A Study on the Emergence of the Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sculpting-Scholarship: A Study on the Emergence of the Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Religious Studies at University of the West In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Religious Studies by Nathan Fredrick DeBoer Summer 2020 Approval Page for Graduate Approved and recommended for acceptance as a dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Religious Studies Nathan Fredrick DeBoer, Candidate Sculpting-Scholarship: A Study on the Emergence of the Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection APPROVED: William Chu, 9-3-20 Chair Darui Long, Sept. 4, 2020 Committee Member Miroj Shakya, Sept 4, 2020 Committee Member I hereby declare that this thesis/dissertation has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at any other institution, and that it is entirely my own work. © 2020 Nathan Fredrick DeBoer ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Acknowledgements The sum individuals who played a role in helping me, in body and mind, to the completion of this dissertation is beyond the telling. However, a few stand as first among equals. First and foremost is Dr. William Chu, whose inexhaustible patience for enduring my relentless, recklessly timed phone calls is truly of a bodhisattva’s proportion. Dr. Anne Hooghart, my high school Japanese language teacher and longtime friend, painstakingly went over each of these chapters, pruning away grammatical and spelling infelicities. My family was a great source of encouragement and support. The wide group of friends from Fourth Coast Café in Kalamazoo, Michigan, also aided with conversation, caffeine, and confectionary. Finally, I would like to acknowledge Melanie Harrison- Holman, whose aid was important to the completion of the defense. ii Abstract Sculpting-Scholarship: A Study on the Emergence of the Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection By Nathan Fredrick DeBoer To date, the phenomena of Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection saw no extend scholarly examination. This dissertation sought to fill that lacuna. Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection represents a radical departure from description to prescription within Buddhist Studies. The study of religion and the practice of religion have long been separated by an impassible divide. This crosses over an intellectual boundary once believed sacrosanct by Buddhist Studies scholar and their religious studies counter parts. Buddhist Studies scholars, drawn to the study of academic study of Buddhism by their Buddhist faith, saw that their scholarship could be an extension of their Buddhist religiosity. Despite the comparatively late emergence of this phenomena, Buddhist Studies scholars of the past were not without theological passion towards their topics. I challenge the assumption that their lay a steep division between early Buddhologists, believed to be thoroughly detached from the object of their study. But a range of normative and theological interest in Buddhism can be seen present in their scholarship. Scholars from the nineteenth century brought a range of assumptions about the merits of studying the works of ancient worthies from their roots in the study of classical antiquity. Others of the same period saw the purpose of their scholarship as to iii recover a unalloyed Buddhism from centuries of deleterious cultural accretions. Early 20th century scholars of Buddhism also evidence unmistakable theological interest in Buddhism as well. Moving onto the present I examine Buddhist Theology through the tools of Comparative theology, allowing for a range of evaluation germane to a large non-Buddhist audience the contributors sought to address with Buddhist solutions. I also examined the continuities and expansion in topics between Buddhist Theology and the Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection. It is important this scholarship find expression in modern Buddhist life and practice if it is to accomplish the end of offering the solutions to contemporary society it sought out with. Finally, I noted the importance of this growing body of scholarship has for Buddhism in America and beyond, and the imperative that further work be done on the reception of this scholarship by communities of practicing Buddhists. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii 1. Chapter One: Introduction 1 1.1. Introduction 1 1.2. Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection 2 1.3. Theory and Method 9 1.4. Literature Review 11 1.5. Chapter outline 14 2. Chapter Two: Narrative and Discontinuities in the Buddhist Critical 17 Constructive Reflection Antecedents 2.1. Introduction 17 2.2. Early Scholars 21 2.3. 20th Century Scholars 28 2.4. Sociology and Terminology 37 2.5. Buddhist-Feminists: The Mothers of Buddhist theology 42 2.6. “Buddhist theology” before Buddhist Theology 55 2.7. Conclusion 78 3. Chapter Three: Examining Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection 82 3.1. Buddhist Theology/Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection requires 83 Comparative theology 3.2. Buddhist Theology 92 3.3. Buddhist Theology: Part 1: What, Why, and How? Summary and Critique 103 v 3.4. Buddhist Theology: Part II: Exercises in Buddhist Theology 139 3.5. Critical Responses 219 3.6. The Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection panel 227 4. Chapter Four: Conclusion 232 4.1. Summary 232 4.2. Final Reflections and Considerations 236 4.3. Concluding Remarks 242 5. Bibliography 243 6. Appendix: Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection Panels 249 and Issuing Publications vi 1. Chapter One: Introduction 1.1. Introduction This dissertation will examine the emergence of a Buddhist theological voice from within North American Buddhist Studies.1 Now named Buddhist Critical Constructive Reflection, I will explore the philosophical, theological, and academic development and implications of this new phenomena in Buddhist Studies.2 Buddhist Studies scholars, or Buddhologists, like their religious studies colleagues, have styled themselves as disinterested, descriptive investigators, concerned primarily with historicizing Buddhist texts and institutions. To maintain the value-neutral quality of their research this required Buddhologists to avoid involvement with potential theological implications of their work. As nascent disciplines concentrating on a topic over which Christian theology3 held almost complete dominance in the West since the 1st century CE, this assertion was critical to distinguish religious studies and Buddhist Studies from this distance parent.4 While description remains the dominant methodological assumption 1 Here I use the term “Buddhist Studies” not as membership in a unified discipline, which Cabezon (1995) and Freiberger (2007) have demonstrated is not a singular discipline as such but a methodological heterogeneous study. By Buddhist Studies I mean to include all researchers for whom Buddhist texts, history, ideas, institutions, and ethnography constitution a major research concern. 2 Readers familiar with the Buddhist traditions may find the term Buddhist “Theology” shocking given the long standing scholarly and common assumption that Buddhism as a religion is notable for, not least of which, the denial of the centrality of deities, or revelation. Contributing scholars to Buddhist Theology offer range of answers but the most ready of which is José Cabezón’s “What I here term ‘Buddhist Theology” is functionally equivalent to much of what is termed Christian or Jewish or Islamic theology; which is to say that this type of discourse functions for Buddhists I a way similar to its counterparts in other religious contexts.” Buddhist Theology: Critical Reflections By Contemporary Buddhist Scholars. Ed. Roger Jackson and John Makransky. (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 26. Although this is a useful point of departure for defining what Buddhist theology is in its concern and activity, I intend to problematize this and other definitions offered in Buddhist Theology and offer my own more finely tuned definition. 3 This can be safely said of Buddhist Studies as well, as the first Europeans to report on Buddhism were Catholic or Protestant missionaries. While these works are not considered examples of Buddhist Studies proper, they represent the degree to which even the topic of other religions was considered the provenance of Christian theology. 4 Both Buddhist Studies and religious studies are strongly beholden to Christian theology for terminology and the primacy of texts in research. The history of Buddhist Studies has even seen the choice to privilege 1 throughout Buddhist Studies, the last forty years of Buddhist Studies scholarship has seen efforts on the part of scholars to offer their insights directly to the community of Buddhists in America. While Buddhist Studies has seen an explosion of interest in the topic of Buddhism in America, concern for the impact of Buddhist Studies scholarship itself, the role of contributions to popular practitioner periodicals, and the genesis of a theological discourse has seen no extended treatment.5 The one notable exception is the work of Charles Prebish, who has noted this dynamic in the four chapter of his edited volume Luminious Passage, “The Silent Sangha.” As the title suggest, Prebish seeks to illuminate the vast number of religiously Buddhist-Buddhist Studies scholars who choose to keep their religious commitments hidden from their peers for fear that this personal inclination will be believed to occlude their scholarship, and negate subsequent possibilities for tenure.