Informed Ethics and Advocacy: Comparative Ethics in Cross-boundary Buddhist Spaces

Ethics is not only anemic, but vacant without a modicum of advocacy, as ethics defines the good without remaining starkly neutral. Comparative religious ethics charts real-time communities, facing salient and timely issues. Yet, informed ethics complicates the good by viewing it comparatively. Comparative ethics requires attention not only to textual, traditional, or theoretical factors, but dynamic, historically-rooted social circumstances.  The first case concerns Soto Zen norms during Japanese annexation of Korea in the early 20th century, in which many celibate Korean monastics were required to marry.  By Korean independence in 1945, a small minority of celibate Korean monastics remained.  The second case charts San Francisco Zen Center’s leadership transitions from a beloved root teacher of Soto Zen lineage, Shunryu Suzuki, whose American successor’s misdeeds pushed restructuring of the community to prevent ethical violations. Comparing Buddhist community adjustments after ethical challenges, this study affirms aspects of advocacy in comparative, informed ethics.