This paper contrasts two forms of Buddhism in India and their respective engagements with concepts of social justice. It highlights the phenomenon of pluralism within religions, arguing that subtle differences often exist in how different branches of one tradition relate to and express concepts of rights and equality. In this regard we present two case studies: in Dharamsala, Tibetan Buddhists are embedded in a struggle for national freedom, while in Pune, the sociopolitical context of caste means that dalit people have sought to find a coherent strategy to fight the injustices they suffer. In Pune, Navayana Buddhism provides a practical system of morality which supports a strong sense of social justice and human dignity, underpinning political action. In Dharamsala, Tibetan interpretations of spirituality bolster welfare activity, but do not lend themselves well to the struggle for Tibetan sovereignty.
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||Economic & Political Weekly|
|Publication status||Published - 7 Jan 2012|