#sblaar20 just attended Prof Jose Cabezon’s AAR presidential address on “The Study of Buddhism in the AAR.” It’s really fascinating to learn how the study of Buddhism as an academic discipline has grown and flourished in North American since the 1960s. Some of my notes: a 1/23

Buddhist studies first took root in North America in the 1960s in area studies departments. Starting in the 1970s, the academic discipline of religious studies began to diversify, accepting more Buddhist studies scholars into religious studies departments. 2/23

Today, Buddhist studies scholars can be found mostly in religious studies departments. These departments also produce the greatest number of MA and PhD students in Buddhist studies. In 2020, there are more than 350 scholars teaching Buddhism in North America (<50 in the 70s) 3/23

When the AAR was founded, religion was categorized by geographical regions and “world religions.” By the 1970s, the AAR had micro-guilds organized by areas and traditions (Chinese religions, Buddhism). Over the years, some units did not survive while others were added. 4/23

Although these geographical and “world religions” categories are ideological and political constructs that do not hold under scrutiny, they have served pragmatic functions for the guilds (i.e. for organization and networking). 5/23

By the 1990s, scholars began pursuing more specialized topics in texts, time periods, traditions, etc. in the AAR. This suggests that the older categories of geography and “world religions” were no longer satisfactory and that more scholars wanted to challenge heterogeneity. 6/23

Interestingly, before the 1980s, the AAS (Association of Asian Studies) was the main intellectual venue for Buddhologists in North America, although beginning in the 1990s the AAR became the main location for Buddhist studies scholars to exchange ideas. 7/23

This trend can also be seen in journal publishing. By the 1990s, JAAR (Journal of the American Academy of Religion) and HR (History of Religion) were publishing twice as many articles on Buddhism compared to journals in Oriental studies. 8/23

This means that NAmerican Buddhologists were increasingly seeing themselves as religionists rather than as Asianists. 9/23

Buddhologists also tend to publish a lot more in tradition-specific journals, such as JIABS (Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies). >140 papers on Buddhism were published in JIABS in the 2010s, vs ~30 published in JAAR. 10/23

This means that although North American Buddhologists identified themselves as religionists rather than Asianists through publication and academic associations, they were not jettisoning their Buddhologist identity. 11/23

# of papers on Buddhism presented at the AAR has increased over the years. The creation of the Chinese Religions and Japanese Religions units helped to boost the number of papers accepted. These area units continue to serve as critical pillars for scholarly gatherings. 12/23

Currently, the Chinese Religions unit contributes to 36% of all Buddhism papers presented at the AAR; the Japanese Religions unit 68%; the Korean Religions unit 28%; the Tibetan and Himalayan Religions unit 81%; East Asian Religions 67%; and Religions in Southeast Asia 38%. 13/23

The 1st Buddhism Unit was created in 1978. Since then, the creation and maintenance of Buddhism units have not been without pushbacks and politics. Ie the N.American Buddhist studies circle has apparently not been very hospitable to proposals for a Buddhist theology unit. 14/23

By 2018, there were 32 program units in Buddhism at the AAR. Buddhologists present in these increasingly more specialized Buddhism units (specialized by text, tradition, philosophical school, theoretical approaches, etc.), but also in other non-Buddhism units. 15/23

Prof. Cabezon argues that the AAR’s openness to more specialized units is central to AAR’s success as an appealing venue for Buddhologists in North America. He concludes that the study of Buddhism in North American has diversified the AAR, and vice-versa. 16/23

Professor Cabezon ended his presidential address with one plead and one observation. 17/23

He pleads that the AAR preserves its official documents in both physical and digital forms. He also urges scholars who have past AAR documents (pamphlets, program guides, etc.) in their collections to contact the AAR’s Atlanta office to contribute to the archive. 18/23

Prof. Cabezon urges that AAR program units keep records of their own and contribute to the digital repositories. In this way, all members of the AAR, including graduate students, can then use the archive to better understand and study the history of our field. 19/23

Prof. Cabezon observes that a distinct Buddhist studies style has been forming in N.America: it’s less about speaking to specialists about arcane and obscure texts and more about exploring broader lessons to be learned. 20/23

It is a style that aims to be more embracing and creative than covering written texts and doctrines. Using a variety of theoretical methods, it investigates more general matters of human activities and concerns. It sees diversity in methods as an advantage. 21/23

In addition, it is a style that wants to be intelligible; it seeks out conversations with other fields actively. In answering a question about the future of Buddhist studies in North America, Professor Cabezon suggests that it will probably continue to diversify. 22/23

He explains that if the history of Buddhist studies in the AAR tells us anything it is that Buddhist studies scholars will increasingly be in conversation with scholars of other fields, both thematically and comparatively. 23/23

***correction in thread 13: the % is the % of papers on Buddhism in each unit, I.e. 36% of all papers in the Chinese Religions Unit are on Buddhism.

Also “plea” and not “plead”