The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities (JIABU) Vol. 9 No. 1 (January – June 2016)
Aims and Scope:
The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities is an academic journal published twice a year (1st issue January-June, 2nd issue July-December). It aims to promote research and disseminate academic and research articles for researchers, academicians, lecturers and graduate students. The Journal focuses on Buddhism, Sociology, Liberal Arts and Multidisciplinary of Humanities and Social Sciences. All the articles published are peer-reviewed by at least two experts. The articles, submitted for The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities, should not be previously published or under consideration of any other journals. The author should carefully follow the submission instructions of The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities including the reference style and format. Views and opinions expressed in the articles published by The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Universities, are of responsibility by such authors but not the editors and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.
Advisors
The Most Venerable Prof. Dr. Phra Brahmapundit Rector, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand The Most Venerable Xue Chen Vice President, Buddhist Association of China & Buddhist Academy of China The Most Venerable Dr. Ashin Nyanissara Chancellor, Sitagu International Buddhist Academy, Myanmar
Executive Editor
Ven. Prof. Dr. Phra Sigambhirayarn Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand
Chief Editor
Dr. Dion Peoples Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand
Editorial Team Ven. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Phramaha Hansa Dhammahaso Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand Prof. Dr. D. Philips Stanley Naropa University, USA Prof. Ven. Dr. Khammai Dhammasami University of Oxford,UK Prof. Dr. Tamas Agocs Dharma Gate Buddhist College, Hungary The Most Venerable Dr. Ching Hsing Ching Cheuh Buddhist Sangha University, Chinese-Taipei Ven. Prof. Chisho Namai Koyasan University, Japan Ven. Prof. Jinwol Lee Dongguk University, Korea Ven. Prof. Dr. Yuanci Buddhist Academy of China, China Prof. Dr. Takahide Takahashi Rissho University, Japan Prof. Dr. Le Mahn That Vietnam Buddhist University, Vietnam Senior Prof. Sumanapala Galmangoda University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka Ven. Dr. Phramaha Somboon Vutthikaro Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand Dr. Rabindra Panth Nalanda Deemed University (Nalanda Mahavihar), India
Assistant Editors
Ven. Dr. Phrapalad Somchai Payogo Buddhapanyasridvaravadi Buddhist College, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, Thailand Ven. Dr. Phramaha Sompong Unyo International Buddhist Studies College (IBSC), Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University Ven. Dr. Phramaha Nantakorn Piyabhani International Buddhist Studies College (IBSC), Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University H.E. Janos Jelen Dharma Gate Buddhist College, Hungary Dr. Sanu Mahatthanadull International Buddhist Studies College (IBSC), Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University
ii
Dr. Soontaraporn Techapalokul International Buddhist Studies College (IBSC), Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University
Staff
Phramaha Nopparat Abhijavo Phramaha Manothai Nepakkhavedhi Ms. Mukrawe Chimphana
Owner International Association of Buddhist Universities
Office International Buddhist Studies College (IBSC) Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University Room A400 Zone A, 4th Floor, Classroom Building, MCU, 79 Moo1, Lamsai, Wang-noi, Phra Nakorn Si Ayutthaya 13170, Thailand Tel: (6635)248-000 ext.8501, 8505 Email: [email protected]
iii JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 iii
Editorial Message: At the International Association of Buddhist Universities, we have several principles that we take as our guidelines in moving forward in our engagements. Here is a reminder of how we progress in our work and how we wish to inspire others, through:
IABU Vision: • Motivate future generations to gain and apply profound understanding of the Buddhadhamma in every aspect of life • Raise the quality of scholarly work within Buddhist Studies and across other academic endeavors • Contribute to meeting the challenges that face human society worldwide
IABU Mission: • Support and collaborate with members to ensure humanity can benefit from the richness and variety of the multi-dimensional Buddhist traditions • Provide a framework towards better understanding diverse policies and activities • Collaborate in administration, teaching, research and outreach • Recognize each other’s qualifications
IABU Goals: • Propagate the Buddhadhamma through collaborative academic channels • Eliminate Buddhist sectarian, national, and institutional barriers • Raise the academic standards throughout the Buddhist world • Maximize academic potentials and abilities
The papers in this volume are on a variety of topics. Originally the volume intended to contain papers on: “Buddhism and ASEAN’s Political Security & Economic Communities”, but there were few contributions on the theme, so a revision to the call for papers included papers on any topic pertaining to Buddhism. As a result, we received papers diverse in quality. There are papers that are very impressive as well as papers from emerging-scholars aspiring towards graduation-requirements. Therefore, the IABU contributed towards making some of these papers become something other than what it was submitted. Hours of editing work went into a few of these papers, and yet, we still apologize if any imperfections remain. We tried, very diligently, to assist these scholars, sacrificing our personal research, for the sake of these scholars that contributed papers to this edition of the JIABU. Dr Rodriguez-Diaz has a very technical paper on Buddhist-data and the concept of loving-kindness in everyone’s daily life, and despite the rhetoric of Buddhism, computerized results show interesting results. Dr. Scherer contributes a paper, originally an epilogue to his upcoming book, on Buddhism’s perspective towards people with variations to their bodies (disabilities or even gender-issues) – towards a very interesting social conversation that more people may find interesting. The research and writing of Sigmund Frued is very popular, and Mr. Tan contributes an excerpt of his research on evaluating dream-states. Dr. Tony Sin-Heng See explores Buddha-Nature, a topic many Buddhists pursue and still have trouble comprehending, this paper should clarify the concept for readers. Our comrade in peace, Mr. Amjad Mohamed-Saleem contributes his writing to help Buddhists understand Non-Violence and Conflict Resolution in the Islamic Perspective – so Buddhists can comprehend how another person from another tradition, may be thinking. This important paper will assist Buddhists in their interreligious-dialogues. Socially-engaged Buddhism, the topic pursued next, by Dr. Priyasen Singh is included next, as continuity in ideas for attaining peace and pursuing JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 iv peace and liberation, through the Bodhisattva Ideal. Ven. Phan Anh Duoc contributes a paper on various leaders involved with engaged Buddhism, expressing their ideas on Nibbana. A leader from China is written about in Mr. Saiping An’s paper on Venerable Chin Kung, illuminating the idea of multicultural education, and how this brings social peace. Other leaders from the pages of Thai history are resurrected by Venerable Yuande Shih, as he researches the holy-men and their involvement with political leadership within texts from Thai history. From the pages of history, towards influential literature and art: the last two papers are on the Sinxay Story, perhaps a Jataka tale from Laos, translated by Peter Whittlesey; and the wonderful architecture of Champa, Vietnam is written about by Dr. Arvind Singh - and many pictures of these temples were included into the article so readers who have never been to Vietnam may one day be inspired to visit a beautiful nation, recovering from decades of a devasting war for liberation. With all of that being said, we hope you will enjoy this ninth edition of the journal for the International Association of Buddhist Universities. This volume, along with all of our other volumes, can be found online, at: www.iabu.org/JIABU - and we hope you will have ample time to read these volumes, and build your research upon our ideas that have been released already, instead of contributing basic-paper after basic-paper. History is full of interesting ideas, and modern researchers try their best to incorporate the past with modern wisdom, so that the emerging generations can produce better research. The vision, mission, and goals of the IABU are expressed to ensure our students and professors are not beginning from nothing. We have an extensive catalog of conference publications and journals which should be explored within the various classrooms in Buddhist Studies, across all of the universities in our association. Professors are encouraged to use these articles as conversation-pieces to push the boundraries beyond what their students are normally producing, and what they themselves are producing. For Buddhist Studies to be taken more seriously in the world of academia, and to be globally-influential, we need to discuss the difficult ideas that traditional studies are often afraid to consider. We all need to be literate on the controversial issues; we must lead discussions on the global stage where these issues are discussed so that policy-makers and shareholders will take our ideas seriously – ideas from Buddhist people and the Buddhist tradition, for the benefit of the world and our civilizations. Thank you for your time and patience with this journal. As with other volumes, if there is any issue you wish to discuss, the IABU Secretariat can put you in direct contact with the author, because these ideas expressed within are not necessarily our own, but deserve consideration as conversation pieces.
If you would like to contact the Manager of the IABU, please find him on Facebook, at: https://www.facebook.com/Dr.DionPeoples - or send a message to the new official IABU Secretariat page, at: https://www.facebook.com/IABUManager/ - to reach the International Association of Buddhist Universities. Please note, Facebook has shutdown the page for: https://www.facebook.com/IABUSecretariat - until we submit official documentation their offices to register as an official certified Facebook-page. We are working on restoring access to the Facebook-page.
Respectfully,
Dr. Dion Peoples JIABU General Editor IABU Manager, MCU, Thailand JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 vi
Table of Contents:
The Social Structure of Loving-Kindness in Buddhist Populations of the ASEAN Region (And Neighbors) - A Sociological Analysis Dr. José A. Rodríguez Díaz 1
Buddhism and Disability: Toward a Socially Engaged Buddhist ‘Theology’ of Bodily Inclusiveness Dr. Bee Scherer 26
Evaluating the “Unconscious in Dream” between Sigmund Freud and the Buddhist Tipiṭaka Mr. P.B. Tan 36
The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature in Mah y na Buddhism Dr. Tony Sin-Heng See 47
Understanding Principles and Community Practices Related to Non- Violence and Conflict Resolution from an Islamic Tradition Mr. Amjad Mohamed-Saleem 57
The Bodhisattva Ideal and Socially Engaged Buddhism: A Progressive Approach Asst. Prof. Dr. Priyasen Singh 70
Interpretation of Concept of Nibb na in Engaged Buddhism: A Case Study on Engaged Buddhist Leaders Ven. Phan Anh Duoc 81
Contribution towards the Peace and Security of Southeast Asia through Venerable Chin Kung’s Idea of “Multicultural Education” Mr. Saiping An 94
The “Holy Men’s” Uprisings in the Thai Political Dynamics: Merits Counted Venerable Yuande Shih 101
Sinxay as a Jataka Nauk Nibat – A Jataka Outside the Circle Mr. Peter Whittlesey 109
Cham Architecture in Viet Nam Asst. Prof. Dr. Arvind Kumar Singh 119 JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 1
The Social Structure of Loving-Kindness in Buddhist Populations Of The ASEAN Region (And Neighbors)* - A Sociological Analysis.**
José A. Rodríguez Díaz University of Barcelona Abtract
Doctrinal Buddhism is well known and studied by a large group of excellent Buddhist scholars, but much less is known about the ways Buddhism takes form in the values, visions, attitudes and actions of Buddhist people. This paper aims to contribute insight into the knowledge of the structural form socially taken by one of the main pieces in the Buddhist cosmovision: loving-kindness. The complex system of interconnections and influences among multiple structural, existential, spiritual, and loving-kindness elements (variables) produces the social structure of loving-kindness, which will be visualized and analyzed. The paper also focuses on the similarities and differences in the models of loving-kindness among countries of the ASEAN Region and neighboring countries from a sociological point of view. It builds, and heavily relies on, graphic representations as new social maps to better understand the Buddhist social field.
Keywords: The Social Structure, Loving-Kindness, Buddhist Populations
Introduction This paper analyzes values, positions and actions of Buddhist people in some ASEAN countries, and in comparison with neighboring countries. The analysis aspires to understand the peculiarities, the similarities and the differences of Buddhist people of different countries and regions, of different traditions. The objective is to uncover some of the social, cognitive and action structures aimed at offering knowledge to deepen relations among Buddhist countries, especially within the ASEAN Region. It focuses on indicators (religious, cultural and social values, interaction, trust, action) regarding and towards others. In fact, loving-kindness, along with compassion, empathetic-joy and equanimity (the four immeasurables1) constitute a main avenue of values and practices towards the creation of harmonious relations with others, and within and between societies. The first part of the paper empirically explores, using survey data, how loving- kindness is seen and practiced by Buddhist people in the ASEAN region and of neighboring countries. We use indicators of their contribution to a better world by focusing on the happiness and wellbeing of others and therefore facilitating harmony, dialogue and cooperation. As the background to loving-kindness, we explore structural and demographic, religious and spiritual, and enjoyment of life variables that define the social territory where it resides. To enhance the comparison, Multi-Dimensional Scaling (MDS) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) are used to build social maps, which depict countries according to their social distances. First, I have seen how countries are placed in a new social map of loving-kindness; then in the second part of the paper, we explore its social structure; and how it takes form as structural combination of variables, both globally and in each country. The combination of systems of relations, of those values, attitudes and actions define the social field of loving-kindness. The map of the social field shows the essence of the social cultural identities of Buddhist people in the ASEAN Region, and in surrounding countries.
1 Mettam Sutta: The Brahma-viharas. SN 46.54 JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 2
How?: I use the largest global sociological survey currently being carried out (World Values Survey2) which focuses on general social values and attitudes and gathers information from almost 83-thousand people from 58 countries worldwide with an important presence of countries with large Buddhist populations. This ample data-set allows me to compare Buddhist people in some countries of the ASEAN region (Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore) and also with neighboring countries (such as China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, along with Hong Kong) and provides a glimpse of how Buddhist people contribute to a better world. As technical and conceptual apparatus I use Multi-Dimensional Scaling (MDS) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) with the statistical program SPSS (for the first part of the paper) along with Social Network Analysis using UCINET (in the second part of paper). MDS, using the ALSCAL algorithm in SPSS, is a statistical procedure that calculates similarities and differences between countries and translates them into Euclidean distances in order to place countries in a two dimensional space. The positioning in the Euclidean space is metrically equivalent to the physical distances between all countries at the same time that produces the standard geographical map. Here I substitute physical distances for social distances producing social maps. Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA), using both intergroup and closest neighbor approaches, mathematically identifies and groups together the most similar countries in what we could think of as social regions. Social Network Analysis (SNA) works with relational matrixes, in this case they are mathematical expressions of the relations among all the variables used in part one of the paper. We can identify and visualize, using the special visualization program Netdraw, the social structure, the social grid and network, of Loving Kindness.
Buddhist in the ASEAN Region, and Asian Neighbors We will start our journey looking into the social configurations and spaces, the social territory, where we believe the field of loving-kindness is embedded. They are structural, spiritual and living elements and dimensions acting as background for loving- kindness. As structural elements, we look into sociodemographic dimensions such as age, gender, education, income, and social class. As spiritual-religious dimensions we look into the relevance of religion and spirituality in their lives and their religious practice. As the living dimension, we are using elements defining the quality and possibilities of their lives (Table 1). Our goal here is to see how those elements are distributed throughout the Buddhist populations of the ASEAN region (in our data represented by Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore) and those of the neighboring Asian countries. By looking into their similarities and differences, we will place the countries (the Buddhist people of a country) in social maps representing social distances.
Sociodemographics The Buddhist population, in the survey, is a bit older than the general population (mean age of 45 vs. 42). There is not an even age distribution or composition within the region as some countries have Buddhist populations substantially younger and others much older. The Buddhist population of Malaysia, followed by that of Vietnam, is the youngest of all the Buddhists, and even younger than the mean age of the general population of the survey (M:32; V: 40). The oldest Buddhist populations are those from Japan (average age 48), Singapore, Thailand, China and Hong Kong.
2 The data used for all the countries belongs to wave 5 (2007) with the exception of that of Singapore which is a new addition in wave 6 (2014) JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 3
In the Buddhist population the proportion of women is slightly larger in all the countries studied (average global proportion of women: 52,7%) and even larger than in the general population. Although the gender composition in most countries is quite homogeneous and similar to the overall mean, in some there is a very large female composition. This is the case of Hong Kong where 68% of Buddhists are women, followed by Taiwan (57%), Vietnam (57%) and China (56%) and Singapore (56%). The average educational level of the Buddhist population is in the middle of the scale (where one is incomplete elemental schooling and eight university degree) but slightly under the global mean (4.0 vs. 4.3), and, overall, their education period is shorter (two years less) than the global population. Two of the countries of the ASEAN Region (Thailand and Vietnam) coincide in similar low levels of education, below the levels of their Asian counterparts, while Malaysia and specially Singapore single out by their high levels. Buddhist people place themselves in middle income and social positions and above the mean of the global population. On average, they are close to the middle lower class and in the middle of the income scale (5.2) while the average in the general population is the working class and a 4.6 in the income scale level. Buddhist people of Vietnam and Thailand coincide with those of Malaysia and Singapore)in their highest levels of income. However, they differ in their perceived social positions, reflecting probably different social structures. Vietnamese Buddhists place themselves in the lowest positions while Thai and those from Malaysia and Singapore (along with Taiwan and South Korea) place themselves in the highest positions. The use of Multidimensional Scaling offers a concise and precise vision of sociodemographic differences and similarities between countries (Buddhist people of countries) by placing countries in a two dimensional space according to the distances to each other and to all the countries. It is a metrical-physical representation of their social distances. Hierarchical cluster analysis is used to group countries by their similarities.
SOCIODEMOGRAPHICS (Graph 1) JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 4
In the representation (Graph 1) we can see a large group of countries concentrated in the center of the space and three scattered countries at equidistant outside positions (Hong Kong, Malaysia, India). It points to a high level of similarity in the social structure of a large part of the Buddhist people. The center of the sociodemographic space is made up of two very close clusters. Vietnam and Singapore along with China and Taiwan on the right, and Thailand, Japan and South Korea on the left. The social structures of Vietnam, Singapore and Thailand seem to be quite similar and are placed at equidistant distances. The youth and perceived higher social levels of Malaysian Buddhist differentiate them from the other countries.
Life: Buddhist people are, overall, healthy, satisfied and happy; and are happier, more satisfied, and healthier than the average person in the global population. Almost one third of all Buddhists defined themselves as very happy and only 9% are not happy. Buddhists also suffer less. Using “not happy” as an indicator of suffering, the proportion of Buddhist people that suffer is half that of the global population. Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia have the largest proportion of Buddhists that are very happy, healthy and satisfied. In the opposite extreme, China has the highest proportion of non-happy, with poor health and not satisfied Buddhist people. Vietnam occupies middle positions in health and happiness while having similar positions as Thailand in satisfaction. In summary, in some countries Buddhist are doing well in terms of happiness, health and satisfaction (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam and Japan), while in others they are doing quite bad (China and South Korea), and in others they are closer to average (Taiwan, Hong Kong, India). As overall comparison, the map of similarities and differences (translated into Euclidean metric distances) offers an image (Graph 2) of a slight dispersion of the countries in this space, with Vietnam occupying a central position. It points to different patterns of life quality and enjoyment. The use of Hierarchical Clustering defines four groups of countries, one in each quadrant of the space, and the division of the space between the right and the left side. On the left side the group formed by Vietnam, Japan and India together with the one formed by China and Hong Kong; and on the right side, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia and the group formed by South Korea and Taiwan.
HAPPINESS, HEALTH, SATISFACTION (Graph 2) JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 5
In the top part of the graphic most countries are doing well and happy and on the bottom part not so well (below average). The vertical axis divides the space into a right side, where good health and satisfaction dominates, and a left side with health below average and a mix of satisfied and unsatisfied countries. Vietnam Buddhists are closer to the center of the space, between the good life indicators of those of Thailand and Singapore and the worst indicators of China at the opposite extreme.
Spirituality-Religion The perception and practice of Buddhism as a religion is an important embedding/supporting dimension for loving kindness. To look into this dimension we use a combination of indicators included in the WVS: thinking about meaning of life, thinking religion is important in life, dedicating time to meditate or/and pray, attending religious services, and being a religious person. Buddhist people, on average, think quite a lot about the meaning of life even though most do not consider religion as very important (only 47% consider religion very important). Almost half see themselves as religious people, the majority (2/3) allocates time to meditate or pray, and their level of attendance at religious services is in the middle of the scale with a less than once a month frequency and close to attendance limited to religious festivities. On average, their levels of religiosity are lower than the global population with the exception of attendance to religious services, which is higher. Collective practices are quite important in the way Buddhism is practiced. The polarization of the differences between ASEAN countries, and neighbors as well, distributes the countries through the social space around a centralizing role played by Singapore. Vietnam is placed at the very top and Malaysia, opposed to it, at the very bottom, and Thailand is placed on the bottom on the right. The positions of the ASEAN countries produce a shape that looks like a star system with Singapore as the intermediating center. China and Hong Kong are placed on the top left corner while Japan and South Korea are in the opposite top right corner. In the ASEAN Region, Buddhist in Vietnam and Singapore coincide in their low levels of religious practice and of considering religion as very important, even though they see themselves as religious people. Meanwhile those in Thailand and Malaysia consider religion as very important and practice (meditate) a lot. Buddhists in Thailand and Vietnam coincide (and this is their only coincidence) in thinking about the meaning of life a lot and above the average Buddhist and General populations. Buddhist in China, Hong Kong and India, think much less about it. Apart from this coincidence, the positions of Thailand and Vietnam differ systematically, producing two opposed patterns. Buddhist in Thailand have high levels of considering religion as important in life (along with Malaysia), having time to meditate (along with Taiwan), attendance of religious services (in a very differentiated patter from the rest), but/and have the lowest level of considering themselves as religious people (along with Japan and South Korea). Vietnamese Buddhist (along with Hong Kong) have very low levels of considering religion as important in life, of having time to meditate (along with South Korea), and of attending religious services (along with China), but have the highest level of considering themselves as religious people (along Malaysia and India). JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 6
RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY (Graph 3)
MDS allows the visualization (Graph 3), in two dimensions, of the system of similarities and differences and Hierarchical Clustering confirms the division in three groups of countries representing three religious patters of meanings and practices (religious models). Buddhist people in the ASEAN region are grouped into two clusters in opposing spatial positions (Vietnam and Singapore on the top right and Malaysia and Thailand at the bottom). The group of China and Hong Kong is close to the cluster formed by Vietnam and Singapore along Taiwan, Japan and South Korea on the top part of the graph, and quite separated from Thailand, Malaysia and India at the bottom. Attendance of religious services and importance of religion in their lives separates the countries in the top part of the graph (with less attendance to religious services and less consideration of religion as important) from those at the bottom part (with high levels in both). On the right side quadrants, Buddhists think a lot about the meaning of life while they do much less on the left side.
The social territory: The complete map of the “social territory”, result of the union of sociodemographics with life and religious indicators, is presented in Graph 4. MDS places countries (their Buddhist populations) scattered around the two dimensional space circling the center. Hierarchical Clustering Analysis points to the creation of three groupings of countries representing distinctive social backgrounds and lives. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 7
SOCIAL TERRITORY (Graph 4)
The ASEAN region countries belong to two different clusters. Vietnamese Buddhists have shown social patterns quite different from the other ASEAN countries; and as a result, they are in the center top group along Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Meanwhile Buddhist people from Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand are together with similar social patters on the right bottom cluster, along India. China and Hong Kong form the other model having coincided earlier in the region and spirituality and the happiness, health and satisfaction spaces. Singapore plays an intermediate position both globally and also between Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia.
Loving Kindness Loving-Kindness3, along with Compassion, Empathetic Joy and Equanimity (The Four Immeasurable4) constitute a main avenue of values and practices towards the creation of harmonious relations and societies. I empirically study, using the WVS data, the positioning and practices of Buddhist people in the ASEAN Region and their Asian neighbors towards the four-immeasurables as indicators of their contribution to a better world by focusing on the happiness and wellbeing of others and therefore facilitating harmony, dialogue and cooperation (Table 1).
3 Loving-Kindness is an English equivalent for the term Metta, described in the Metta Sutta of the P li Canon‘s Sutta Nipata (Sn 1.8) and Khuddakapatha (Khp 9) 4 Mettam Sutta: The Brahma-viharas. SN 46.54 May all sentient beings have happiness and its causes, May all sentient beings be free of suffering and its causes, May all sentient beings never be separated from bliss without suffering, May all sentient beings be in equanimity, free of bias, attachment and anger. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 8
Love and Compassion We have identified several variables (meanings and practices), in the WVS data set, that could be used as indicators (proxies) of love and compassion: being family and friends very important; supporting altruism in children, being member and active in civic organizations; and caring for others and for the environment. Family is of most importance for the vast majority of Buddhist people (86%) as it also is for the majority of people in the world (90%). It is always more important than friends; 37% of the Buddhist and 48% of the overall population consider friends as very important. There are some worth noting differences and similarities between countries. Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia (along with Japan, South Korea) are above the mean affirming the importance of the family while Vietnam (along with Hon Kong and China) is way below. Two countries of the ASEAN regions in the survey (Malaysia and Singapore) are the ones valuing friends the most. The other two countries (Thailand and Vietnam, along China) coincide in not considering friends so important and at the same time stressing, above most countries, the value of altruism in children. Only Japan has a larger proportion of its Buddhist population (53%) stressing altruism in the new generations. Action towards the wellbeing of others often takes the form of participation in social life, of membership and active volunteering in civil organizations dedicated to issues such as religion, sports and recreation, education and culture, labor unions, political parties, environmental, professional, or charity. Altogether, Buddhists show similar social behavior to the overall population. Both populations average membership and active volunteering in 1.6 and 0.7 organizational types. The form and intensity of active participation (membership and volunteering) in civil society differs among countries producing an interesting image. Thailand and China, followed by Malaysia, have the most social active Buddhist populations with level of membership above average; and Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia have the highest active volunteering rates. Singapore and the other Buddhist populations have participation and active rates below and/or close to the mean. Closely associated to love and compassion are the Schwartz indicators (Table 1) of level of identification (in a scale from 1 total identification to 6 no identification at all) with a person for whom it is important to help people nearby, and for whom it is important to look after the environment. The Buddhist population of the WVS strongly identifies with those who care for the environment and for the wellbeing of others (means of 2.8 and 2.9). As another indicator of caring for others, a relevant part of the Buddhist population (14%), slightly below the rate in the overall population (17%), would act and give part of their income to stop the destruction of the environment. It is worth noting that both the Buddhist and the general population stress the relevance of actions towards others (be it people or the environment) well above individual goals such as wealth or/and adventure. Buddhists from Vietnam, followed by those from China and from Taiwan, stand out for being the ones caring the most for others and the environment. On the opposite position, Buddhists from Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore follow Japan and South Korea with lower rates of caring for others. In brief, Buddhists in Vietnam are the ones more oriented towards and loving others while Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand are a bit less. MDS represents the system of similarities and differences, translated into metric Euclidean distances, placing countries in a two dimensional space according to distances between their structures/patterns of love and compassion. Hierarchical Clustering Analysis (HCA) helps to identify countries with higher similarities. In this case (Graph 5), most countries are placed around the center, with the exception of Japan, Hong Kong and Vietnam father out in the west, east and south. HCA points to two main groups of countries very similar in their love-compassion models. A larger and most central one formed by JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 9 two small and close to each other clusters (India and South Korea on the top center-right, and Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore on the left). Vietnam and China form another cluster on the bottom part of the graphic, leaving Hong Kong and Japan isolated. Importance of family and care for others seems to act as main dividers of this social space. The top large cluster represents a model stressing the importance of the family with lower levels of care for others. In the bottom cluster, family is not so relevant but their care for others and the environment are the highest.
LOVE COMPASSION (Graph 5)
Joy and Equanimity: As indicators (proxies) for joy and equanimity we are using several variables (meanings and practices) dealing with importance of tolerance values in children, social aperture/closure towards others (wanting/or not to have them as neighbors), believing wealth is beneficial for all, and trust (general and towards population groups both known and unknown). As with the other indicators analyzed, the distribution of these values and practices in not even throughout the Buddhist population, existing contrasting positions and similarities between countries, and especially among the AR countries. Malaysian Buddhists, followed by those from China, Taiwan and Japan, are leaders stressing the importance of tolerance in the value system of children, well above the Buddhist and overall population means. In this dimension, Thailand, Vietnam and Singapore coincide in lower rates similar to the average, and Hong Kong and South Korea with the lowest. Social openness and closure somehow reflects equanimity as their visions and perceptions of others. Vietnam Buddhists stands up, following Buddhists from Hong Kong, as the most socially open and differ from those from Thailand, and China, with higher rates of closure and non-equanimical positions. In a scale between the opinion that people can become rich only exploiting others on one extreme and the belief that wealth can grow in such a way as to be enough for everybody, Buddhists position themselves towards the more equanimical positions (6.9 in a scale from 1 to 10). Buddhists from China stand out for their strong orientation towards this position, followed by those from Taiwan and Thailand. Conversely, Buddhists from Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore have positions below the mean. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 10
More than one third of the Buddhist (36%) believes that most people can be trusted, and their trust in others is above that of the overall population average (27%). Trust in others connects us to concepts such as interdependence and no-ego, equanimity, and interrelation and closeness. Trust is seen, in the ample social science literature, as a key component of social capital, which facilitates social interaction. It becomes a crucial indicator of social richness and potential. By facilitating interaction with others, cooperation can be very intense and with a potential social impact. This trust in others in high in the countries of the ASEAN region with the exception of Malaysia. Half the Buddhists in Vietnam, and China, and a bit less in Thailand and Singapore, believe most people can be trusted. The lowest levels of trust are found among Buddhists from Malaysia, Taiwan, South Korea and India. When trust refers to specific groups of people (in a scale of 1: total trust to 5: no trust) the indexes vary from higher trust in known people to lowest in people upon first meeting, with middle low levels of trust towards people from other nations or other religions. In all cases, Buddhists show average rates a bit lower than the average overall population. Singapore Buddhists stand out for their highest level of trust towards others, above the Buddhists and overall population averages. Rates in Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia are lower, just below the average.
JOY EQUANIMITY (Graph 6)
The representation of distances (similarities and differences) between Buddhist populations done with MDS produces a social map of joy and equanimity presented in Graph 6. Countries are scattered throughout the space forming four clusters of countries, with high levels of similarities, circling the center. Trust seems to separate the cluster at the bottom part with higher levels of trust from those on the top part with lower levels, with the exception of Hong Kong isolated on the right margin. On the center bottom of the map, we find the group formed by a very central Singapore with Thailand and Vietnam along Japan and China. On the top part of the field, we find India and South Korea forming the middle cluster; and the right cluster of Taiwan and Malaysia also coinciding in high levels of importance given to altruism. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 11
The Loving Kindness social field The complete map of the loving-kindness “social field”, result of the union of love and compassion with joy and equanimity indicators, is presented in Graph 7. MDS places countries (their Buddhist populations) in the two dimensional space circling the center. Hierarchical Clustering Analysis statistically confirms four groups of countries representing distinctive models of loving-kindness. The pattern of Loving Kindness differs among the Buddhist populations in the ASEAN Region. Thailand and Vietnam, with China, are close together forming a cluster placed on the center top part of the map. Hong Kong is placed afar on the bottom right margin. India and South Korea are grouped together with Singapore at the center bottom and Malaysia clusters with Taiwan and Japan on the left.
LOVING KINDNESS (Graph 7)
The representation maintains some of the key features seen in the previous LC and JY maps and the division between the top and the bottom parts of the map. General trust and care for others and the environment are high on the top cluster. Importance of family and friends and less general trust in others is more spread on the bottom clusters. These two general models of loving-kindness seem to represent a more open approach towards others in general, including environment, on one extreme (top) and a model of loving kindness more centered on close relational circles (family, friends and known people) spread throughout the bottom clusters.
The social structure of loving-kindness Once we have seen and analyzed the social maps of countries placed according to their similarities and differences, we can now attempt to uncover the social structure of loving-kindness (LK). By social structure of LK we understand the entire system of relations and mutual influence among the variables defining the field of social LK (LC: love-compassion plus JE: joy-equanimity) as well as the social territory. JJIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 12
Similar or different configurations of relations and influences produce distinctive social structures. That is to say, they are specific combinations of meanings and practices producing types of Loving Kindness (as kind of DNA). To uncover, visualize, and analyze such structure I transform the mathematical system of relations and mutual influences among variables (correlations) into a relational matrix. The matrix is the mathematical embodiment of the system of influences and covariance among variables. I use statistically significant relations. To be able to better visualize and compare the structures of the countries, I use relations greater than r: 0,20, resulting in a system that represents some relational intensity by being above the minimum significance level in all countries, except China and India. In these countries, I use strong relations greater than r: 0,30 and r: 0,40 respectively). To create the representation of the structures, the graphs, I use Social Network Analysis (SNA) instruments of visualization (Netdraw) and SNA indicators such as centrality of nodes (where the size of node if proportional to the number of direct relations with others) and strength of relations indicated by the thickness of the connecting lines. The two main elements in the Graphs are Nodes and Lines. Nodes represent the variables. Color and shapes are added according to dimension: Joy Equanimity (JE): purple diamond Love Compassion (LC): yellow square+ Religion and Spirituality (R): green up triangle Happiness Health and Satisfaction (HHS): blue square Sociodemographics (S): red circle.
Lines represent the connection (relation, influence) among variables. Their thickness reproduces the relational intensity, that is to say the correlation between variables (the thicker the stronger).
Loving Kindness in the ASEAN Region The combination of variables and relational intensities produce what we could consider as the Loving Kindness DNA of Buddhist people. Graph 8 depicts the social structure of LK in Thailand. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 13
THAILAND (GRAPH 8) (gt r: 0,2)
Trust: People Met First time Sex Moments of prayer, meditation. Unselfishness Important child qualities Trust: People Another Nationality Would give part oincome for environment Tolerance and respect Important child qualitiesr Trust: People Another rReligion
Trust: People Know Personally Most people can be trusted
Friends Important in life Frecuency attend religious services Family Important in life
Religion Important in life Religious person
Important to look after environment
Feeling of happiness
Important to help people nearby Thinking about Meaning of Life State of health Age
Satisfaction with life Highest Educational Level
Number of organizations Active Age Completing Education Scale of incomes
Wealth good for all Social class Number of organizations Member
Social closure
Social openness
At this level of relational intensity/influences, there is a large weakly connected structure and a small part of love-compassion (LC) disconnected. At the extremes of this central structure, there are two blocks of loving kindness (LK) (a larger one on the top and a smaller one at the bottom). The top block is made up of trust (joy-equanimity: JE) and importance of others (LC). The bottom one connects membership and activity in civil organizations (LC) with social closure and openness (JE). Importance to help people and look after the environment form another block in this case separated from the main web. These blocs represent different aspects of LK: trust and importance of others (top), action towards others (bottom) and importance to do things for others and the environment (isolated on the right). The center of the structure is occupied by happiness-health- satisfaction (HHS) and religion (R) connecting the entire system. On the top part of the graph, religion is linked to indicators of meanings. On the bottom, HHS is linked with indicators of practices on the right and to sociodemographic indicators on the left. The main link maintaining the whole system together is between happiness (HHS) and importance of religion in life (R). In Thailand, the social structure of LK comes together thanks to R and HHS linking separated approaches of meanings and practices. Happiness and importance of religion in life glue the system together. The social structure of LK in Vietnam takes the form of a connected structure without isolated elements. All the elements directly or indirectly influence each other (Graph 9). JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 14
VIETNAM (GRAPH 9) (gt r: zero,2)
Trust: People Met First time Trust: People Another Nationality
Moments of prayer, meditation. Trust: People Know Personally
Most people can be trusted
Trust: People Another rReligion Wealth good for all Frecuency attend religious services Important to help people nearby
Religion Important in life
Unselfishness Important child qualities Religious person Important to look after environment
Would give part oincome for environment
Thinking about Meaning of Life Social openness Family Important in life
Sex Satisfaction with life
Number of organizations Member Social closure
Age Completing Education Friends Important in life Number of organizations Active Feeling of happiness State of health
Scale of incomes
Highest Educational Level
Social class
Age
There is some similarity to the structure in Thailand as the structure takes an elongated form with a large top and bottom connected by a thinner center. The top part with indicators of JE (trust, wealth for all) along LC variables (importance to help people and protect environment) represents meanings (ways of seeing, orientation, values) and it is bordered by / linked to Religion indicators. Towards the bottom right there are LC elements representing practices (action in society) surrounded by HHS and Sociodemographics. The center of the structure is occupied by elements of HHS (Life Satisfaction) and Religion (Religious person, Thinking about Meaning of Life) connecting the system by bridging top meanings with bottom practices. Satisfaction in Life and Religiosity are here the elements gluing the LK structure. Malaysia’s LK social structure is a simple, thin, and disconnected structure (Graph 10). The main structural component (the main body of the network) is dominated by a large substructure of LK (LC and JE linked together). It is connected to the rest of the sparse network by Health (HHS), which plays a key central role in the whole structure. The small isolated group on the left is formed by social openness and importance of Family in life as LC indicators. Overall, the main component of the network is dominated by a LK substructure autonomous from, though linked to, the social territory. Health plays the key bridging role holding together the main component. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 15
MALAYSIA (GRAPH 10) (gt r: 0,2)
F recuency attend religious serv ices Age Moments of pray er, meditation. Age Completing Education Religious person Wealth good for all Satisfaction w ith life
Scale of incomes Sex Thinking about Meaning of Life Social class
Tolerance and respect Important child qualitiesr Highest Educational Level Unselfishness Important child qualities
Religion Important in life
Feeling of happiness
State of health
Would give part oincome for environment
Important to look after environment Number of organizations Active
Trust: People Met First time
Number of organizations Member Important to help people nearby
Trust: People Know Personally
Trust: People Another Nationality
Family Important in life Friends Important in life
Trust: People Another rReligion
Social openness
Most people can be trusted
Social closure
In Singapore, we find a large, complex but broken, social structure (Graph 11). In the main component of the network, two sets of Loving Kindness meaning indicators (Trust, on the left, and Importance of Family and Friends, on the right) are linked thanks to the connecting role played by the Happiness-Health-Satisfaction part of the social territory. Religion and spirituality indicators do not play a key role although they are indirectly connected to LK. At this level of relational intensity, Loving Kindness meaning and practices are not connected. In fact, practices, the two isolated structures on the top left and right corners, are disconnected from the main social structure. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 16
SINGAPORE (GRAPH 11) (gt r: 0,2)
Important do something good for society ACTIVE Important look after environment
Important help care people lnearby
MEMBER Trust People another nationality
Trust People know personally Social Closure Social class Trust People meet first time
Social Openness Most people can be trusted Trust People another religion Satisfaction financial household
Thinking meaning purpose life Scale of incomes
Highest educational level Feeling of happiness
Age completed education State of health Important in life: Friends Satisfaction with life
Gender (Female) Age Important in life: Family
Frequency pray
Important in life: Religion Wealth for all Frequency attend religious services IChQ: Tolerance and respect others Money ecological organization Religious person IChQ: Unselfishness
Similarities and differences among the countries of the ASEAN Region. While the Loving Kindness structure of Vietnam is densely connected, those of Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore are fragmented with LK elements isolated. Even though in all cases there seems to be different dimensions of LK which get connected, it is always thanks to the bridging role of HHS and also, to a lesser extent, of Religion and Sociodemographic indicators. Those three dimensions become the social territory where LK emerges as a connected phenomenon. Religion indicators seem to be closely linked to Meaning indicators (JE) while HHS is connected to Practices (LC). Religiosity has a key linking role in the Thailand and Vietnam. Along with it, Happiness also has a bridging role in Thailand and Singapore, while in Vietnam the role is played by Satisfaction with Life and in Malaysia by Health.
Loving Kindness in the Buddhist population living in neighboring countries The social structure of LK of the Buddhist people in China is a well-connected network, which could be seen as composed of two sides connected by an intermediating structure (Graph 12). The left side of the structure is occupied by a large group of JE indicators (trust and social openness). The right side is occupied by two small LC groups of variables connected by Sociodemographic variables (Education) and Spirituality (Thinking about the Meaning of Life). The top right group is formed by social action indicators (membership and activity in organizations along willing to give money to protect the environment) while the bottom represent the importance to help and care for others and the environment (the predisposition and orientation towards the wellbeing of others). JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 17
CHINA (GRAPH 12) (gt r: 0,3)
The division between meaning indicators and practices ones (left and right) are linked together by a central structure formed by some HHS indicators (Happiness), Religion (Religious person and Religion Importance), and Sociodemographics (Income). The social structure of LK is held together by the important connecting role of Happiness and Religiosity along Sociodemographic indicators such as Income and Education. The social structure/field of Loving Kindness in Taiwan emerges as a very large, dense and connected network (Graph 13).
TAIWAN (GRAPH 13) (gt r: 0,2)
LK indicators are interconnected occupying the central top part of the network, with JE indicators in the middle surrounded by LC elements, with Importance of Friends as the central piece of the whole system. This whole central part rests upon a line of Sociodemographic indicators, which rest themselves upon the HHS subsystem (bottom on the left), and Religiosity (bottom on the right). In this Buddhist population, the Loving Kindness field (well connected) dominates the whole structure and rests upon/rises from the social territory formed by sociodemographic, happiness-health-satisfaction, and religious indicators. In Japan, we find a very simple, yet stylish, and weak structure. Most indicators of JE are not part of the network, they are not connected at this significant level, with the only exception of Wealth Good for all. On the right side of the network there is a well-connected JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 18 subgroup of LC, linked to the rest of the system by Importance of Religion (top) and Sociodemographic variables (Age, Social class). The HHS group is at the very bottom of the structure, linked to social class and income but with no direct relation with any LK indicators. Loving Kindness in Japan is mostly formed by the interaction among Love Compassion indicators. Among these, Importance to Help and Care for People and the Environment are the most central in the whole system.
JAPAN (GRAPH 14) (gt r: 0,2)
Loving Kindness is directly connected to Religion and Sociodemographic variables, but not to Happiness-Health-Satisfaction. Loving Kindness in South Korea is a large, dense, and complete network. The bottom part of the structure is occupied by a large group of LC and JE variables creating a solid structure of LK combining meanings and practices. The other extreme of the network, top left, is occupied by LC action indicators (membership and active participation in civil organizations). Both parts (and extremes) are linked by a large group of HHS, Sociodemographic and Religion indicators. In this case, the complete mix of LK indicators, of meanings and practices needs of the linking role of what we called the social territory (Sociodemographics, Religion, HHS).
SOUTH KOREA (GRAPH 15) (gt r: 0,2)
Loving Kindness in the Buddhist of Hong Kong takes the form of a small structure with a very little LK sector (Graph 16). Most LK indicators are not connected at this JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 19 statistically significant level, they do not have a significant relation or influence. The social territory here is a very cohesive and strong base from where a thin and weak line of LC and JE rises, from Care for the Environment to Social Closure. It is also worth noting the central linking/grounding role played by the base of the weak LK, Care for the Environment. On the social territory, the most central and connecting elements are Social Class and Education along with Health. Thin line of LK rising from strong grounding social territory.
HONG KONG (GRAPH 16) (gt r: 0,2)
LK in India unfolds as a large connected network (Graph 17). LC and JE indicators are interconnected creating a large group wrapped by HHS, Religion and Sociodemographics. In India, what we defined as social territory acts as a holding space for a large LK. It is worth noting too, the centrality role played by Importance of Religion and Importance to Care for the Environment, on the LK space, and Life Satisfaction and Education from the social territory.
INDIA (GRAPH 17) (gt r: 0,4)
The comparison of these structures shows that in most cases LK takes the shape of a compact and connected structure, which is wrapped and/or held by the social territory (Sociodemographics, Religion, Happiness-Health-Satisfaction). With the exception of China, the social territory does not play a gluing role for LK, but it has a host, fertile ground, role, where Loving Kindness takes place. Japan and Hong Kong stand out by their very thin and simple structures. The ones in China, Taiwan, South Korea and India are very compact and dense. Loving Kindness dimension is the dominant substructure in Taiwan, Malaysia and India. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 20
Global comparison To complete the study I look into the Loving Kindness social structures for the entire Buddhist population and the overall survey population. The structure taken by LK for the entire Buddhist population resembles a humanoid figure with a body, a head, two short arms, and a triangular base. The large and strongly connected body results from the interconnection of R, HHS and Sociodemographics. The head and the extremities are groups of LK elements. The head, the largest of the hanging substructures, is made up of Trust indicators and Importance of Others. The head represent meanings here. The arms imply action, of doing things for others on the right, and of openness and interaction with others on the left. The base of the whole system is Love and Care for Others and the Environment.
GENERAL BUDDHIST POPULATION (GRAPH 17) (gt r: 0,15)
For the entire Buddhist population, the social territory elements take shape as a strong body with guiding (head) and action (extremities) parts composed of LK ingredients. The body plays a fundamental role connecting Meanings with Practices, head with extremities. Values need the linking social dimensions of the body to materialize into social action. The social structure of LK for the overall population (represented by the survey) takes the form of four groups of variables, three of which are linked together forming a larger structure, and one is isolated on the left. The top structure is a large group of LK combining all the ingredients of JE (trust and social openness) with Importance of others (family, friends). It is dominated by Meanings. In the middle, right there is a large structure of HHS and Sociodemographics from which a small social LC action group (memberships and activity in organizations) emerges. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 21
OVERALL POPULATION (GRAPH 18) (gt r: 0,15)
On the bottom left, the religious group hangs from weak links to the other two substructures. Religion does not play a significant role here, even though it is connected, weakly, to the two larger subgroups. For the overall global population the social structure of Loving Kindness takes form, uniting meanings and practices (values becoming practices) thanks to the mediating role of Education and Satisfaction with life.
Comparing overall Buddhist with overall population They represent two different models of Loving Kindness. In the Buddhist model, the meaning and practice parts of LK are united thanks to the linking role of the social territory (S, R, and HHS). In the overall population model, LK is fragmented. This main difference emerges from the different role played by Religion. Religion plays a key role in the Buddhist model uniting the head with the body, while it is marginal in the population model. In fact, the group of LC, which is isolated in the fragmented overall population structure, is the base of the Buddhist structure and is linked to the main body thanks to a Religion element (To Think about Meaning of Life). Overall, Loving Kindness is more articulated and united in the Buddhist model than in the population model (due to the role of Religion and Spirituality).
Conclusions: This paper has focused on the complex ways Buddhism lives in the values, attitudes and actions of Buddhist people nowadays. Using survey data, and combining and fusing methodological and conceptual approaches (classical ego centered and lineal causality, MDS and HCA, with newer relational and non-lineal intercausality and SNA) it uncovers a piece of the Buddhist social, cognitive, and action world. The exploration of how Loving Kindness is embedded in those values, attitudes and actions has resulted in social maps where physical distances, between countries, have been substituted by social distances. These social maps provide a new cartography of Buddhist in the ASEAN Region and neighboring Asian countries. In the map of the social territory, union of sociodemographics with life and religious indicators, the ASEAN countries are spatially separated and placed in two of the three existing clusters of countries that divide the space/territory. Vietnam is in one cluster and JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 22
Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia are together in another. In the Loving Kindness social field, the four countries of the ASEAN Region are spread through the three clusters giving form to two general models of Loving Kindness. One represents a more open approach towards others in general, including environment (Thailand, Vietnam, China) and the other, spread throughout Singapore, Malaysia and the other countries, is more centered on close relational circles (family, friends, known people). The second part of the paper uncovers the social structure of Loving Kindness as the systems of relations and mutual influence of variables forming the social territory and the Loving Kindness social field. In three of four countries of the ASEAN Region studied, Loving Kindness becomes an interconnected structure thanks to the bridging and gluing role played by the social territory. In Malaysia and the other countries, however, the social territory hosts and nurtures LK, it does not play a gluing role. In either case, values/meanings need the linking or nurturing social dimensions to materialize into actions/practices. The comparison of the overall Buddhist population with the overall survey population indicates Loving Kindness is more articulated and united in the Buddhist model than in the population model thanks to the key linking role of Religion and Spirituality. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 23
References: Bell, I.P (1979) “Buddhist Sociology: Some Thoughts on the Convergence of Sociology and Eastern Paths of Liberation” in Scott G. McNall, ed. Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology. New York: St Martin’s Press. Borg, I., Groenen, P. (2005). Modern Multidimensional Scaling: theory and applications (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. SAGE Publications Limited. Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. 2002. Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies. Cox, T.F., Cox, M.A.A. (2001). Multidimensional Scaling. Chapman and Hall. Geshe Kesang Gyatso, Eight Steps to Happiness: The Buddhist Way of Loving Kindness .Tharpa Publications; 2 edition (May 1, 2014) Guruge, A., Buddhist Answers to Current Issues: Studies in Socially Engaged Humanistic Buddhism. AuthorHouse, 2005 Hanh, Thich Nhat, Thich Hhat Hanh’s Sociological Imagination: Essays and Commentaries on Engaged Buddhism. Human Architecture, 2009 Hastie, Trevor; Tibshirani, Robert; Friedman, Jerome (2009). “14.3.12 Hierarchical clustering”. The Elements of Statistical Learning (2nd ed.). New York: Springer Heine, S. & Prebish, C. Buddhism in the Modern World: Adaptations of an Ancient Tradition. Oxford University Press, 2003. Inglehart R. and Wayne E. Baker (2000): Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values, American Sociological Review , Vol. 65, No. 1 Inglehart, R., Basáñez, M., Díez-Medrano, J., Halman, L. & Luijkx, R. (2004). Human beliefs and values. A cross-cultural sourcebook based on the 1999-2002 values surveys. México: Siglo XXI Editores. Kaufman, L.; Rousseeuw, P.J. (1990). Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis (1 ed.). New York: John Wiley. Kruskal, J. B., and Wish, M. (1978), Multidimensional Scaling, Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Application in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications. Loyd D., The Great Awakening: A Buddhist Social Theory. NY. Wisdom Publications, 1997 Mohr, John, and Vincent Duqenne. 1997. “The Duality of Culture and Practice” Theory and Society 26:305-356. Pew Research Center, The Global Religious Landscape. December 2012: http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-exec/ Rodríguez, J.A. , “Being Buddhist in New Lands: Mapping Buddhist Social-Cultural Identities” in IABU, Teaching Dhamma in New Lands: Academic Papers presented at the 2nd IABU, Ayutthaya, Thailand (Bangkok, Thailand: Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University, 2012). JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 24
Rodríguez Díaz. José A. “ Being Buddhist in the XXI Century Society. A Sociological Analysis of Buddhist People Social Values and Attitudes” in M.V. Dr. Thich Nhat Tu and M.V. Dr. Thich Duc Then (editors), Buddhism for Sustainable Development and Social Change. Ho Chi Minh: Religion Press. Vietnam Buddhist Universities Series 21, 2014. Schipper, Janine, “Toward a Buddhist Sociology: Theories, Methods, and Possibilities”. American Sociologist, v43 n2 p203-222 Jun 2012. Sharon Salzberg, Lovingkindness: The Revolutionary Art of Happiness. Shambhala Classics, 2002. Wasserman, Stanley y K. Faust, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994). World Values Survey, WVS 2005-2007: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/ JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 25 JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 36
Evaluating the “Unconscious in Dream” between Sigmund Freud and the Buddhist Tipiṭaka
P.B. Tan Mahidol University, Thailand
Introduction Sigmund Freud, based on his clinical psychoanalysis, distinguished three different systems of psyche: ‘unconscious’, ‘preconscious’, and ‘conscious’ and relate them to the respective concepts of ‘id’, ‘ego’, and ‘superego’. A constant movement of impulses of stored unconscious data is passing from the ‘id’ to the ‘ego’ and becoming ‘preconscious’, and through the efforts of the ‘ego’, undergo the modification process and become ‘conscious’. The unconscious system is the source origin of memory data that transmit to the preconscious system and the conscious system. The Preconscious and Conscious items were all evolved from the Unconscious. The preconscious is involved with data retained in the ‘id’ that can readily be brought to conscious form. The preconscious mind rejects all the undesired elements Freud called ‘defenses’ - to deny elements of the Unconscious (all that are uncertain or unknown) in order to safeguard our self-esteem, self-ego, etc. The ‘superego’, which is at least partially conscious, serves as a censor on the ego functions and comprises the individual’s awareness of the present perceptions, feelings, and thoughts, towards family and society, at any particular moment. Freud uses the term ‘unconscious’ in several ways, but the term is used primarily to designate a functional system of the mind which acts as an archive of memory data, and exists independently of the individual’s conscious awareness. Dreams and slips of the tongue are examples of the unconscious. To find an exact term from the Buddhist corpus to match Freud’s notion of the Unconscious would be futile, except finding only its surface meaning used to describe general situations. However, there may be some terms or a grouping of them, which come closer to it.
The ‘unconscious’ in the Id and the Ego Freud’s theory postulated the ‘unconscious’ as both a repository for repressed traumatic memories (for example, the ‘Oedipal Complex’) as well as the stimuli source of inducing anxiety to individual from certain socially or ethically unacceptable behaviors (for example, an offence of a religious taboo). These unconscious events are not directly observable. In the following sections, I shall extend the explanation of ‘unconscious’ to include its other peculiarities and the Buddhist renderings for it.
Characteristics of the ‘Id’ Freud describes the characteristics of id as: an impulse to get satisfaction for instinctual needs with no recognition of the passage of time; it has no negatives but its content elements are energized with either greater or lesser strength. It is interesting how Freud explains this degree of intensity of the id content:
“…no means of showing the ego either love or hate. It cannot say what it wants; it has achieved no unified will. Eros [sexual instinct] and the death instinct struggle JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 37
within it; we have seen with what weapons the one group of instincts defends itself against the other.”1
This aspect of the id-forces of unconscious is precisely the point I made, according to the Abhidhamma, how our latently stored mental concomitants will behave:
“... joint-forces by several factors to achieve a common purpose; the good supplementation and harmonization of isolated qualities were used mistakenly as the opposing forces instead of using as supporting forces.”2
Pleasure Principle and Death Instinct The unconscious system of the ‘id’ works on the “Pleasure Principle”, demanding immediate gratification of its urges, to the extent of even disregard the undesirable effects (for example, stealing, rape, incest). The id unconscious elements also act on the “Death Instinct” of dangers or obsessional neurosis, either as ways of defusing them, emotionally unmoved, or acting confrontationally as Freud describes it:
“… instinctual diffusion and the marked emergence of the death instinct call for particular consideration among the effects of some severe neuroses3; …and death instincts are in part “rendered harmless by being fused with erotic components, …diverted towards the external world in form of aggression, …continued in their internal work unhindered.”4
The ‘ego’ operates mainly in conscious and preconscious levels, but it also contains unconscious elements because both the ‘ego’ and the ‘superego’ are also furnished by the ‘id’. The ‘ego’ works on the ‘reality principle’ which takes the most strains to either satisfy or deny the id urges as soon they arise, and simultaneously respond to the restraints imposed by the ‘superego’ or reality of the physical world. The function of the ‘ego’ is liken to an arbitrator, controlling and organizing the id instincts, as well as balancing the conflicting drives of both ‘id’ and ‘superego’. Inappropriate desires are not satisfied will be suppressed by the ego and these repressed memories are retained in the unconscious ‘id’.
The unconscious neuroses of ‘Rebirth’ Freud also mentions the clinical implications of the unconscious notion of ‘Rebirth’. Freud’s attributes the phantasy of ‘rebirth’ to the imaginative life of the neurotics such as the mutilated version of the homosexual wishful phantasy, and in another euphemism, the phantasy of incestuous intercourse with the mother or father (the womb-phantasy).5 Freud’s notion of the unconscious ‘rebirth’ is a psychoanalytic approach to neuroses. In contrast, the Buddhist explanation of the unconscious in its sense of the afterlife and rebirth, could be quite surprising. According to Tibetan Buddhism:
1 Smith, Ivan (compiled, 2011), Freud, Sigmund (auth), Strachey, James & Freud, Anna (ed.). The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. “The Ego and the Id” (UK: Hogarth Press, 1974), p. 3992. 2 P.B. Tan. An Anatomy of Mind. Being Essence of the Dhammasaṅgaṇi in Abhidhamma. (Germany: Grin Publishing, 2015), p. 231. 3 Smith, Ivan (compiled, 2011), Freud, Sigmund (author), Strachey, James & Freud, Anna (ed.). The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. “The Ego And The Id” (UK: Hogarth Press, 1974), p. 3975. 4 ibid., p. 3988. 5 Smith, Ivan (compiled 2011), Freud, Sigmund (author), Strachey, James & Freud, Anna (ed.). The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. “From The History Of An Infantile Neurosis”. (UK: Hogarth Press, 1974), p. 3579-3580. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 38
“…after having been unconscious for up to three and a half days, you will be awaken from unconsciousness and wonder, “What has happened to me?” So, recognize this to be the intermediate state [bardo]…”6; “…If you are to be born as a male… If you are to be born as a female… experience the perceptions… [Emotional arousal] will cause you to enter a womb… in the midst of the meeting between the sperm and the ovum. From that state of bliss you will faint into unconsciousness, and as time passes, the embryo will come to maturity in the womb …”7
It is not easy to find the best rendering of the Freudian version of ‘unconscious’ in the Buddhist literature as there is no direct parallel. I will include these terms as the closest for discussion: bhavaṅga (the factor of becoming or existence); anusaya (the underlying tendency); sava (the metaphorical “canker” or “intoxicant”).
The idea of ‘Collective Unconscious’ Interestingly, Freud comes up with the notion of ‘collective unconscious’8 but no significant progress had been made as it was not easy to translate the concepts of individual psychology into group psychology. Similarly, very little had been mentioned in the Buddhist doctrines about the topic of “collective unconscious”, which I presume it to have a direct relationship to the aggregate of “kamma”, of either the individual or the collective mode as group. The research on “collective unconscious” should be a profound and rewarding attempt.
The concept of Bhavaṅga When we keyword-search for the term ‘bhavaṅga’ in the Theravada Tipitaka, we can see the term appearing in only two collections - mainly however: inside the Abhidhamma.
9
Whenever the mind is in a state such as a dreamless deep sleep, or at the final moment of death, or right after the end of every thought process, or stop receiving a fresh external object or thought-freed (vīthimutta), we say the mind is in the state of ‘bhavaṅga’. Thus, we can also say bhavaṅga acts like a buffer as it arises and perishes between two consecutive thought-process. Nyanaponika Thera likens bhavaṅga to ‘subconscious’, ‘stored-up memory’, ‘kamma’, ‘rebirth’, ‘life-continuum’, which seem closer to the Freudian sense of the dynamic ‘unconscious’:
“Since time immemorial, all impressions and experiences are, as it were, stored up, or better said, are functioning, but concealed as such to full consciousness, from where however they occasionally emerge as subconscious phenomena and approach the threshold of full consciousness, or crossing it become fully conscious. This so- called ‘subconscious life-stream’ or undercurrent of life is that by which might be explained the faculty of memory, paranormal psychic phenomena, mental and
6 Padmasambhava (comp.), Gyurme Dorje (trans.), Graham Coleman & Thupten Jinpa (ed.). The Tibetan Book of the Dead. (US: Penguin Group, 2005), p. 236. 7 Ibid., p. 289-290. 8 Freud, Sigmund (auth.), Jones, Katherine (trans). Moses And Monotheism (UK: Hogarth Press, 1939), p. 208 9 Thank you to Dr. Dion Peoples, the editor of the JIABU, for doing a keyword-search on the Digital P li Reader Firefox browser-software, for this term, and for providing a screenshot of the authentic results, and for making a correction in my text to reflect the accuracy of the information. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 39
physical growth, karma and rebirth, etc. An alternative rendering is ‘life- continuum’.”10
S.Z. Aung and Mrs. Rhys Davids view bhavaṅga as a functional moment of subconsciousness, a subliminal consciousness, but disagree for it to be treated as a sub- plane from which thought emerge from the substrate to surface:
“Bhavaṅga means function… a functional state or moment of subconsciousness… below the threshold’ of consciousness by which we conceive continuous subjective existence as possible. … a flow of momentary states of subliminal consciousness… constitutes the stream of being… The stream is liable to be interrupted constantly by thought… it cannot be regarded as a sub-plane from which thoughts ‘rise to the surface’.” 11
In my view, bhavaṅga does not correspond to a sub-plane; it is not a subliminal consciousness, nor is it a functional state of subconscious existence. The author’s description as “below the threshold” of consciousness, and “continuous subjective existence” is suggesting the coexistence of subconscious and consciousness, but there are no two types of consciousness that can coexist according to Abhidhamma - they arise and perish in an infinitesimal split-moment. The following illustration of bhavaṅga by Mrs. Rhys Davids as a vibrating node in two consecutive thought-moments (second and third) of the total seventeen thought-moments (khaṇa) would totally rule out bhavaṅga as a repository of either the subconscious or unconscious:
“…in every such act, seventeen moments or flashes of consciousness took place, each moment being considered to involve the three time-phases of all ‘becoming’ namely, a nascent, static and dissolving phase … after one citta-moment (1) has passed, enters the avenue [or focus] of sight, the life-continuum (bhavanga) vibrating twice (2) (3) … then seven flashes of full perception, or apperception (javana) (9- 15); finally, if the percept is sufficiently vivid, two moments of retention or registering consciousness (16, 17) … After that comes subsidence into the life- continuum [bhavaṅga].”12
Dr. O. H. De A. Wijesekera concludes that ‘bhavaṅga’ can be equated with Freud’s notion of the id forces of unconscious:
“At the non-empirical state, viññ na is unconscious and becomes conscious only when confronted by the objective world in the perceptual process… Freud’s concept of the human psyche consisting of id-forces and the Unconscious may therefore be considered to a large extent parallel to the Buddhist notion of bhavaṅga which, according to our understanding, is constituted by the saṅkh ras or physical forces combined with viññ na which in the empirical state appears as consciousness which Freud attributed to the ego or the empirical agent.”13
10 Nyanaponika Thera. Buddhist Dictionary: Manual of Buddhist Terms & Doctrines. (Kandy: BPS, 1980),p. 70 11 S. Z. Aung (trans.), Mrs. Rhys Davids (eds.). Compendium of Philosophy: Being a Translation of Abhidhammattha- Sangaha. (Oxford: PTS, 1910), p. 266-267. 12 Mrs. C. A. F. Rhys Davids. Buddhist Psychology… (London: G. Bell & Sons, 1914), p. 180-181. 13 O.H. de A. Wijesekera (1979). The Freudian Unconscious and Bhavaṅga. The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Vol. 1, p. 65-66. JIABU, Vol. 9 No. 1, 2016 40
In my view, this is confusing. At the non-empirical state (or prior to the first vibrating bhavaṅga), not only is viññ na stays at unconscious, the saṅkh ras are also in unconscious. Saṅkh ras are not physical forces but is the term designated in Suttanta, and for which in Abhidhamma are being translated into 50 mental factors excluding vedan (feeling) and saññ (perception). It is perhaps only true to say that, according to Theravada Abhidhamma, some of the biased 52 mental factors arising with the different consciousness as a result of influence by corporeal objects (or mental visuals), and together as a whole constitute a working process similar to Freud’s notion of the empirical ego-forces.
Anusaya (latent tendency) The term ‘anusaya’ is seemed comparable to the Freudian id-forces. The PTS’s P li-English Dictionary defines ‘anusaya’ as: “bent, bias, proclivity, the persistence of a dormant or latent disposition, predisposition, and tendency. Always in bad sense.” According to the Yamaka in Abhidhamma, there are 7 latent tendencies of the: (1) sensual craving (k mar g nusaya), (2) aversion (paṭigh nusaya), (3) conceit (m n nusaya), (4) fallacy (diṭṭh nusaya), (5) scepticism (vicikicch nusaya), (6) craving for existence (bhavar g nusaya), (7) ignorance (avijjánusaya).14 These English renderings has the characteristics of the dormant and lurking tendencies, latent proclivities, thus making the term ‘anusaya’ closer to the Freudian sense of ‘unconscious’ repository.