CEIFR Notebooks
Compared to other conversion processes that can be observed in France, let us immediately underline the specificity of the problem of "conversion" to Buddhism. On the one hand, it is a religious tradition recently imported into France: apart from a few cases of Asians, it is not a "return" to one's original tradition, but a change of religion or a conversion of individuals "without religion" to this tradition of Asian origin. On the other hand, and we will return to this, there is also the problem of the definition of Buddhism as a "religion". We will see in particular how this tradition attracts a certain number of individuals precisely because it does not seem to them to be able to be defined - rightly or wrongly - as a religion. We are thus faced with the paradox of very committed people who reject any idea of "conversion to Buddhism" (the formula referring too explicitly in their eyes to a religious problem) and on the contrary of very weakly committed individuals who explicitly display themselves as "Buddhists". This is the reason why in the thesis that I have just defended and published on Buddhism in France, I carefully avoided in a first global approach to the phenomenon to speak of "converts", of "faithful" or even of "followers", to speak indistinctly of people "touched" by Buddhism. We will see that the French people truly socialized in Buddhism through attendance at a center or a master and regular spiritual practice are very few in number. However, we can only speak of "conversion" for this highly involved population. Before studying this conversion process in more detail in the more specific context of Tibetan Buddhism – the Buddhist movement most represented in France – and showing how it sheds a strong light on the relationship between tradition and modernity, let us briefly recall how an imaginary of Buddhism has been formed in the West since the mid-19th century, an imaginary that profoundly illuminates the current success of the Buddha's message in the land of Descartes, and let us evoke some very general points on Buddhism in France.
I. Historical reminder: construction of an imaginary
Buddhism has only really been known in the West for a little over one hundred and fifty years. Although numerous contacts took place since the 13th century with local Buddhist traditions, travelers and missionaries of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance had not yet brought to light the history of Buddhism and its unity across this immense diversity of cults and doctrines, widespread in most Asian countries. Certainly, since the 17th century, some Europeans had guessed the Indian origin of the Buddha2 and managed, as best they could, to situate his historical existence. In 1691 and 1693, Simon de la Loubère, Louis XIV's envoy to the court of the King of Siam, published remarkable works that established the possibility of a link between the different religions of Siam, Ceylon, Japan, and China, and suggested the possible existence of a single founder long before Christ3. But this too isolated knowledge had little impact in Europe. It was not until the founding of the Société Asiatique du Bengale in 1784 that Orientalism experienced a rapid and decisive boom. From the 1820s the word "Buddhism" appeared4, and with it the first conceptualization of a tree with multiple ramifications. But we still have to wait for the publication, in 1844, of Eugène Burnouf's masterful work, Introduction to the History of Indian Buddhism5, to gain precise knowledge thanks to a critical comparison of the most diverse sources. The works of the French scholar and other pioneers of Buddhist studies – mainly Alexander Csoma de Köros and Edmond Foucaux on Tibet, Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat and Stanislas Julien on China, Christian Lassen and Spence Hardy on Ceylon – will arouse in Europe a tremendous enthusiasm for Buddhism. It will, from then on, continue to spread in successive waves until today.
During these approximately 150 years of diffusion of Buddhism in the West, we can underline two major facts concerning its reception. First of all, Buddhism is constantly received through distorting cultural prisms and reinterpreted at each important moment of its diffusion according to the concerns of the Westerners who use it. Then – and this regardless of the period – Westerners have always sought to emphasize the kinship of Buddhism with modernity. Since its scholarly discovery, we have thus been led to distinguish four major moments where Buddhism experienced a new boom and was reinterpreted – always from a modernist perspective – according to the needs and mentalities of Westerners. 6
First moment: Buddhist rationalism (mid-19th century)
For the contemporaries of Baudelaire and Hugo, Buddhism, which had just been brought to light by scholarly studies, appeared above all as an atheistic doctrine which claimed to rely only on reason, placed individual experience at the center of its praxis, did not seem to rest on any intangible dogma, proposed a humanist morality without reference to any divine revelation, etc. We especially like to compare Christian "moralism" or "dogmatism" with the Buddhist philosophical system, "purely rational", surprisingly "compatible with modernity". Thus in the second half of the 19th century, Buddhism spread, first in France, then throughout Europe, as a formidable argument against Christianity. Most atheist, anti-clerical intellectuals or those simply hostile to Roman "intransigence" - Taine, Renan, Nietzsche, Renouvier, Michelet etc. - exalt Buddhist "rationalism", "atheism" and "positivism" against Christianity which represents, according to the positivist vision of Auguste Comte, an infantile stage of humanity. Nietzsche, for example, wrote in 1888 in The Antichrist: "Buddhism is a hundred times more realistic than Christianity, it has inherited by atavism the capacity to pose problems objectively and coldly, it comes after a philosophical movement that has lasted hundreds of years; the notion of God is already liquidated when it comes. Buddhism is the only effectively positivist religion that history presents to us, even in its theory of knowledge (a strict phenomenalism), it no longer declares "war on sin", but, giving reality its rights, "war on suffering". It has surpassed - which profoundly distinguishes it from Christianity - the self-deception that moral notions are, - it stands, to use my own language, beyond Good and Evil -7. » But this idealization and instrumentalization of Buddhism for polemical purposes will not resist, on the one hand, the Christian counter-offensive which presents Buddhism as pure nihilism and a terrible doctrine of nothingness – an interpretation reinforced by the assimilation of Buddhism to the radically pessimistic doctrine of the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer8 – on the other hand, the diffusion of scholarly works concerning Northern Buddhism, called the Great Vehicle, which presents many religious traits close to Catholicism: abundance of rituals, importance of hierarchy and decorum, beliefs in deities, demonic spirits, heavens and hells… Also, after having praised it to the skies, most European intellectuals turned away from Buddhism.
Second period: Esoteric Buddhism (end of the 19th century)
Alongside this decline, we are witnessing a new spread of Buddhism, this time through occult circles which, while remaining anchored in a rationalist perspective, nevertheless attempt to reconnect with a symbolic and mythical thought against the "materialism" of Western thought. This is why Tibetan Buddhism, which in their eyes combines rational thought and magical thought, rallies the support of the esoteric movements which abound in Europe and the United States at the turn of the century. The most illustrious of these, the Theosophical Society, was founded in 1875 by a Russian medium, Helena Blavatsky, and an American colonel, Henry Olcott. The Theosophists are fascinated by mysterious Tibet and revive the myth of magical Tibet and of lamas with extraordinary psychic powers, who are said to be the last "great initiates" on the planet. The myth of a secret Tibet, of lamas with magical powers, dates back to the distant tales of medieval travelers, such as Marco Polo or William of Rubruck, and was quite widespread in the West during the last quarter of the 19th century. Moreover, at that time, Tibet was completely forbidden to Westerners, which only amplified the fantasies about it. The Theosophists could not find a better refuge for their famous "Mahatmas" or "Masters" than this inaccessible Tibet - no Western expedition managed to reach Lhasa, the mythical capital of the land of snows, during the second half of the 19th century. "There are occultists of various degrees of advancement all over the world, and even occult brotherhoods which have much in common with the main brotherhood established in Tibet," wrote Alfred Sinnett, one of the leading Theosophists, author of a bestseller with the eloquent title: Esoteric Buddhism (1881). » But all our research on this subject has convinced me that the Tibetan brotherhood is by far the highest, and that it is considered as such by all the others. « 9
Third moment: Buddhist pragmatism (1960s)
Introduced to "esoteric Buddhism" by the Theosophical Society, the French explorer Alexandra David-Néel marks, by her unusual itinerary, a true transition between this heritage of esoteric Buddhism and the spread of a new Buddhist wave in the West in the aftermath of the Second World War, marked this time by the seal of experience and pragmatism. During this long journey in the East, in contact with multiple local traditions, notably Tibetan, Alexandra discovered with Tibetan yogis what no book could offer her: the learning of meditation. She also wrote in 1921: "meditation is the profound basis of the Buddhist's life, the basis of Buddhist doctrine, itself derived from the meditation of its founder, Sidattha Gotama, the Buddha. Just as one cannot logically call a man a Christian who does not pray, one who does not meditate has no real right to call himself a Buddhist10." At the time when the French explorer wrote these lines, the first Westerners who understood the existential significance of Buddhism linked to the effectiveness of its techniques had to go to Asia to learn to practice from competent masters. Today, the presence of many Asian spiritual masters in the West – it is quite clear that the drama of Tibet11 played a major role in this process, by promoting contact between the many Tibetan lamas in exile and Westerners – and the establishment of several thousand meditation centers allow all those who wish to engage "existentially" in the Buddhist path by initiating themselves, under the guidance of an expert, in various practices, of which meditation constitutes the archetype. The French explorer and orientalist only anticipated by half a century what would become, from the 1960s onwards, the dominant mark of interest in Buddhism for many young people from the counter-culture movement: a spiritual path that allows work on oneself, self-knowledge, self-transformation.
The inner experience fostered by Buddhist meditation is conceived as a true science. Thus, to Western science, which is interested in external phenomena, Matthieu Ricard, a former researcher at the Pasteur Institute who became a Tibetan Buddhist monk, opposes the "inner science12" that constitutes Buddhism, a "science" that allows us to answer the great questions of existence and to help the individual find true happiness. This individual search for happiness, inscribed at the heart of psychological modernity, also constitutes the central axis of the Buddhist approach, itself perceived by Westerners as rigorous and pragmatic. We can therefore say that Buddhism offers, for these new followers, a sort of "modern science of the subject", to use Edgar Morin's expression, which also has a decisive advantage: that of practically promoting individual happiness through work on oneself that integrates all the dimensions of the person: body, imagination, emotions, psyche, spirit.
Fourth moment: Buddhist humanism (end of the 20th century)
Finally, for the past ten years or so, we have witnessed a media frenzy surrounding Buddhism, and in particular the emblematic figure of the Dalai Lama, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989. Since then, Hollywood films, television programs and press kits devoted to the "Buddhist wave" have multiplied and many books relating to Buddhism have become bestsellers. Through this intense media coverage, several million Westerners are now affected by Buddhism through very diverse borrowings: occasional practice of meditation – sometimes in an explicitly Christian framework – beliefs in karma and reincarnation – 24% of Europeans – and above all strong sensitivity to the values of religious tolerance, interdependence, compassion and respect for life, individual and universal responsibility, values that punctuate all the speeches, works and interviews of the Dalai Lama. The "modernity" of Buddhism is once again underlined. But this time especially through its ethical dimension, which seems well adjusted to the great challenges that humanity is facing today, notably the dangers of religious fanaticism and ecological threats. It should be noted that this new rise of Buddhism in the West is occurring at the very moment when the last great political utopias are collapsing. It is on a field of ideological ruins that the media Buddhism of the Dalai Lama is developing in the West and appears to many as a new "secular wisdom" with universal values.
Conclusion: a double heritage
Through this heritage, Buddhism therefore appears above all "modern", because it is rational - a religion without God or dogma - because it is pragmatic and effective and finally because it constitutes a kind of humanism, of secular wisdom, adapted to the great challenges of our time. In parallel with the progressive construction of this representation of Buddhism as a "modern religion" and which today permeates all minds, we have seen that since the end of the 19th century we have witnessed the development of a specific imaginary concerning Tibetan Buddhism. Throughout the 20th century, an abundant esoteric literature will only reinforce this myth of "magical Tibet", a myth which finds its most accomplished popular expression in a comic strip like Tintin in Tibet. The tragedy of Tibet, invaded by China in 1950 and which has since suffered a veritable genocide, reinforces in the minds of many Westerners this idealization of a traditional Tibet "totally pure and peaceful" which fights with the weapons of the mind alone against the totalitarian Chinese power. The emblematic figure of the Dalai Lama alone embodies this dual Western imagination: he appears as modern, rational and non-dogmatic, close to Western science, tolerant, professing compassion and responsibility. At the same time, he embodies through his pacifist struggle the thousand-year-old tradition of Tibet threatened with extinction, but also this magical Tibet, which believes in signs from the sky and oracles, which sees great masters reincarnated as small children and lamas with mysterious powers. Thus the current success of Tibetan Buddhism in the West is played out between a modern perception on the one hand and the attraction of magical thinking and recourse to an ancient tradition on the other.
II. A Brief Overview of Buddhism in France
By the curious coincidences of history, France found itself in the 20th century at the crossroads of the most diverse Buddhist currents: Vietnamese who came to fight in Europe during the First World War; installation in the early 1960s, in the South-East of France, of the European Center of the Japanese Soka Gakkai movement; Tibetan lamas called by Western disciples to found centers in France at the end of the 1960s; arrival, at the same time, of the Japanese master Taisen Deshimaru who chose France to transmit Zen to the West; influx of Cambodian and Vietnamese political refugees fleeing the massacres of the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s. The main currents of Asian Buddhism are therefore well represented in France. But while the communities of Southeast Asia remain fairly withdrawn, Zen and Tibetan movements reach thousands of French people eager to learn the teachings of Buddha and practice meditation. There are currently more than two hundred Zen and Tibetan meditation centers in France. One of the main Zen dojos in Europe is in Touraine, the largest Tibetan monastery in the West is in Auvergne. Totally absent from the official religious landscape less than ten years ago, Buddhism is now recognized, de facto, by the public authorities as the fourth religion of the French, and since 1997, Buddhists have been entitled to their share of religious programs on television.
Is it possible to count the number of French Buddhists? The figures generally given are very disparate. The French Buddhist Union (UBF) lists 600,000 followers according to a precise count: 50,000 Chinese, 400,000 refugees from Southeast Asia and 150,000 native French (it is obviously this last figure that is important in the context of this study). Much less euphoric, François Jacquemard, the head of Editions Claire Lumière, which has been publishing the Guide to Tibet in France for about fifteen years, estimated in 1993 that the French "converts" to Buddhism, all branches combined, were less than 10,000. The French public authorities, via the Ministry of the Interior and Religious Affairs, estimate the number of Buddhists in France at "maximum 400,000", including "approximately 50,000 French converts". 13 The media also refer to surveys showing that several million French people are attracted to Buddhism and sensitive to some of its themes, such as tolerance and the freedom given to each person to follow their own path. Apart from their lack of justification, these figures are meaningless if they are not linked to various categories. Aside from Buddhists of Asian origin, how many "native" French people are affected by Buddhism? Whether we are talking about 2 million, 150,000, 50,000 or even 10,000 French people who have become "Buddhists," to what extent are they so and according to what criteria? How can various models or categories be updated in order to assess the real importance of a phenomenon parasitized by intense media exploitation and to measure its impact on individuals and on French society? We have attempted to show in our study that the most appropriate criterion for the desired goal is that of involvement, a criterion that corresponds much better to the characteristics of Buddhism and religious modernity than the criteria of belonging, adherence or identity. Involvement is indeed a neutral axiological criterion, without religious connotations, which avoids all the rhetorical games, misunderstandings and theoretical traps linked to the notions of adherence and identity. Applied to Buddhism, it makes it possible to measure the intensity of the commitment of individuals without privileging or excluding one of the many parameters to be taken into account: intellectual investment, practice of meditation, practice of rituals, adoption of principles of ethical conduct etc. The work we have undertaken thus allows us to distinguish three major categories according to a criterion of involvement: from the most committed – the "practitioners" socialized in centers – to the least committed – the "sympathizers" sensitive to the values of Buddhism – passing through the "close", an intermediate category which covers three models: syncretistic handymen, Christians who practice meditation and agnostic intellectuals. Starting from the files of Zen and Tibetan centers, we can put forward the figure of approximately 12 to 15,000 "regular practitioners" to which we can add the approximately 6 to 7,000 members of the Soka Gakkai. 14 A recent survey (Psychologies-BVA, December 1999), confirming other previous opinion surveys, allows us to estimate the number of "sympathizers" at 5 million. Finally, we can very roughly estimate the number of "close" between 100 and 150,000. This first draft of a census by category according to the criterion of involvement not only allows us to have a more precise idea of the real impact of Buddhism in France – very few truly committed people and many “sensitive” people – and to establish comparisons with other religious movements. It thus appears clearly that the French who claim a Buddhist religious identity are essentially the few hundred thousand Asians, to which we can just add a few thousand French – mainly from the Tibetan movement and the Soka Gakkai – who recognize themselves as “converts”.
Converts to Tibetan Buddhism
Let us focus on the French socialized in the Tibetan tradition, who regularly attend a center, engage in various ritual and meditative practices and readily recognize themselves as “Buddhists”, even if this label does not have a religious connotation for all. The numerous testimonies that we collected through interviews (around thirty) and questionnaires (more than 600) show a triple movement at work in the process of conversion to Tibetan Buddhism. On the one hand, practitioners are deeply inserted into the modern world and seem well shaped by the primacy of rationality, individualism and pragmatism, so characteristic of modernity. And it is this kinship that they perceive between Buddhism and modernity that leads them towards this spiritual path. On the other hand, they criticize certain aspects of modernity – lack of verticality, consumer society, stifling technical rationalism, etc. – and it is often in the name of this criticism that they call upon the Buddhist tradition, seeking experienced spiritual masters to help them live an "authentic spiritual experience." It is therefore through this triple relationship between modernity, critique of modernity and appeal to tradition that it is appropriate to study the processes of conversion within the framework of Tibetan Buddhism, by showing all the adjustments and rebalancing that Western followers of Buddhism attempt to operate between these three poles. Here, very briefly summarized, are some avenues.
Rational thought and magical thinking
It appears clearly in the light of the investigation that the development of Buddhism is favored as much by modernity as by the crisis of modernity. 15 From modernity, it integrates the fundamental values of individualism and rationality-pragmatism. No follower interviewed thinks of questioning these two postulates. All are perfect representatives of modern individualism and insist on their freedom of choice or their personal happiness, as on the rational, concrete and effective aspect of Buddhism. The fact that most of them are city dwellers, from bourgeois backgrounds and with extensive education, makes them particularly representative of Western individuality at its most advanced. In the crisis of modernity, however, is inserted its more archaic, magical, symbolic, ritualistic character, which allows the atomized subject to be reconnected to a sacred cosmos. This balance between rational thought and magical thought appears particularly with Tibetan Buddhism. The testimony of Christophe, a 32-year-old polytechnician, is eloquent in this regard: "What I really liked about Buddhism is this rational approach and at the same time this magical side. The fault of the scientific approach, especially today, is that we have fallen into the extreme, what we call scientism, radical materialism. It is a danger. If the scientific vision was a good thing at the start – it rejected the religious dogmas of the Catholic Church – we went too far into materialism and a reductionist vision of reality. Buddhism has a point of view that is both very logical, completely scientific, but is not limited to that. There is indeed in Buddhism a dimension that goes beyond rational understanding, the world of concepts. When a great master, whether the Karmapa or Lama Guendune, performs miracles – and they do, I have seen them – it is beyond understanding. There is a magical side that is found nowhere else. »
However, we have noticed that some Westerners touched by Tibetan Buddhism and who were clearly particularly fascinated by its magical, mysterious, initiatory side, felt the need in their discourse to minimize, or even deny this "marvelous" character in order to highlight the modern, rational, pragmatic, even "scientific" character of this tradition. We will hypothesize that Tibetan Buddhism particularly attracts Westerners in search of a typically religious experience – involving faith, emotion, the sacred, symbol, ritual, myth – but who need the rational and modern discourse of Buddhism to return to religion. These are most often former Catholics in revolt against the religion of their childhood or individuals without previous religious experience, but too deeply inserted into the modern rationalist universe to recognize – in front of others, but sometimes also in their own eyes – their need to connect with a sacred cosmos. We can also wonder whether this impossibility of defining Buddhism as a religion according to the usual substantive criteria, while it nevertheless has many characteristics, does not constitute one of the important reasons for the attraction of Buddhism to Westerners who no longer want to hear talk of "religion", but whose religious demand is still just as pressing. The recipe for Buddhist success is somewhat the opposite of that of Canada Dry: it doesn't look like religion, and yet it is!
Tradition and Modernity: A Religion Without God or Dogma
Let us now examine more precisely the relationship between tradition and modernity. Our research has convinced us that recourse to tradition in no way cancels out the effects of modern individualism on contemporary religious beliefs and behaviors, such as the loss of credibility and the disappearance of religious institutions. The attempt to reinscribe in a Buddhist tradition constitutes more an effort to rebalance against the excesses of modernity than an attempt to escape modernity and return to the stable universe of tradition. It is precisely because it possesses a real affinity with modernity—an affinity that is often exaggerated, it is true, but nonetheless real—that Buddhism allows Westerners to have recourse to this tradition. The paradox of Buddhism, repeatedly emphasized for over 150 years and which exasperates our Manichean logic, lies in this association of typical traits of the traditional religious universe and typical traits of modernity. For many Westerners, it constitutes a privileged meeting place of the modern and traditional universes, in which they can select what suits them best from these two universes. This rather unique space, within which individuals rooted in the modern world, but in search of other horizons of meaning than those offered by techno-science and consumer society, allows them to reconcile certain fundamental achievements of modernity – reason, individualism, pragmatism, relativism – with a "deep" spiritual experience, authenticated by "experts" in religion, but freed from the most "outdated" characteristics of their traditional religious universe: God, dogma and norms. Buddhism therefore appears as a "modern religion," that is, a marked spiritual path, but which leaves the subject complete freedom of choice and action. "What particularly touched me about Buddhism is the freedom given to each person to take what suits them," explains Jacqueline, a retired teacher, thus emphasizing the resolutely modern nature of her approach. But she immediately emphasizes the need to root oneself in a tradition by following the advice of a wise master: "you cannot do without an authentic being who has lived the experience before you and who is like a mirror for you. He can verify at any moment the authenticity of your spiritual experience."
Individuals attracted to Buddhism remain very sensitive to the modern values of individualism, freedom of choice and subjectivity which continue to undermine traditional religion, whatever it may be. At the same time, they want to inscribe their spiritual trajectory in a "lineage of practitioners" that goes back to the Buddha himself. This appeal to tradition seems to fulfill several functions. We will identify at least four.
First, an initiatory function, which manifests itself in a dual aspect: pedagogical and as a safeguard. All practitioners emphasize the need to learn to meditate from experienced guides. The search for a spiritual master is therefore essential. This master is chosen freely—a central characteristic of modernity—but the disciple then commits to trustingly following his or her recommendations regarding his or her learning of the spiritual life and, in particular, meditation. Tradition is also perceived as a bulwark against archaic mystical experiences that the meditator fears to experience during his or her spiritual journey.
For many practitioners, recourse to tradition then takes on a socializing function. It responds to the needs of individuals with fragmented trajectories to recreate social bonds by joining, even occasionally and partially, other "meditators" within the framework of a common practice and belief. Practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism emphasize the role and personality of the lama as a cohesive force within the community. For them, a Buddhist community only has meaning in relation to the spiritual master who brings together a certain number of disciples around him. When the master disappears, the community no longer really has a reason to exist. This is why many followers leave the center after the death of the lama who had touched them and seek another lama elsewhere. We can therefore say that the religious socialization of Tibetan Buddhism is mainly of the charismatic type.
The use of tradition also has a stabilizing and unifying function, because it offers the possibility to individuals with fragmented personal trajectories to find, even superficially, a certain coherence and stability. The survey, particularly through questionnaires, showed that most practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism truly "converted" to Buddhism after their thirties, and rather around 35-40 years old. Many had previously had a rather chaotic life path on an emotional and spiritual level. In search of values other than those proposed by Western society and disappointed by their religion of origin, they searched for a long time for a meaning to their existence and what they readily call their "own spiritual path". They then conducted for years an all-out search through various philosophical and spiritual readings, personal development courses, psychological work of the Gestalt or Jungian type, the practice of yoga, etc. During this fragmented journey, many of them, moreover, encountered Buddhism through a book, a conference, a trip to Asia. They felt sympathy and an interest in the teachings of the Buddha, but not to the point of engaging in a practice. And then, a few years later, still wandering, they rediscover Buddhism through a chance encounter or reading and decide to walk through the door of a center. The trigger is then most often immediate. They "recognize" in the Buddhist message and practices what they have been yearning for for many years. Suddenly, their inchoate journey seems to find a new coherence. Conversion within a tradition thus appears as an essential process in the construction of an identity. A modern space of freedom where everyone can adjust their personal spiritual needs as much as a traditional space of rooting, Buddhism seems, here too, perfectly adapted to the paradoxical demand of Westerners.
The call to tradition finally takes on a memorial function for all practitioners of Buddhism. What they seek in the invocation of tradition is in no way its normative and restrictive character, but the possibility it offers them to aggregate their individual quest to a great historical adventure. Here too, the rearticulation of the relationship to tradition seems to take place within the framework of an emotional religiosity according to the Weberian "ideal type". In the general context of the dissemination of belief, the use of charismatic figures, on whom emotion is fixed, constitutes one of the only ways for the "small pages" of atomized individual journeys to aggregate into the "great Book" of Tradition. The work of Danièle Hervieu-Léger on tradition and memory proves very enlightening here. 17 Inscription in a believing lineage, or more precisely here in a lineage of practitioners and men who have had this fundamental experience of "awakening", is an essential feature of Buddhism. Each Tibetan lama or Zen master begins his teaching by referring to his masters and by showing the lineage that connects him to some distant founder of the lineage, who all go back, from master to disciple, to the Buddha himself. For Christophe, "Buddhism is the only living, authentic tradition that has been passed down from master to disciple on the planet." Jacqueline points out that "it is said in Tibetan Buddhism that if the living transmission is broken at any point, everything will be lost."
Do the processes of conversion to Tibetan Buddhism constitute a stable return to a traditional religious universe? Careful observation of the behavior of these new converts shows that this is not the case. Behind the apparent submission to the "Buddhist magisterium," all sorts of tinkering are still at work, and most of these commitments remain very fragile. This new tradition, this new authority, is no longer received; it is chosen. This complete reversal allows the modern individual to engage in this process of conversion, but also encourages him to reappropriate the tradition and adjust it to his needs... even if it means abandoning it if this adjustment proves impossible. Today, it is no longer tradition that imposes itself on the individual and integrates him into its mold, but the individual who chooses a tradition and adapts it to his personal needs. As Danièle Hervieu-Léger points out, "being religious in modernity is not so much knowing oneself to be engendered as wanting to be engendered. This fundamental reworking of the relationship to tradition that characterizes modern religious belief opens up, in a theoretically unlimited way, the possibilities of invention, tinkering, and manipulation of the devices of meaning capable of creating tradition. "18
Thus, among French followers of Tibetan Buddhism, we observe not only a significant tinkering at the level of beliefs, but also a very loose community adherence. Those in charge of the centers deplore a very high "turnover": approximately 10% of practitioners remain loyal for more than five years and 3% for more than ten years, according to statistics from the Karma Ling Institute. Followers of Tibetan Buddhism, in particular, tend to change centers according to the evolution of their needs and the occasional presence of a particular high lama who comes to give an initiation or a teaching. Noted by sociologists across many European countries, this fluidity of commitments and this instrumental conception of community is perfectly typical of religious modernity and affects all historical religions as well as new religious movements. They reflect, once again, this Copernican revolution in religious consciousness: it is no longer tradition that dictates meaning to the individual, but the individual who freely seeks what makes sense for him in one or more religions. Religious "self-service" is the consequence of this shift in the relationship to tradition and, apart from a small minority of faithful deeply and lastingly socialized in a religion, most Westerners who convert today within a historical tradition do not invest themselves totally - tinkering and subjective reinterpretations remain at work - nor lastingly. "There are excellent reasons why people after religion are tempted to convert in all directions, emphasizes Marcel Gauchet. And there are even better ones whose conversions are neither very solid nor very lasting, because they are not able to renounce the reasons that determine them to convert, which is what a conversion requires to be fully effective. A back and forth and a lame compromise between adherence and distance, between the cult of the problem and the choice of the solution that defines the specific religiosity of the time – and perhaps the lasting mode of survival of the religious within a world without religion. 19 Conversion to Buddhism offers an excellent example.
Frédéric Lenoir (CEIFR, EHESS, Paris)