Organizer: Gareth Fisher, University of Richmond
Chair and Discussant: Charles B. Jones, Catholic University of America
Discussant: C. Julia Huang, National Tsing Hua University
This panel will initiate dialogue and debate among
scholars from different disciplines whose research involves firsthand fieldwork
on contemporary Chinese Buddhist communities in mainland China or Taiwan. The
three presenters, all of whom have recently completed their own fieldwork,
will discuss their diverse approaches to fieldwork methodology and analysis
while critiquing alternative perspectives. Each presenter has received primary
training in a different discipline – either
religious studies, anthropology, or sociology; in addition, all three presenters
have combined approaches from more than one discipline in their work. In exploring,
respectively, the contemporary followers of Master Yinshun’s “Buddhism
for the Human Realm” (renjian fojiao) in Taiwan, newly converted lay Buddhists
in Beijing, and contrasting temple communities in Zhejiang, the three presentations
will consider issues such as the relationship between fieldwork and textual
analysis in Chinese Buddhism, single vs. multi-sited fieldwork, and Buddhism
as an institutionally-cohesive religion or an ever-changing set of loosely
connected beliefs and practices. The three presenters will also consider the
particular challenges that the study of contemporary Chinese Buddhism brings
to the theories and methodologies of their respective disciplines and how future
fieldwork might be improved. The presentations will be followed by comments
from two discussants, representing anthropology and religious studies respectively,
each of whom is well-established within the field of Chinese Buddhist Studies.
The panel will conclude with a period of engaged discussion with its audience.
Stefania Travagnin, University of London
This paper aims to problematize and reassess the theoretical discourse
that frames the discipline of “Religious Studies” as applied
to the fieldwork-based study of 20th-century Chinese Buddhism, with special
attention to the area of Taiwan. My presentation is divided into two segments.
The first part discusses the definition of the field “Religious Studies”,
its domain when it comes to terms with fieldwork and the specific context
of East Asian Buddhism, and the role that it plays in relation to disciplines
like the sociology and anthropology of religion. It concludes by arguing
the need for an Asian/East Asian framework for its agenda. The second section
explores specifically the multi-disciplinary and multi-faceted new “Post-Western” methodology
that I have applied during my fieldwork in Taiwan and argues its validity
and limitations through the analysis of a number of case-studies like the
theology of renjian fojiao (“Buddhism for the Human Realm”),
the strength of the Buddhist Order of nuns, the establishment of international
Buddhist organizations, the Chinese (and Buddhist) discourse of modernity,
new modalities of faith, and the Buddhist pattern of Taiwanese identity.
In this way, the paper uses a sinological lens to analyze the process of
deconstruction and reconstruction of the field “Religious Studies” and
sheds more light on the sphere of adoption and path of application of
the discipline.
Gareth Fisher, University of Richmond
Recent interest in the contemporary practice of Buddhism in both mainland
China and Taiwan has led scholars of religion to undertake firsthand
fieldwork among religious professionals and lay practitioners. Several of
these studies, written by scholars trained in historical and textual approaches
to the study of religion, have emphasized the evolution of Buddhism as religion
in contemporary China or chartered contemporary Buddhist movements as
discrete religious institutions with a founding leader or leaders, a central
corpus of texts, and a cohesive organizational structure. “Case studies” from
interviews with adherents may be included, but these are often integrated
within a specific narrative of Buddhism’s development familiar to
its institutional leadership. This presentation will present an alternative
approach to the execution and analysis of fieldwork on contemporary Chinese
Buddhism taken from the disciplinary perspective of cultural anthropology.
Drawing from a field-based study of lay Buddhists in contemporary Beijing,
I examine lay practitioners less as participants within a connected, institutionally-recognized
narrative of Buddhism’s evolution in China and more as persons who
use both the social space of temples and loose collections of texts and
practices to find their place within a rapidly changing world, often
in very different ways. I will conclude the presentation by suggesting that
the strength of doing fieldwork in Chinese Buddhism lies in uncovering
how ordinary adherents adapt a rich and diverse religious tradition to fit
their own life experiences.
Yanfei Sun, University of Chicago
Analyses of contemporary Chinese Buddhism based on single sites, if not
careful, can lead to overgeneralization and spurious explanations. Scholars
trained in religious studies, when studying contemporary Chinese Buddhism,
seem most interested in discerning the historical development of doctrines
or ideas of a more or less unitary religious tradition. However, this approach,
if neglecting the differential penetration of religious ideas in different
strata of Buddhism as well as the diversity of ideas, may not adequately
convey the complexity of contemporary Chinese Buddhism. Thus, to reach a
typology of Chinese Buddhism is essential. Nonetheless, this requires extensive
fieldtrips and many years of research time. To partly solve this dilemma,
my own fieldwork study has focused on a single county in Zhejiang province,
which, in spite of its relatively small size, contains diverse forms of
Buddhism. Specifically, I have focused on four temples: the first two are
presided over by monks from other provinces; the third is led by a male
lay devotee and the fourth by a nun, both of whom are natives of this county.
While the first two temples are embedded in regional or national networks
of monastics and lay devotees, the latter two are mostly independent of
these networks, relying upon local patrons. In addition to delineating different
models of temple operation, this study also explores what has led to the
divergences. The feasibility and strength of adopting a multi-sited approach
for the study of contemporary Chinese Buddhism is discussed in the end.
|
