The Social Implications of Buddhist Thought
There have often been criticisms levelled against Buddhism , or other religions with a strong emphasis on personal experience, that they do not focus enough attention on the social world and the social reality of humanity as a social species. There are very many reasons why this is incorrect, but one can’t but see why and how this impression arises. Social media for instance is saturated with corporate promotion of the kind of self-help, motivation and wellness apps that simply endorse the existing social conditions, and more often than not, blame individuals for their suffering in a deeply exploitative system.
However, this substack is not about adding to already valid criticisms and political commentary which are more capably handled by others. (I would point to the excellent substack of Prof Carlos Garrido for the latter). It’s about Buddhism and philosophy. But just to address this point of the compatibility of Buddhism to social philosophy and the struggles for social emancipation, I offer the following brief outline of the ontological implications of Buddhism for social activity based on the work of Japanese philosopher Abe Masao;
Community. Community presupposes individuality. Individuality presupposes relativity. Relativity means dependency. Dependency means lack of independent existence. Lack of independent existence means empty of self-essence (or self-nature). For there to be community, there must be individuals. For there to be individuals they must be relative. As relative, they must be empty;
Absolute particularity, or individuality, entails absolutel relativity. The ontological ground of the absolute relativity of absolute individuals or particulars cannot be a substantial ground, or participation in some ultimate substance (because participation in something substantial negates absolute individuality and hence, community). The only ground on which such a dialectic of community/individuality can occur is the ground of absolute Emptiness, Sunyata. Thus, paradoxically, to be absolutely individual means to be absolutely empty. The principle of absolute Nothingness (as in, no specific thing-ness, or in other words, absolute fullness, from which both being and non-being are simply derivatives and discriminations) is the ultimate identity. Self-realisation (Nirvana) is not a mere negation of individuality or particularity but a realisation of identity with absolute Nothingness.