This blog started way back in 2006 when I was touring the UK visiting Buddhist groups on behalf of the Network of Buddhist Organisations. Having been involved with Buddhism for the better part of 40 years, I have seen the rise (and sometimes fall) of quite a few Buddhist groups. Some groups just starting when I was young are now well-established and entering a new phase: the founding zeal and inspiration has dissipated - usually with the retirement or death of the founder - to be a replaced by the more sober reality of keeping things going.
Keeping insitutions going is tough work - often mired in politics - and with the everyday need to cover costs and keep the punters coming. And over the past forty years, the name of 'religion' has been badly tarnished by terrorism and abuses of power.
All institutions are at risk of losing touch with their purpose, becoming complacent (and arrogant), abusing power, and becoming dominated by unaccountable individuals or groups. Unfortunately, religious institutions often seem more at risk of such corruption than secular companies. This is partly to do with the excessive deference shown to religious institutions, and their leaders, but also to a lack of transparency and accountability. Religious institutions are not usually run on democratic principles.
In general, UK Buddhism has a reasonable track-record. However, there are several accounts of Buddhist leaders and teachers abusing their positions for sexual favours and of behaving badly in other ways. There have been cases of imposters and frauds, and continuing examples of poor teaching. The actions of those in authority speak volumes, and we should expect that those offering Buddhist teachings, wearing Buddhist robes and regalia, or purporting to represent a Buddhist tradition, act in accordance with basic Buddhist ethics, and in a compassionate and honest way.
And if a teacher does misbehave, we should expect a clear admission of fault and appropriate measures being taken to redeem the situation and prevent further transgressions. If not from the transgressors themselves, then from their management groups.
This seems to me to be the minimum needed to maintain the confidence of those interested in Buddhism and to keep Buddhist institutions healthy. And yet, when problems are identified, all too often the perpetrator is able to shrug it off and continue in the same role protected by a management hierarchy or over-zealous supporters. The example of widepspread child abuse in the Catholic church is a powerful warning of where 'turning a blind eye' can lead.
As well as there being a very difficult climate for 'religion' (and ignoring the debate about whether Buddhism is a religion or not), Buddhism faces strong secular competition from mindfulness initiatives and from secularised versions of Buddhism. These side-step the negative connotations of 'religion', whilst offering meditation and other teachings. It seems possible to envisage a future where meditation, mindfulness and the path to enlightenment are taught in entirely secular institutions whose authority comes from scientific evidence and professional standards.
And perhaps it is worth asking why Buddhist traditions that evolved within Asian cultures should be appropriate for western nations such as the UK? One can admire and enjoy many Asian institutions, without expecting or wanting them to take root in the UK just as they are, or of expecting them to be appropriate for Western people.
Perhaps we should be a lot more interested in focusing on the core Buddhist practices and teachings and setting aside those behaviours which are cultural adaptations.
There is nothing new in this suggestion, except that we now have a lot of western born and educated people who have devoted much of their adult lives to Buddhist practice (and theory) and can speak with the authority that comes with genuine insight. We are older (and maybe a little wiser) and no longer imagine that magical and enlightened beings living in himalayan caves have the answers to all of our problems, or that robes exert a magical influence on those wearing them,turning them all into benevolent and wise sages, or that lay-Buddhists leading engaged lives are automatically unable to realise awakening.
If we step back and see ourselves primarily as Western Buddhists with our own rich culture, rather than adopting a theravada, tibetan, japanese, Zen, pure land and so on, Buddhist identity, we can avoid the creeping sectarianism that we see in UK Buddhism and focus on the truth of awakening that underlies, or transcends, all traditions.
Many traditions that have become established in the UK are well aware of this issue. Some are consciously developing secular frameworks (steps to happiness, mindfulness programmes, and similar initiatives), and many are discouraging those who support them from regarding themselves as converts.
So, this blog and the many others like it, are part of the reflection, criticism, celebration and comment that is the sign of an active and inquiring community of western Buddhists.
The blog is intended for information and opinion about all aspects of Buddhism. I often find that those who practice the path of awakening are reluctant to voice their views. I think this is unhealthy and would encourage you to speak out. Please be direct but courteous.
