MUCH INK HAS BEEN SPILLED in recent years over the question of what con­stitutes genuine “American Bud­dhism.” ls it the Buddhism of recent European­ American converts, or the generations-old tradi­tion into which many Americans of Asian ances­try were born? ls it a matter primarily of ideas or of practice? ls it meditative, devotional, or both? Must one be a member of a specific organization to be counted as a Buddhist, or should “free­lancers” be included as well? In short, are there any criteria at all for defining ”American Bud­dhism,” and precisely who should be included in the picture?

The passions stirred by recent debates on the subject make it clear that these are not merely academic issues. Lurking just beneath the surface of these attempts to define genuine American Bud­dhism lies the far more divisive question of what constitutes “genuine” Buddhism as such. And behind these questions lies a broader, more polit­ical issue: who gets to do the defining, and what agendas underlie these attempts? The funda­mental issue, in other words, is the politics of rep­resentation.

Every act of definition is, among other things, a political act: to define is inevitably to frame the Other in one’s own terms, an act that involves a certain distance of oneself from the Other’s own perspective or, in extreme cases, even denying the Other’s very right to exist. To define is, to put it crudely, an act of conquest, in which the Other’s self-definition is subordinated to one’s own.

But surely we liberal, multicultural Buddhists would not fall into such an obvious trap. Would­n’t an all-inclusive, all-reflective “Indra’s net” be a better image of the way we North American Bud­dhists see and relate to one another?

Unfortunately, it would not. There are sev­eral distinctive positionseach the product of its own history, cultural roots, and socioeconomic groundingfrom which American Buddhism is being defined (and thus created) today. What is striking about these positions is not their variety, but the extent to which those in each camp have managed not to seethe others at all. ln American Buddhism today, some of usperhaps most of usare unwittingly engaged in the practice of defining large groups of our fellow Buddhists out of existence.

Liberate this article!

This article is available to subscribers only. Subscribe now for immediate access to the magazine plus video teachings, films, e-books, and more.

Subscribe Now

Already a subscriber? Log in.