How do we go about when we hear the English expression ‘Buddhism’? It
seems to be hardly the case to make sense it in any other way rather than its
popular connotations as religion and philosophy. Both are usually taken to be
corresponding expressions of the Sanskrit words Dharma and darsana respectively.
If so, can we have a different way of signification of ‘Buddhism’ other than in
the sense of Buddhadharma (religious
Buddhism) or Buddhadarsana (philosophical Buddhism)? This question seems to be pertinent in the
context of conceptual ambiguity that prevails in the ways of characterizing Buddhism
in relation to Buddha’s own teachings and the cultural traditions inspired by Buddha. The
obscurantism of Buddhism becomes so much apparent when it is being subsumed
under the so-called Hinduism. Even though religious Buddhism had its very long successful
run in India, in the glorified discourse of Hinduism, Buddhism appeared to have
only a self-defeatist stature. While what is said to be the tradition of philosophical
Buddhism seems to have got its historical and theoretical credentials, estimation
of its contemporary viability (arguments for its ideological imperativeness) appears
to be insignificantly lesser and obscure. Seemingly the cultural space for Buddhism in
India today is simply a vacuum. Nevertheless,
its disguised presence seems to be so pervasive and vibrant, despite untold
mutilations and disfigurements. A two-pronged strategy of appropriation and
dejustification of Buddhist practices has hard on its way. Religious and
philosophical significations of Buddhism do not seem to make much appeal for seeking
justification for its popular inheritances and legacies. This might call for
alternative ways of signification of Buddhism. Cultural Buddhism may be
historically and politically viable form of signification.
The divergent forms of cultural practices that are considered to bearing the
traits of some kind of Buddhism appear to have been made frozen in such a way
they get assimilated by what they want to challenge. Viewed from the context of
cultural history of the Indian sub-continent, the conceptual frames of religion
and philosophy seem to be inadequate to accommodate the divergent streams of
cultural practices having distinct engagements and challenges. Hence we may
propose here a more inclusive characterization of Buddhism, which could be
having a more encompassing range of signification for embracing the entire
cultural dynamics related to all that what can be termed as Buddhist
traditions. Considering all that practices that are categorized as Buddhist
Philosophy or Buddhist Religion as forming part of different aspects of
cultural dynamics within the Buddhist traditions, a more liberal and
non-freezing kind of signification of Buddhism could be categorized as
‘Cultural Buddhism’
No comments:
Post a Comment