站內檢索
Interpreting the "Humanistic" in Renjian Fojiao (人間佛教) as Advocated by Venerable Master Hsing Yun of Fo Guang Shan
Humanistic Buddhism in the Digital Age: Make Truth Great Again!
The new religion of the 21st century is turning out to be dataism. First mentioned by New York Times columnist David Brooks in 2013, the data revolution enables human cognition to be augmented by algorithms that could work on all kinds of information (Brooks 2013). In dataism, the value of humans or an enterprise is assessed by their ability to contribute to data processing. This may seem surprising to some of you in the audience but perhaps, a question may confirm this fact. If you were to employ an administrative assistant, would you choose one who can use the mobile phone to help you manage your busy calendar, employ the latest software to turn your ideas into stunning presentations, and churn out reports as you speak with voice-recognition technology or one who slowly punches on a keyboard and still rely on shorthand to take minutes? Alright, you may say that history has seen many jobs being replaced and people simply must learn new skills. However, what we are about to experience in the Fourth Industrial Revolution or Digital Age is not only a simple paradigm shift.
The Future of North American Buddhism: An Appeal to Expand Humanistic Buddhism Study beyond Chinese Custom and Culture
This is a humbling experience, to be among noted historians and scholars attending this, the 7th Symposium on Humanistic Buddhism. I told myself that I can either be intimidated, wonder what of value I would have to contribute, or just “go forth” and share my experiences, thoughts and conclusions. Plus, I have the audacity to request that you study the needs of the West, thereby giving direction to Fo Guang Shan local temples and their Chinese communities. Therefore, I will share my personal observations and what I think can be done to further the efforts being made. Please consider this a “front line” view as I see Westerners seeking a path, sometimes finding it, sometimes wandering away, and sometimes discouraged from remaining.
Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm
One could translate the Chinese term commonly rendered “Humanistic Buddhism” more literally as “Buddhism in the Human Realm” (renjian fojiao 人間佛教). The term “human realm” (renjian 人間) has both an everyday meaning in modern Chinese and a more expansive technical Buddhist meaning. In everyday parlance, it means “the human world,” “humanity,” or “social relations,” and within a modern scientific world view, humanity exists in only one place—the planet Earth. Hence, English-language texts sometimes render the term “Humanistic Buddhism” as “Earthly Buddhism.” In traditional Chinese Buddhist texts, however, the term has a more specialized, technical meaning arising from premodern Buddhist cosmology. In this context, it indicates one in a list of five or six possible paths of rebirth. To be reborn in the human realm means that one’s past karma has led to rebirth as a human being, and in Buddhist cosmology, the Earth is not the only place where humans reside. The fact that the term renjian has different definitions in these two contexts has led to some confusion when scholars confront the terms “Humanistic Buddhism” and “The Pure Land in the Human Realm” (renjian jingtu 人間淨土). Variations in the way Buddhists and scholars understand the meaning and purpose of Humanistic Buddhism only compound the confusion.
The Relationship Between Buddhism and Chinese Culture
Buddhist culture is part of Chinese traditional culture. The issue of culture has recently become a hot topic of discussion in intellectual and cultural circles. Concerning this discussion, my understanding is shallow and my thoughts immature. However, I believe that the development of human culture is a continuous process, thus traditional and contemporary culture cannot be completely separated. We should draw out all the valuable essentials of traditional culture to enrich and develop a socialist-oriented national culture. My view is that traditional Chinese culture should also include Buddhist culture. At present, there is a biased opinion of equating the former with Confucian culture, and entirely eradicating the role and contribution of Buddhist culture in traditional Chinese culture. This is unfair and not reflective of historical facts.
When Mahāyāna Meets Theravāda: Humanistic Buddhism’s Challenges and Opportunities in Myanmar
From 15 to 17 February 2017, the United Association of Humanistic Buddhism of Chunghua (Zhonghua renjian fojiao lianhe zonghui 中華人間佛教聯合總會) organized a visit to Myanmar for a three-day meeting regarding harmony and dialogue between Mahāyāna and Theravāda Buddhism (Liang’an nanbei chuan fojiao ronghe jiaoliu fangwen zhi lu 兩岸南北傳佛教融合交流訪問之旅). As well as being noteworthy for uniting Mahāyāna and Theravāda Buddhist Schools, this crosstraditional exchange was important due to the involvement of the National Saṃgha Committee Chairman, Venerable Bamaw Sayadaw Dr. Bhadanta Kumarabhivamsa; other well-known senior Burmese monks; and Myanmar government officials. During their stay in Yangon, the monastic delegates joined in various activities including the Thousand-candle Offering, a forum on Educational Exchange on Mahāyāna and Theravāda Teachings, and visits to monasteries, Buddhist educational institutions and sites of historical interest in the company of Burmese monks and laypeople. Additonally, Tipitakadhara Sayadaw U Sundara guided them in the Vipassanā Meditation. To an extent, then, the group of delegates from Taiwan and Mainland China experienced Theravāda practices. Afterwards, Ven. Foxing from the Buddhist College of Minnan and Julia Jin, president of the Merit Times, each wrote on the possibilities for Mahāyāna and Theravāda union in the house periodical of the Fo Guang Shan Institute of Humanistic Buddhism.
Mapping Fo Guang Shan and the Spread of Humanistic Buddhism
With over 250 temples throughout the world, Fo Guang Shan (FGS) has emerged as a global Buddhist movement and significant force in the spread of Humanistic Buddhism. In this talk, I will demo an interactive map of FGS temples (existing and retired) developed by the project team at the Institute for the Study of Humanistic Buddhism at the University of the West. The map is constructed using QGIS technology and includes basic information for each temple (name, address, GPS coordinates) and a sliding timeline by which the user can view the historical spread of FGS temples across the world. QGIS allows for additional layers in which the user can also develop their own components (e.g., Taiwan’s population and GDP growth) and visually analyze the relationship of other data to the base map. As such, the interface provides scholars with a powerful research tool and significant starting point that can be used to investigate the geo-social dimensions of Buddhist institutions and understand the factors that have contributed to the growth of Humanistic Buddhism.
Transcending Borders: Using Regional and Ethnographic Studies to Envision the Future of Humanistic Buddhism
Ellison Onizuka (1946-1986) made this observation upon viewing the Earth from Space Shuttle Discovery in 1985. A National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) astronaut, Onizuka became the first Asian-American and the first Buddhist to reach space. Raised as a Shin Buddhist in Hawaii affiliated with the Kona Hongwanji, Onizuka was struck by the lack of boundaries or borders—political, racial, or egoistic—visible from such a distance.
Humanistic Buddhism and Contemporary Chinese Art
As we enter into the third decade of the twenty-first century, at least two observations can be made. On the one hand, the human condition faces its own extinction as artificial intelligence and climate change substitute basic human habits and habitats. These substitutions simulate—but can arguably never replace—natural human ones. It is not surprising, then, that fundamental aspects of the human world buried by progress into the ashcan of history have risen from the dead. The current renewal of human tribalism and authoritarian systems challenge assumptions of what “progress” and “modernity” as defined by Western Enlightenment is and can be. Indeed, cultural critics have discussed the phenomenon of postmodernity as characterizing the late twentieth century. Can we speak of neo-tradition and post-progress as veins running through the early twenty-first century? We clearly feel the pulse of these veins, but remain unsure of their paths or purpose.