Joseph Goldstein: One Dharma

Summary:

One Dharma is an enjoyable, light, quasi-academic look at the emergence of one "Buddhism" in the United States.  In it, Goldstein accomplishes three aims.  First, he briefly introduces the amalgam of Buddhist traditions present in America today; second, he provides basic teachings on Buddhist doctrine common to all traditions; finally, he justifies the trend towards an integrated Buddhism and in fact argues for the development of "One Dharma."

The quote which opens the books is by the Third Zen Ancestor Seng-Ts'an:

"There is one dharma, not many.

Distinctions arise from the needs of the ignorant."

The placement of the quote is fitting, because Goldstein's primary point is the same as Seng Ts'an's, which happens to be expressed more laconically.  Goldstein argues that the sectarian arguments, conflict and disagreements (minimal as they are on the Western Buddhist scene), actually betray the true unity of the Buddha's teachings.  The diversity of the teachings arises out of the skillful means (upaya) of the Buddha, in which he catered very heavily to his audience.  Where the listeners needed to hear an emphasis on compassion, he gave that to them.  Where they needed an emphasis on wisdom, likewise. 

He says, "One Dharma is just this: experiencing the essential point common to all teachings." (13) This requires two things: the creation of a a foundation of basic understanding of Buddhist principles and second, an openness to the diversity that the various traditions have to offer.  Moving forward, he says the One Dharma's method is mindfulness, expression is compassion, and essence is wisdom. 

In conclusion, he offers: "Where is this all leading? We are in a crucible of transformation in which the diversity and depth of ancient Buddhist schools are meeting the openness and pragmatism of our contemporary Western culture...The One Dharma of Western Buddhism emerges as a grand tapestry of teachings, weaving together from different traditions the methods of mindfulness, the motivation of compassion and the liberating wisdom of non-clinging.

Reflections: 

First, I would like to see a more rigorous, historical and analytic investigation into the emergence of "One Buddhism." I think it's an intriguing proposition, first of all, and would like to see a religious studies scholar digest the problem.  Second, I'm not sure our situation in the span of the history of world religions is unique and I'd like to see someone compare our encounter with several "Buddhisms" with a similar interaction from a different time.  

These thoughts aside, I appreciate how he didn't call for the formation of a non-sectarian movement, or non-sectarian Buddhism, but rather simply described (and later embraced) the emergence of One Dharma phenomenon.  It's not the case that he's calling for a diluted, bland Buddhism that blurs all distinctions between tradition.  Quite the contrary, actually: he's arguing for the preservation of unique traditions but alongside the acceptance and openness of traditions different from one's own.  [Suspiciously, he constrained his One Dharma to solely Buddhist sects, but surely in Christian-America, there are elements of Christianity that are seeping into the One Dharma.  He would have done well to include a chapter on the effect of religious traditions already present in America on the emergence of One Dharma.

From one perspective, this is a nice description of the way in which Buddhism is being transmitted to the West.  From another, its lazy historically (probably by intention because of the popular nature of the book) because it leaves out many of the details of sectarian debate, argument and conflict.  

How does this volume influence my project on the role of the self in mindfulness-based psychotherapies?  Quite a bit, I would have to say.  Mindfulness-based therapies, though stemming from Jon Kabat-Zinn's connections with IMS and thus the therevada tradition, tend to incorporate elements of Zen and Tibetan Buddhism.  From this point of view, the idea of One Dharma really makes sense.  Mindfulness-based therapies take it one step further, however.  Rather than simply removing all notions of sectarianism (and it's pretty easy because most practitioners of mindfulness therapies aren't even aware of the historical development of most strands of the therapies anyway), MBSR aims to eradicate religion altogether.  From this perspective, MBSR (and its tributaries) is even more "One" than Goldstein's One Dharma.   See pages 88-104 for his discussion of mindfulness in One Dharma.

Also, conceptions of self as  amounting to just the aggregates, or being essentially pure, radiant and selfless, are both present in MBSR.  Goldstein does a good job of tracing some of the various conceptions of the self and this helps to clarify where certain discourses on the self within MBSR come from.  See pages 139-143 for more on self in One Dharma.

Leigh Schmidt: Restless Souls

Summary
I just completed a superb work of entirely accessible scholarship by the renowned Princeton scholar of religion, Leigh Schmidt.  Restless Souls (2005) is Schmitdt's investigation into the origin and development of the persistently-nebulous term "spirituality" in so far as it appears in progressive American religious circles.   Focusing specifically on the period from 1830-1920 (roughly from the beginning of Emersonian transcendentalism to the demise of Greenacre in Eliot, Maine, with a few exceptions), Schmidt skillfully traces the various intersecting and overlapping streams of thought and practice within a number late nineteenth century movements: Transcendentalism, New Thought, Theosophy, Universalism, to name a few.  His broader project amounts to an attempt to distill the currents -and their main drivers - which contributed to the historical development of the term "spirituality."

In addition to producing a work of scholarship on the history of "spirituality" in America, Schmidt also has an axe to grind: he wants to offset the trend to tag the current "New Age" and "spiritual but not religious" crowd as self-serving, flaky and consumerist driven, among other pejoratives. Schmidt wastes no time, taking his gloves off and openly challenging the evangelical right within the first few pages of the introduction.  To protect contemporary liberal religiosity from the evangelical onslaught of the conservative right, he wishes to reclaim the validity and historical foundations of  American "spirituality" by tracing various liberal religious causes: universalism, religious pluralism, social causes such as abolition and women's suffrage, solitude, meditation, among others.

Schmidt divides the book into six chapters which each focus on one particular aspect of American spirituality: mysticism, solitude, universalism, meditation, freedom vs. self-surrender, and seeking.  Along the way, he profiles a number of key figures - from Emerson to Sarah Farmer and beyond - which play a role in the development of spirituality in America.  Emerson and mysticism, Thoreau and solitude, Higginson and Whitman for Universalism, Adler, Trine and Olcott for meditation, Farmer for the freedom vs. self-surrender debate and finally Jones, Smith and Heard in the chapter on seeking.  Naturally, these movements and figures overlap to a considerable degree, but Schmidt skillfully weaves the individual narratives into a coherent whole, a story of American spirituality.



Reflection
Naturally, I'm inclined to reflect on how this work of scholarship impacts my own investigation into the appropriation of Buddhist meditation into the western psychotheraputic setting.  It's not hard to see, in reading the book, that Schmidt focuses almost exclusively on spirituality in New England and the Northeast.  Whether this is because New Thought, Transcendentalism, Theosophy and the other movements share the Northeast as their epicenters or its a case of myopia on the part of Schmidt (who, not surprisingly, studied and teaches in the Northeast), or both, we can probably never know.  That said, the work clearly suggests that liberal American spirituality finds its origin in New England.

Relatedly, meditation (in its present incarnation) was initially incorporated into psychotherapy in New England (40m outside of Boston) in 1979.  My question is as follows: how much of a role does geography play in the development of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction specifically, and meditative interventions in general?  If a number of  liberal religious movements evolved out of New England stretching back to 1830's (and further), is it reasonable to assume that there is something about the Northeast that contributed to the development of Jon Kabat-Zinn's infusion of meditation into main stream medicine?

My first answer is that, Yes, of course, this is the case.  For the past 150 years or so (?) Harvard (and Cambridge in general) has been the liberal bastion of the nation - and indeed world.  Apparently, liberal ideas such as religious inclusivism and pluralism lend themselves well to adoption of Eastern thought and practice.  But is there anything else, besides a general progressive bent?  What about New England in particular, rather than just liberalism, contributes to the development of "spirituality" at the expense of "religion"?  Why Transcendentalism, New Thought, Universalism and MBSR instead of fundamentalism and all its friends?

More to the point: how has the religious geography of New England contributed to the development of MBSR?  Is there some connection between Emerson and Kabat-Zinn?  Between Thoreau and Kornfield?

Questions:
What is his method?  What is he doing?
How do you (Gary) seeing this work impact my own investigations?