Page 109 - Applied Buddhism

made up of laymen/laywomen only, or monastics (in this case it is Two Major Challenges
called the Sangha), or both, should engage in politics? This is the
issue that will be discussed in this paper However, for Buddhist organisations to be involved in public
and political affairs, there are two major obstacles to overcome.
In my opinion, the issue is not whether Buddhist organisations The first is how not to deviate from the original vision, mission,
should engage in politics. Rather, the issue is how Buddhist and objectives of the organisation. For example, political parties are
organisations should engage in politics. What would be the ethical formed with a specific mission and objective to rule the nation. As
code to guide them in politics? the ruling party, they would then have to formulate national policies,
allocate economic resources, and consolidate power. Likewise,
Engagement in politics has two aspects. Firstly, it involves Buddhist organisations have a specific mission and objective, which
the use of power by being part of a ruling party. Secondly, it is is to promote the study and practice of Buddhism and to protect
about exercising the rights of a citizen in civil society, as provided the well-being of the Buddhist community in the country. Thus,
for under the constitution of the state, and be involved in making the objective of a Buddhist organisation differs greatly from that of
decisions regarding public policies, either as individuals or in a political party. If Buddhist organisations choose to deviate from
groups. Buddhist organisations may not be involved in the former their original objective and instead become “actively involved” in
but would be involved in the latter in a democracy. political affairs, then they are misusing Buddhism.

In a democracy, it is the right of citizens to be involved in The second challenge is that when Buddhist organisations are
politics and in determining public policies. If citizens form groups to partisan in politics, there is a strong possibility of disunity among
champion their causes, this is natural and should not be challenged. the members. For example, in the 2004 Presidential Election in
Hence, when Buddhists establish organisations to champion the Taiwan, the abbot of Zhong Tai Si, Ven. Wei Jue openly supported
cause of Buddhism, they are only exercising their rights as citizens James Soong for the Presidency. This angered the supporters of Chen
of the country. In this case, the Buddhist organisation becomes Shui Bian who demonstrated in front of the Zong Tai Si. Again,
a corporate citizen of the country. But if Buddhist organisations when Ven. Xin Yun supported Ma Ying Jiu in the 2012 Presidential
abdicate their role as corporate citizens, then they are marginalising Election in Taiwan, supporters of Chai Wen Yin were not happy.
themselves in society, and allowing themselves to be dictated by Another example is when some monks in Sri Lanka joined political
the ruling power without any inputs. This means we are allowing parties and took part in elections. This resulted in a division within
the ruling party to wield absolute power where they can exploit the the lay Buddhists, as well as within the Sangha.
people just like in an absolute monarchy. Thus, it is important that
Buddhist organisations should play a proactive part in determining When Buddhist organisations disintegrate, they will not able to
public policies in the country. play the role of “middle ground” in a civil society. And a healthy
civil society requires a “middle ground” to pull together the divisive

096 Applied Buddhism Applied Buddhism 097