Defending the Dharma: Buddhist activism in a global city-state

Abstract

The preceding excerpt comes from a 1973 article in Nanyang fojiao (南洋佛教), a popular and widely circulated monthly periodical published by the Singapore Buddhist Federation (SBF, Xinjiapo fojiao zonghui 新加坡佛教總會). The author, under the pseudonym of ‘learned old man’ (youxue laoren 有學老人), laments the decline of Buddhism in the modern age. He therefore emphasizes the sacred duty of protecting and disseminating the Buddha’s teachings. Three decades later, the Buddhist community in Singapore remains seriousabout defending its faith. In Buddhism in Singapore: A Short Narrative History, Y. D. Ong highlights the ‘current discussion topics’ that are intermittently discussed in recent issues of Buddhist magazines, in articles found in annual commemorative volumes of Buddhist organizations, and at Buddhist conferences held in the global city-state.2 One of the topics that Ong notes, which relates to the defence of the Dharma, is the removal of ‘misconceptions’. Ong points out that the Buddhistcommunity saw the need to build a clear religious identity by eliminating misconceptions about Buddhism. First, the Buddhists eradicated non-Buddhist practices such as offering slaughtered poultry and the burning of joss-paper in Chinese Buddhist temples. Second, they emphasized the differences between the Daoist Hungry Ghost Festival and the Buddhist Ullambana Festival. Third, the Buddhist community also played an important role in disassociating Buddhism from death and funeral rites. They sought to highlight that their faith is not only for the dead.3Ong emphasizes that Buddhists have the responsibility to ‘speak up to set the record straight where a wrong or distorted picture is presented in a television programme or in [the] newspaper’.4 The attempt to clarify misconceptions and correct misrepresentations of Buddhism, however, is far from being a recent phenomenon in Singapore. Buddhist activists, in their attempt to defend the Dharma, played a significant role in correcting misrepresentations of Buddhism in the mass media, illuminating the misconceptions about Buddhist teachings and censuring ‘unorthodox’ Buddhist practices and new ‘Buddhist’ movements. Buddhist activism may be broadly defined as the intentional efforts of the Bud-dhist community – involving either or both the Sangha and laity – to correct misconceptions, promote social, political or environmental reforms and defend their faith against threats and heterodox teachings. Previous scholarship on Buddhism in Singapore pays little attention to Buddhist activism.5 On the one hand, scholars who adopt a ‘macro approach’ to the study of Buddhism in Singapore present valuable findings on the arrival, transformation and development of the various Buddhist traditions in this island city-state.6 While these studies offer useful conceptual frameworks and contextual backgrounds to the study of Buddhism in Singapore, they are often selective and limited in their focus and analysis. On the other hand, a growing number of recent studies examine specific issues and smaller case studies. These burgeoning works on Buddhism in Singapore have covered a broad array of topics, including Buddhist leadership and personalities, institutions and organizations, as well as the emergence of so-called ‘Reformist Buddhism’.7Although these studies offer valuable insights into the history and sociology of the religion, they have yet to consider how the Buddhist community, in their attempt to defend and promote their faith, played a role in religious activism. This study seeks to explore Buddhist activism in post-independence Singapore by raising three questions. First, why did Buddhist activism take place in Singapore? Second, who were these activists and what were their intentions? Third, how can the study of Buddhist activism in Singapore contribute to the understanding of the emergence of ‘Reformist Buddhism’ and state-society relations? The term ‘Buddhism’ often implies a religion of renunciation and withdrawal.However, in reality, Buddhism is far from this stereotypical image in modern Asian societies. Buddhist activism has long been a topic of interest in the field of Buddhist studies. Thich Nhat Hanh, the Vietnamese Zen Master who coined the term ‘Engaged Buddhism’ in the 1960s, introduced the term and its implications to the West.8 ‘Engaged Buddhism’ is broadly described as the Buddhist community’s ‘energetic engagement with social and political issues and crises’.9 Thesemovements are non-violent activist movements to address economic, social, political and spiritual needs, contribute to the amelioration of conditions that produce suffering for all sentient beings and reform Buddhist doctrines and institutions in light of the demands of modernity. Hence, Christopher Queen and Sallie King consider these religious movements as ‘Buddhist liberation movements’.10 Humanlife Buddhism (rensheng fojiao 人生佛教), which was actively promoted by Master Taixu (太虛, 1890-1947) and readily supported by a group of reform-minded monks in Republican China (1912-1949), aimed at reforming Chinese Maha-ya-na Buddhism and making the religion relevant in the modern world.11 While the extent of the effect of Taixu’s brand of modern Buddhism had on Buddhist activists remains debatable, Buddhist activism became increasingly common in modern China.12 James Brooks Jessup, for instance, argues that Buddhist activism in Shanghai contributed to the construction of a new lay Buddhist ‘civic culture’ in China from the 1920s to the 1950s, which led to the creation of a newly redefined identity as a Buddhist ‘householder’ (jushi 居士).13

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.