around Boudha and heard all sorts of things about me.

This was rather funny because almost nobody in Boudha knows who I am, nor would they care. In any case, I thought it highlighted how mature these communities are given that people care enough to do such things.

[Sherlock]

Yes, Buddhists social networks exist espcially among the Asian communities but what are they not offering that Christian communities do that is getting youth to convert? I really don't think ideology is a primary factor for most people, for introverts like me and many people here maybe it was, but most people only buy into ideology after getting entangled in Christian social networks. Also, I am not deriding Christianity here since I know they have centuries of intricate theological and philosopihcal writings, but the sects that are getting converts (evangelicals) have pathetic theology.

It seems like Buddhist structures for engaging children and youth are rather weak. Buddhists don't drive their kids to sutra study at 5 am before school starts like Mormons and some other Christian sects do in Singapore AFAIK.

[Kim O'Hara]

Yes, Buddhists social networks exist espcially among the Asian communities but what are they not offering that Christian communities do that is getting youth to convert? I really don't think ideology is a primary factor for most people, for introverts like me and many people here maybe it was, but most people only buy into ideology after getting entangled in Christian social networks. Also, I am not deriding Christianity here since I know they have centuries of intricate theological and philosopihcal writings, but the sects that are getting converts (evangelicals) have pathetic theology.

It seems like Buddhist structures for engaging children and youth are rather weak. Buddhists don't drive their kids to sutra study at 5 am before school starts like Mormons and some other Christian sects do in Singapore AFAIK.

How the social side of a religion works depends quite a lot on whether the religion has a majority or minority following in the society, and whether it is a new religion (like Buddhism in America) or an old one. New religions have a high percentage of converts, who are generally more enthusiastic about their religion than people born to it and brought up in it. Followers of minority religions tend to cling together for mutual encouragement, while followers of dominant religions don't need to. Etc, etc.
Because of these factors, I think your topic only makes sense if you nominate the country you want to talk about.


Kim

[Johnny Dangerous]

There are efforts towards this kind of thing in my area. The Dharma Association in my region does events for the whole Mahasangha...I think it's a great, and very worthwhile effort...maybe even instrumental to a "permanent" Buddhism in the West, IDK. To me, having a community is an extremely good thing.

The unfortunate thing about this is, some of the efforts i've seen are well...demographically homogeneous in terms of who organizes them I think. I.E...lots of white folks. Not that that is bad necessarily, but I do wonder if sometimes because the more active organizers in these organizations are white, middle class Americans, it sidelines practitioners who are not of the dominant culture, or at least makes those people less likely to take leadership roles.. Still, whatever the case (and my perception may be off on that anyway), it's important that people keep making these efforts and I try to support them however I can.

[Sherlock]

According to Stark, most converts to ANY religion are going to be middle class, fairly well educated people without strong religious backgrounds, a few will come from the upper class, actually this is something he is not clear about though. Lower class people are much more likely to stick to established religious forms. Soka Gakkai seems to have a significant African American following but I suspect most of them are middle class anyway.

About leadership, just IMO but these middle class people might be better suited to administration and organization anyway. Actual teaching should be separate though. The Dzogchen community kind of has this thing going on but it seems to me that it still isn't that family friendly, which is a condition for alasting religion IMO.

[rory]

Actually you have a great example of this; Soka Gakkai in the US. They make converts, have extended social institutions: for chlldren, young people, separate men and women's groups. In my area I could go to various meeting 4x a week. Lay people are in charge, there are mentors etc. Clark Strand of Tricycle just wrote a book on Nichiren Buddhism and I'm dying to read it.
gassho
Rory

[Ayu]

Maybe part of the problem is the decentralized nature of Buddhism, with many sects, often with different teachers trying to create their own little empires.

I don't know, any thoughts?

I know nothing about the buddhist social networks in Asia. What I see in TV documentary reports, I think in some places there are good functioning beneficial organisations also.

In the West buddhism isn't that much established yet. Before one can help others s/he has to become stable him/herself.
The older western practicioners, that I know, do as much as possible in the limits of their personal capacities.
For example the group "Sangha-Help" in Hamburg, Germany, is a very nice project:
http://www.tibet.de/ueber-uns/sangha-hilfe.html
They offer help for members and friends of the Tibet-center in Hamburg, and also for other people if they come along:
- Passaging support for old or sick people, help them find a solution for getting by.
- Other practical support in daily life.
- Dharma talks.
- End-of-life-care.
- etc...

I don't know, how it works for them there, but at least it is a wonderful idea for to genuinly live the bodhisattva practices.

[tlee]

While there is something in that bias towards Buddhists and the exclusion of others that is reprehensible, it may not be a bad idea to establish a culture of mutual support for Buddhists.

However, I have noticed that Buddhists are able to enter into many social circles and subtly guide them because they are unbiased. If Buddhists became exclusive in their benevolence, our new reputation might limit our influence.

While we might materially benefit from limiting our support to each other, what will we, and the world, lose by making such a transition?

[Kim O'Hara]

...However, I have noticed that Buddhists are able to enter into many social circles and subtly guide them because they are unbiased. If Buddhists became exclusive in their benevolence, our new reputation might limit our influence.

While we might materially benefit from limiting our support to each other, what will we, and the world, lose by making such a transition?

Reminds me of what the Quakers have always done - and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.

Kim

[Sherlock]

While there is something in that bias towards Buddhists and the exclusion of others that is reprehensible, it may not be a bad idea to establish a culture of mutual support for Buddhists.

However, I have noticed that Buddhists are able to enter into many social circles and subtly guide them because they are unbiased. If Buddhists became exclusive in their benevolence, our new reputation might limit our influence.

While we might materially benefit from limiting our support to each other, what will we, and the world, lose by making such a transition?

I never said we should be exclusive in our benevolence, that's not the Bodhisattva way anyway.

We should show charity impartially, definitely. But, on the other hand Buddhists seem to have less intra-community support than Mormons do. There are no real Buddhist hospitals, universities etc. I think some of Chinese Buddhist temples do this somewhat for Chinese communities in Western countries but it's quite closed-off to non-Chinese.

[tlee]

There is also the issue of what happens to transmission of the teachings when membership benefits attracts insincere people.

It is not hard to take over an institution and bad people are attracted to power and status.