Buddhism Today talk

8/10/2019 Buddhism Today talk

1/6

RELEVANCE OF BUDDHISM FOR EMANCIPATORY DISCOURSE

Dr. S. Lourdunathan, Dept of Philosophy, Arul Anandar College, Karumathur

Indian social history is inseparably interconnected with Buddhism both as culture

and liberation movement. The question namely How Buddhism be conceived as

constitutive of liberation potential/praxis is worth considering. The intention is not

to hurt ones psychological dispositions rather to de-construct our constructs in

order that better construct be plausible.

The sociology of Buddhism in India has manifold existential dimensions:

1. Ancient Buddhism but Caste Institutionalised: It exists strictly as an

institutional religion

exclusive of Hinduism

as Hinanyana and

Mahayana versions,

adhered and practices

within and beyond

the geography of

Northern India in the

tribal settings. Rituals,

institutional practices,

forms of worship, rules and regulations, Buddhists cannons, monasteries and

nunneries etc form the actual social world of this typology of Buddhism where in

Buddha, is deemed more than an historical person as Divine. Within this domain

of Buddhism, caste is not considered as anti-social and discriminatory but as part

and parcel of its religious/social ethos. For instance Ancient version of Buddhism

(as institutionalised practice) caste division is quite authenticated and followed.

2. Buddhism as Applied Hinduism or Advaitic Buddhism (Hindu Revivalism):

Within Indian philosophical social world view, Buddhism has been continuously

construed as an applied version of Hinduism. In this sense it is a kind of

reconstructed Hinduism or an extended form of Hinduism one may even call it


2/6

Applied Hinduism where in Buddhism is treated as yet another form inclusive

religion within the mosaic of Hindu religions. This is sort of an inclusive sense;

all encompassing strategy of reconstructive Hinduism. We locate two

subdivisions of this reconstructed or revived Hinduized forms of Buddhism.

Buddha pictured as one among the many Gods of Hinduism goes to evolve a sort

of devotional (bhakti) cult and there is its abridge version with in philosophical

category. The concept of Anatama, Anitya, Nirvana etc are almost equivalent to

the idea of Advaitic theory of world as maya or illusion and hence Buddhism is

sort of an extended version philosophical Hinduism. One may term it as the

Advaitic Buddhism. Most Indian Renaissance writings fall within this category of

Advaitic Buddhism which is but an condensed version of Advaita and

Buddhism.

3. Nietzsche Buddhism: Western thinking has also been attractive of Buddhism.

For instance the writings of Nietzsche especially The Anti-Christ. It consists of

the idea that the sayings of Jesus and Buddha largely share similar ideas and

Buddha being the forerunner within the Asian ethos, his insights has strong

reflections on Jesus sayings. Whereas the church as an institutionalised religion is

sort of an anti-Christ has adopted the Greek, Roman Ruling philosophy, a

particular form of political domination is in fact against very teachings of Jesus.

In the similar line, one can argue that the institutionalised Buddhism is sort of

Anti-Buddhism which has evolved over a period of history, inculcating the

politics of casteism and evolved into a culturally institutionalised form religion

and society. All the attempts to re-construct Buddhism within the national or

political boundaries of Hinduism could be viewed in terms Anti-Buddhism,

similar to that of Nitetzsches Anti Christ and the role of emancipation calls for

an emancipation of Buddhism (on an intellectual plane) from its false religious

identifications.

The question is when Indian scholars engage Buddhism as emancipator ethos, do

they discourse of the very emancipation of Buddhism from its Hindu

ramifications or are they simple adopt the rhetoric-logic that Buddhism is anti-


3/6

caste and anti-ritual and anti-superstitious and therefore viable to promote

liberation politics.

4. Ambedkarian Buddhism: We can also locate the Ambedkarian type of

Buddhism. Ambedkar Buddhism is again a constructed Buddhism, (though

different from the above mentioned Hindu re-constructions). It operates within

the boundaries of enlightenment morality or Indian modernity. Buddhism is a

religion that propels social change on the grounds of justice, liberty and fraternity

and all the more Buddhism is originates within Indian cultural soil. Within

Buddhism there is no caste. Hence viable of promoting liberation discourse. But

then the question is Indian Buddhism is either Hindu-Buddhism or it is a sort of

caste-inclusive ancient Buddhism. If and when conversion as a political strategy

of affirming the identity of the downtrodden and the untouchables, can

Buddhism contain the potentials of a caste-free liberation discourse? All the more

conversion to Buddhism raises yet another difficulty namely which version of

Buddhism one is to be converted? Can such conversion be constitutive of ones

religious ethos or mere a political strategy of reframing or refraining from caste-

Hindu politics? There is a lot of confusion here and the role of social intellectuals

is to clarify this kind of Ambedkarian Buddhist Call. More over one has to also

take note of the postmodern critique against the promises of modernity. The

postmodern sensibilities propel the idea that modernity is a failure in the sense of

not-able-to- reach its promised land, namely the land of liberty, and justice and

progress of society. Be it capitalist or Marxist, both fall within a category of an

over-arching rationality, a ruling rationality as if it is a objective and scientific

truth. But the question of truth, it is argued that it is subjective, conditioned and

therefore no-truth. Now the argument is this: if Ambedkars version of engaging

Buddhism on the grounds of modernity (secularism and Justice and democracy

etc) be taken seriously as a viable proposal, but when modernity itself can be

located of its own-failures, how could Ambedkar Buddhism with in the

parameters of modern democracy vouch for the liberation of the downtrodden

and the untouchables.


4/6


5/6

Lankan Buddhism can we call this militant National Buddhism, if so, what

about Buddhist tall ideals of Compassion and Brotherhood and non-injury.

9.

Inverted Colonial model: In the similar vein, one can see some parallels: India is

Hindu and Hindu is India and the rest should either be excluded or strategically

included. I do not want to blame certain fundamental camps alone for this

strategy. How about the evangelical politics? The entire globe is to be

evangelised, what is evangelised is holy/godly/Christian and what is not and

what lies outside the border of evangelization is sinful, pagan, and hence do

social works. I suspect it is the European Christian, the British Colonial, the

French-colonial imaginations that seeded this type patriotic cultural trans-

nationalism deep down it is discriminatory in nature. From where cultural

nationalism finds its Bethlehem.

10.The Psychological or Body Buddhism: There is also an untold sense of

Buddhism that seems to capturing the well-employed, sophisticated, the western,

and the rich. I may call it as the Body Buddhism. The Body Buddhism is the type

of culture which provides Zen Pills, Massage tastes, Relaxation techniques,

Restaurant Stays and pieces and bits of sensual nourishments. Those who are

educated to be employed to serve the profit interests of the transnational

corporations, seems to undergo heavy work-pressure. They do not have time to

think, critically engage or participate life rather they are calendarised within the

calendar-programme of the companies for the maximum turnover interest of

their employing companies. They are increasingly and educationally robbed of

their social mind, ethos and individuality and dignity. In that empty space these

minds are filled with programmes, projects and profits. These programmed life-

machines needs to be revived by the kind of Body-Buddhism, I mentioned above.

Can this Body Buddhism be emancipatory or just regulatory within the

mechanics of a technocracy?

11.

Ancient Buddhism is caste ridden; National Buddhism is militant and it can

shake hands with similar typologies of religion based national politics. Christian

Buddhism is all the more is deceitful and derogatory. Modern Buddhism of

Ambedkar is politically regulative but pragmatic to the extent of registering a


6/6

protest and it has not yielded a complete democracy. And democry is shattering

in terms of caste and power democracy upon the shoulders of technologically

acquired money power. Ayothidasar Buddhism similar to that Ambedarian in a

broad sense however the Dravidian roots as Buddhism adds to ones historical

glory, a sense of cultural pride; the Dravidian as linguistic and religious

connotations has paid its political party interests sufficiently and now-a-days, the

Dravidian party interests arguments of the calculations to continuous power by

modes of appropriations. Hence the issue is emancipation within the above

categories or schools of thought seems not-that-promising for the downtrodden.

So where are we and where we are heading towards?

12.The intellectual foundations of Buddhism when perceived as a category of

protest against the forms of discrimination and oppression, tracing either to its

ancient history or to Ambedkarian engagement of Buddhism, I believe, needs to

be further evidenced and evaluated. One cannot escape the postmodern criticism

as well.

13.All the above positions I place before you -many of you are day-to-day writers in

Tamil leading journals and magazines, and I am not a writer by profession except

a reader and an analyst not with the idea of weakening your political or social

or religious involvement the arguments are raised with the view re-locating

your political position in augmenting Buddhism as viable movement in terms of

anti-caste movement.

Amen

Documents

Buddhism Today talk