Author Affiliations: Religions and Development Research Programme, Department of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Leeds
摘要
1 Introduction 1 2 A brief overview of Buddhist teachings, beliefs and practices 4 3 Buddhism and the RaD research programme 6 3.1 The relationship between Buddhism and key development concerns 7 4 Buddhist values 9 4.1 Karma 9 4.2 The ‘Four Noble Truths’ and the ‘Eightfold Path’ 10 4.3 Buddhist precepts and rules 11 4.4 Dana (‘giving’) and philanthropy 11 4.5 Ethics of social justice 13 4.6 Political ideals and attitudes towards state power 15 5 Buddhism and development 17 5.1 Engaged Buddhism 17 5.2 Buddhism and ecology 19 5.3 Buddhist economics 22 5.4 Buddhism and gender 29 5.5 Buddhism and peace building 31 6 Conclusion 33
Notes 34 References 36
目次
This is one of a series of six background papers prepared as part of the Religions and Development Research Programme. Each aims to provide an introduction and overview of the teachings of one of the major faith traditions with which the programme is dealing: Christianity, African traditional religions, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and Sikhism. Their purpose is to summarize recent material produced by the relevant religious organizations and by some of the main academic interpreters to provide background material on the understandings of ‘development’ that arise out of the core beliefs and values of each faith tradition. Each review seeks to identify concepts and teachings relevant to human development within the relevant faith tradition, with reference to its teachings/ethics and theology. It also considers the extent to which the understandings have evolved over time; identifies major differences in the understanding of concepts developed by different branches within a faith tradition; and discusses the extent to which views associated with particular religious organisations and their adherents arise from their religious beliefs or are influenced by the social and cultural context in which adherents live. The writers were asked to concentrate on the key concepts underlying the notion of ‘development’: development (goals, obstacles and appropriate strategies), poverty (and its causes), wealth, inequality and well-being. They were also asked to consider issues of particular relevance to the various components in this research programme a) Credit and debt b) Gender roles and equality c) Education (the role of education and access to educational opportunities)d) Engagement in public life through politics, social movements, advocacy, community organization etc. e) Corruption/ethical behaviour in public life f) Livelihood decisions e.g. building wealth, seeking improved wellbeing, begging. The contemporary discourse of development post-dates most religious teaching, which is not historically or even today couched in terms of the conventional international development discourse. However, each religious tradition has ideas about ‘right social ordering’ and provides guidelines to individuals and societies about the values and ethics they should adopt in their pursuit of a life that is not just spiritually rewarding but also morally and socially responsible. Interpreting these teachings in a 2 Working Paper 18relatively short paper in the light of the terminology of development is problematic and the interpretations and views put forward by the authors of these papers are necessarily partial and provisional. Moreover, all religious traditions have developed schools or denominations that present different interpretations of core teachings and practices. Religious traditions have also developed under the influence of different sorts of inputs: for example, from mystics, theologians, philosophers, ritual specialists or legal experts. While at certain times and in certain places particular interpretations of religious traditions may dominate, it is impossible to talk about a single view of development, for example a Christian view or a Muslim view, and instead we may find a range of opinions or even competing views. This difficulty is compounded by the fact the interpretation of teachings may vary between the authorities responsible at the highest level and local religious specialists, between the official sources and everyday lived religion, over time, and between places, where it is interpreted through the lens of differing cultural traditions. Some of this variety is captured in the papers, but certainly not all. The authors themselves come from different backgrounds: not all are scholars from within the religious tradition about which they are writing, and not all are adherents of that tradition. Each has his or her own interests and preoccupations. The accounts are also dependent on the available sources, which do not necessaril
