Wonderbread Dharma

I've taken a few minutes out of my schedule to catch up on some friends blogs (in case you don't know of them, check out Danny Fisher, Dreaming of Danzan Ravjaa, Dharma Folk and the others under "Blogger Buddies" at right).  I just read an interesting post by arunlikhati at Dharma Folk entitled Angry Asian Buddhist.  Arunlikhati is, I believe, of Southeast Asian extration and sometimes points out the incredible ethnocentrism of the White Buddhist establishment.  In this post, arunlikhati writes about an article in Buddhadharma called The future of Buddhism in a post-baby boomer world (follow the link for the original article). 

Arunlikhati (and I keep typeing the name instead of using a pronoun because I'm unsure of his/her gender identity) I think rightly points out how insulting this article is.  I'm a cracker white guy myself (check arunlikhati's comment for the etymology of the term "cracker." I thought it had to do with actual crackers that we eat becuase, like Saltines, they're basically white.  I feel dumb.) and I'm suprised at how brazenly this article values (largely white) convert Buddhist over the traditions practiced within the Asian-American community, not to mention Buddhism in Asia.  Arunlikhati states:

Buddhism in America is headed for exciting times, agreed the four esteemed participants — Sumi Loundon Kim, Rod Meade Sperry, Iris Brilliant and Norman Fischer. They discussed the separate communities of formal convert Buddhists and casual Buddhists-by-affiliation. Also mentioned were emerging trends, such as a need for innovation, the hunger for engaged Buddhism and the mixture of Buddhism and modern technology. But what did they not mention?

Asians. In fact, the esteemed moderator Barry Boyce makes clear from the outset that he just doesn’t want to talk about Asian Buddhists. He wants to talk about the Buddhists “who did not inherit it as a part of their ethnic background.” In other words: not Asians.

...

It’s insulting for a magazine like Buddhadharma to discuss the future of the Buddhist community in America without talking about Asian Americans. We’re not some alien species in the Buddhist community — we brought Buddhism to America. We’ve been practicing Buddhism on American soil for well over a century. We speak English, we have youth groups, we go on retreats and we do all the other crazy Buddhist stuff that white people do and more. Unfortunately, it seems we’re just not white enough for even an honorable mention.

While I can curse this article to no end, the Buddhadharma discussion finally opened my eyes to the way that white Buddhists see the Buddhist community. Dharma centers, sitting groups, meditation retreats, lay teachers, Free Tibet mailing lists and Buddhism-themed magazines are all part and parcel of white Buddhist culture. And white Buddhists want to preserve this. They want to build on this. But I can see that working with Asian Americans isn’t part of the plan.

...

At one point, arunlikhati says, "...even if the participants aren’t racist...."  However, I'd have to say the whole tone of the article is in fact racist.  By devaluing the Asian-American approach to the Dharma in such a blatant fashion and presenting the (again, largley white) convert version as the future of the Dharma in the West--by making such a value statement, this view of the Dharma in the West is in fact racist.  Let's call it like it is.

Follow the links above to read the original article and the post about it on Dharma Folk.  If we cast out the Asian Buddhists on these shores how can we lement the lack of diversity in our convert communities as is so often the case?  I think those who have been deemed the leaders of the convert Buddhist community in the West are often speaking out both sides of their mouths.  "We want diversity, as long as you're white like us."  Ugh!

UPDATE:  Check out this post over at Shambhala Sun (the same company publishes both Shambhala Sun and Buddhadharma) by Barry Boyce, who moderated the panel discussion in question.

Comments

[Konchog Norbu]

I have to disagree with the beef here. Articles have focuses, and the focus of this one was Dharma culture as it's emerged for American-born baby boomers -- fermented in the 70's and 80's -- and where that culture's headed now that the first wave is aging and dying. So what? Another article with a different focus might explore the evolution of culturally Asian Buddhism that found its way to America via immigrants. Somewhere in there might be the issue of how the culture gap has persisted between the two Dharma cultures in America. That would be interesting to explore, but it's not the remit of the article at hand. To be fair though, I just read the intro offered, and haven't seen the discussion.

You have to admit Iris Brilliant is a fabulous name.

[Marcus]

Hi,

I certainly think 'western' Buddhism need to be tied to 'Asian' lineages for a long time to come, and the way Buddhism is actually practiced in Asia ought never be overlooked.

But I totally disagree with the idea expressed in the article that "white Buddhism is developing into a culture of oppression".

I mean, oppression? Oppression? Are you serious? And this claim is made on the basis of one article in one magazine. Arunlikhati gives no examples that he himself has come across, just this one single article.

Are white Buddhists banning books, refusing to let Asians speak, chasing them from the temples, arrests, imprisonment, segregation?

I think the author should be able to make a strong point by all means. But A Buddhist really must avoid crying wolf. Don't exaggerate. And be careful not to cause division.

Marcus

[Marcus]

I've just read the article Arunlikhati is so angry about over and over again and just don't get it. I can't see the quote he uses from it (The Buddhists in North America referred to as “convert Buddhists” — those who did not inherit it as a part of their ethnic background — are largely baby boomers. Are enough younger people coming up through the ranks to sustain healthy Buddhist communities? ) and even if I could I don't see the problem.

This article is an introduction to a forum discussion about ageing 'white' Buddhist world. It's not excluding Asians, it just happens to be about one particular aspect of the broad Buddhist community. And I am 100% certain that issues of Asian'Western Buddhism and Buddhists will come up in the forum of which this article is just a taster.

[arunlikathi]

Thanks for this blog, Ven. Rinchen Gyatso. I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who felt this way. Be careful of using the term cracker -- I'm not sure if you know it, but a cracker is the man on the plantation who cracks the whip. Indeed it's a derogatory word, but it's a derogatory word for "the oppressor."

I got an email later from one of the participants who told me that the issue had been raised about putting an Asian American Buddhist on the panel. But the editor wanted to focus on convert/white Buddhists. Indeed, as Marcus said, they might to a piece on Asian American Buddhists for a future issue.

[Janet C]

I'm Asian, Buddhist, and lived in the US, and I don't know if I'm betraying my demographic but I just couldn't get mad at the article. I left a comment on my American experiences at the Angry Asian Buddhist post.

Now, part of my problem may be that I don't actually want to get mad!

[Marcus]

Hi,

Some questions:

(1) There are Korean (or any other nationality) temples in America run by Koreans in which everything is conducted in Korean.

Should I, as a white Buddhist, be angry?
Is this a 'culture of oppression'?

(2) There are Korean temples in Korea run by Koreans with no non-Koreans at all in any official temple positions.

Should I, as a white Buddhist, be angry?
Is this a 'culture of oppression'?

(3) There are Korean temples in Thailand run by Koreans in which everything is conducted in Korean and the only Thai people you see are those paid to sweep the yard.

Should I, as a white Buddhist (or any Thai interested in Korean Buddhism) be angry?
Is this a 'culture of oppression'?

(4) There are Buddhist magazines in America that are developing a kind of 'western Buddhism' and which have recently addressed the issue of youth and Buddhism but they didn't mention asians.

Should I be angry?
Is this a 'culture of oppression'?

--------------

I'd suggest the answer to each question be 'no'.

[Rinchen Gyatso]

Wow. I'm glad this generated so much discussion and I agree with much of what has been said. For me, though, this article is a sympton of a larger problem in the convert community in the West in which the Asian tradition is simply edited out of the equation. I don't feel angry about it, though, just disappointed. Ven. Konchog is right that there may be another article with a different focus, but where are those articles? The problem is that Asian-American Buddhist communities are routinely ignored by the convert community. So this one article in an of itself isn't terrible, but for me it's a symptom of a very real problem. I also think there's a very real sentiment among many in the American convert community (I can't speak for Europe) that "we're the ones really doing Buddhism while those Asians just do empty rituals." As for Marcus' comments about Buddhist temples in Korea, I suspect that there are very few foreign Buddhists in Korea and those that are overwhelmingly have their own national traditions are not interested in immersing themselves in the Korean tradition. I also think that temples in the West that only serve a particular ethnic community may be a double edged sword. On the one hand, they play an important role in keeping a particular community connected to their roots. On the other hand, they have the effect of maintaining divisions that may be unhealthy. That's not oppression, but it isn't entirely without negative consequences.

And while I'm still on my soapbox, I'm frustrated with something else in the convert Buddhist press--how they tend to ignore traditions embraced even by converts that don't focus on silent meditation. Sure, Tricycle did an article recently on Soka Gakkai, but there are so many Buddhist traditions that are given scant recognition by the convert establishment.

[Marcus]

Hi Rinchen Gyatso Sunim,

I agree with you 100% about how western converts far too often look down upon Asian practice. But pointing out how 'white Buddhism' seems to disregard Asian practice is one thing.... calling it racist and a "culture of oppression" is another thing altogether.

And it is that accusation of racism and oppresion that Arun made (in the original post that started this debate) that I disagree with.

You need more than a single article not mentioning Asians to back up a claim of racism and oppression. And making such claims with such little evidence can only be devisive and to the detriment of the wider Sangha.

With palms together,

Marcus

[Christian]

I believe that the point of view in question has to be interpreted strictly in the context of American culture.

Even "Asian American" is a concept that wouldn't be understood in Europe, except perhaps in the UK. The fragmentation of Buddhism as labelled as "white", "Asian American", "baby-boomer", etc. assumes some typically US cultural background, and is, therefore, probably inevitable there. Once you have a country (USA, UK) whose societal model is multiculturalism, the concept of community is a positive one, then you have churches attended only by Blacks (Should I say "African Americans"?), Koreans (Should I say "Korean Americans"?), White (Should I say "Americans"... Oops) etc. Why this would not happen for Buddhism as well?

Because my cultural upbringing considers this multicultural model as evil, and since culture is what should define people, not ethnicity of imaginary ascendence, thus one people in one country, I am sorry to read this kind of divisive discourse about Buddhism, but not surprised since everything is already in place in American culture to bring it to the fore without shame.

Now, reality is not a model and in practice, there are communities, in Europe as well, of course. Following my line of thought, the issue should be how to get these Buddhists to know each other in the West. It could precisely be a way to avoid a doomed multicultural society.

[Keith]

Wow, it's a funny world. I am a middle aged white buddhist. I always thought the opposite phenomenom existed, that asians looked down on american style buddhism. I suffer from the idea that when I hear the dharma, I would prefer to hear it come out of a 50+ asian man. Fortunately, I have been exposed to excellent teaching in the school I belong to (Kwan Um), both male and female. One thing I would say though, is that I can understand why a person who is of asian descent (or any other descent) for that matter would be uncomfortable in some cases. The few retreats I have attended, and in my daily practice, I have seen exactly three asians and two people of indian descent. Every single other person I have come in contact with has been white.

Good luck
Keith

[Jack Daw]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/nyregion/13buddhists.html?scp=10&sq=buddhism&st=cse#

This article in the New York Times talks about traditional Asian temples branching out to non-Asian practitioners. This sort of thing should happen more often no matter whom is supposedly looking down upon whom. We all do the same thing.

[rinchengyatso]

Jack and Keith-you're right, it can cut both ways. Discrimination is no good no matter who is doing it.

Konchog-I've had the same experience with Tibetan monks at times making it clear they don't like western monks and nuns. I've been told they feel threatened, thinking that they're loosing control of their own culture.

Marcus-I think arunlikhati pointed out that there are different interpretations of the words "racism" and "oppression." One interpreation of the word "racism" I came across in my days of working in Higher Education in America was that all white people in the U.S. (at least) are racist because we benefit, even unwillingly, from a racist system. I don't agree with that particular definition, but maybe I'm biased. As for "oppression" I have come to understand it to refer to the majority culture acting out of attitudes that disenfranchise or disregard minority cultures.

As for their being Korean temples in foreign countries that do things in Korean, that's no problem as far as I'm concerned. It's natural to want to be with people like us. What is a problem is the pervasive tendency, in this case in the white convert Buddhist culture at least in the U.S. (that's what this was originally about) to ignore and even denigrate the practice of Asians and Asian-Americans. If there are those in Asian and/or Asian-American communities who speak ill of the practice of converts in the West, that is equally wrong.

As for language like "racism" and "oppression" being divisive, I disagree. The divisions are already there. The point of using such language is to shine a bright light on those divisions with the hope of undoing them. Sometimes the shock these words cause can be useful in shaking people out of negative attitudes. I think their is a great deal of evidence that this is a serious problem in the U.S. at least. I've been in both Asian-American and convert communities for nearly 20 years in the U.S. and have seen it time and again, overwhelmingly from white converts.

[Marcus]

"As for their being Korean temples in foreign countries that do things in Korean, that's no problem as far as I'm concerned. It's natural to want to be with people like us."

I entirely agree with you.

But if it's okay for Asian temples to actively exclude those from outside their ethnic communities, why is it then 'racist' and 'oppressive' for a magazine to discuss the concerns of the white Buddhist community?

I honestly think Arun's reaction is an overreaction. I still don't see the oppression.

With palms together,

Marcus

[Rinchen Gyatso]

I'm not sure that Asian temples are *actively* excluding anyone and I dont' think that white convert groups would close the doors on Asian people who come to practice. The language barrier simply prevents a lot of people from crossing those lines in terms of participating in each other's communities. The issue is that the mainstream Buddhist media has isolated itself to the concerns of a largely white, middle/upper-middle class community of converts and continuely portrays itself as all that matters. Buddhism in America is both convert _and_ immigrant--but the convert community continually cuts the immigrant/non-white Buddhist communities out of the discussion--ignoring their input in the process of bringing Buddhism to the West and their continuing contributions to the development of Buddhism in America. It's true what one of the commentors said...either here or on Dharma Folk...there are a lot of supposedly liberal, socially aware white Buddhists who spew derogetory remarks about Buddhism in Asia and Asian Buddhist in the West without having any experience of those communities. The problem with this article is that it one more in a long history of articles that say, by specifically excluding non-white Buddhist groups, "You don't matter." People who write these articles are more likely that not not overtly racist, but their actions demonstrate that they don't value voices outside the white convert community. That's the problem. ...At least in the U.S. I can't speak for Europe.

I'm sure there are also similar problems in Asia as you and Ven. Konchog mentioned. However, this article was written by and for members of the American Buddhist community, so the problem of racism and oppression in the West/States is what came up.

[Mumon]

Thanks for the link from the angry Asian guy.

You know lots of folks have already breached this stuff. Whether you or he, it really is de trop to think of it as "extra."

[Bill]

I took refuge in Buddha, Dharma, Sangha. No one said anything about what kind of sangha, or whose dharma, so I assumed it was all the same: the Buddha's. Perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps we have here a situation that requires personal growth on everyone's part.

We have to be so careful about labeling. The "cracker" term is an example. While Ven. Rinchen Gyatso's explanation is correct as far as it goes, he makes assumptions that are perhaps unskillful in some ways. On the Florida ranches where I grew up, a cracker is indeed one who cracks the whip -- to herd cattle -- and it is done without harming the cattle. The sound does the job. That's why they're called "bullwhips."

So, you see...

[Bill]

Sorry 'bout that. Got confused about whom I was writing to for a moment. I meant to write "arunlikhati" instead of Ven. R. G. May the fleas of a thousand Rhesus descend upon me, bringing with them enlightenment.

[shavenheadbigbelly]

Marcus,

You might consider that because you don't see the oppression doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Perhaps you might spend some time trying to understand the general racism and injustice that people of color experience in American society. White convert communities are not separate from this climate. Spirit Rock has some online resources on their website that might be helpful.

Prejudice and racism does exist in Asian culture and by extension in Asian religious communities, but what does this justify? As an Asian American, I would hope that we would aspire to live up to the highest ideals of democracy in the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr., Cesar Chavez, and Barrack Hussein Obama.