Published wi h license by Koninklijke B ill b | doi:10.1163/18748929-bja10130
© Ma in Baumann and Tiziano Bielli, 2025 | ISSN: 1874-8910 (p in ) 1874-8929(online)
This is an open access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he cc by 4.0 license.
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
b ill.com/j e
Engaging o he Common Good
Typology, Mo i a ion and Scope o Ci ic Engagemen o Buddhis s in I aly
and Swi ze land
Ma in Baumann | o cid: 0000-0001-9871-7568
Depa men o he S udy o Religions, Uni e si y o Luce ne, Luce ne,
Swi ze land
[email p o ec ed]
Tiziano Bielli | o cid: 0000-0001-7117-9157
Depa men o he S udy o Religions, Uni e si y o Luce ne, Luce ne,
Swi ze land
iziano[email p o ec ed]om
Recei ed 17 Augus 2024 | Accep ed 29 Janua y 2025 |
Published online 13 Oc obe 2025
Abs ac
This a icle akes s ock o and compa a i ely analyzes he scope and mo i a ions o
ci ic ac i i ies o Buddhis s and Buddhis o ganiza ions in I aly and Swi ze land. Based
on he analy ical pe spec i e o ci ic engagemen , we sugges disce ning ci ic ac i i ies
on a con inuum om nonengagemen o ac i is engagemen , dis inguishing he ou
ypes o nonengagemen , in e media y, shape , and ac i is . Fu he , he a icle di e -
en ia es ou social mo i a ions and ou Buddhis mo i a ions o ci ic engagemen .
The scope o ci ic engagemen appea s o be much la ge in I aly han in Swi ze -
land. The a icle o mula es six hypo he ical explana ions o he di e ence, a guing
ha na ional and cul u al speci ics, di e ences in he legal sys em ega ding he go -
e nance o eligions, and he composi ion o he Buddhis popula ions a e c ucial in
unde s anding he dissimila scope o Buddhis ci ic engagemen in he wo coun-
ies.
2baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
Keywo ds
Buddhism – ci ic engagemen – ypology – mo i a ion – go e nance o eligions –
I aly – Swi ze land
The ci ic engagemen o Buddhis s and Buddhis g oups is a phenomenon o
he wen ie h cen u y (Queen 2000a, 1; King 2018, 483) and he objec o his
s udy. I no ably con as s wi h he incep ion and ea ly de elopmen o he
Buddhis o de o monks and nuns (saṅgha) wi h i s asce ic, wo ld-wi hd awn
cha ac e . Acco ding o he su as (Pāli, sc ip u es) o he Pāli canon, he Bud-
dhaand hesaṅgha didno ac i elyin e e ein hesocialwo ld,and as wande -
ing asce ics e ac ed om wo ldly a ai s (Gomb ich 1991, 30, 81; Ha ey 1990,
217).While he su as epo o he Buddha mee ing kings, b ahmins (B ahman-
ical p ies s), and householde s and ad ising hem wi h his p ac ical eachings,
he Buddha did no ake an in e es in he poli ical and social a ai s o socie y.
Buddhologis Heinz Beche hus held ha he “o iginal aim [o he Buddha’s
eaching] was no o shape li e in he wo ld bu o each libe a ion, elease om
he wo ld” (Beche 1984, 7, emphasis in o iginal). In his ega d, in his compa -
a i e s udies on he economic e hics o he wo ld’s majo eligions, sociologis
Max Webe coined he ideal ype o “o he -wo ldly asce icism” ep esen ed by
he ea ly wande ing Buddhis monks and nuns. Acco ding o Webe , ea ly Bud-
dhism was a “speci ic unpoli ical and an i-poli ical p o ession- eligion” (1972,
218), a depic ion la gely conside ed co ec by leading schola s in Buddhis
s udies (see Schluch e 1984).
Du ing he succeeding cen u ies o he sp ead o Buddhis eachings, p ac-
ices, and o de o nume ous Asian coun ies and kingdoms, howe e , he
saṅgha es ablished close ela ions wi h he oyal ule s and go e ning classes.
Monks adop ednew social oles and se ed as—among o he hings—poli ical
ad ise s o and ch onologis s o kings and empe o s, eudal lo ds o land and
illages, and ce emonial specialis s wi h i ual se ices o laymen and he
oyal cou (e.g., Michael 1982; Ca i he s 1984, 134–142). The saṅgha and Bud-
dhis eligion hus de eloped o signi ican ly shape li e in he wo ld and o
s ongly in luence social and poli ical a ai s. Gene ally, and wi h ew excep-
ions, h oughou hei his o y he e ol ed, di e en Buddhis o de s and adi-
ionsa i med hesociopoli icals a usquo,and p o i edwell om oyalpa on-
age and i ually legi imized ule s and kings (Ha is 1999).
The social engagemen o Buddhism is ce ainly no an exclusi e ea u e o
i s sp eading in Wes e n coun ies. As Ch is ophe S. Queen and Sallie B. King
s a e in hei seminal con ibu ion on Buddhis libe a ion mo emen s in Asia,
engaging o he common good 3
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
“[ o] mos people in he Wes , he e m ‘Buddhism’ means a eligion o in o-
spec i e wi hd awal. Ye he eali y o con empo a y Asian Buddhism is o en
some hing e y di e en . ‘Buddhism’ in con empo a y Asia means ene ge ic
engagemen wi h social and poli ical issues and c ises a leas as much [as] i
means monas ic o medi a i e wi hd awal” (Queen and King 1996a, ix).
Wi hin he spec um o wo ld-wi hd awn Buddhis o de and sociopoli i-
cally in ol ed Buddhis monks and adi ions, we conside he con empo a y,
in e nal, di e se mo emen o engaged Buddhism as a speci ic exp ession o
Buddhis pe sons and g oups ci ically ac ing in he wo ld and socie y. King
p oposes o de ine engaged Buddhism as “ hose o ms o Buddhism ha in en-
ionally and non- iolen ly engage wi h he social, poli ical, economic, and en i-
onmen al issues o socie y and he wo ld on [ he] basis o and as an exp es-
sion o Buddhis belie s, alues, concep s, wo ld iews, and p ac ices” (2018,
479). Likewise, Queen speci ies ha socially engaged Buddhism is cons i u ed
by hose ways “in which Buddhis eachings and p ac ices a e in e p e ed and
applied o mobilize peace ul, collec i e esponses o socie y-wide challenges”
(2018, 502). The e m “engaged Buddhism” was i s coined by he Vie namese
monk Thich Nha Hanh in he 1960s o e e o Buddhis ac ions in he spe-
ci ic con ex o he ep essi e Diem egime and he ensuing Vie namese wa
(King 1996). Queen and King ans e ed he e m o he academic sphe e and
compa a i ely po ayed so-called Buddhis libe a ion mo emen s and hei
o ms o Buddhis -inspi ed social and poli ical engagemen in Asia (Queen and
King 1996b; King 2018) and heWes (Queen 2000c; Queen 2018).Taking up his
pe spec i e, we aim o ake s ock o , compa a i ely analyze, and ypologically
sys ema ize he scope o ci ic engagemen and socie al in ol emen o Bud-
dhis s and Buddhis o ganiza ions in I aly and Swi ze land. In his ega d, ci ic
engagemen is mean o encompass indi idual o collec i e ac ions, imple-
men ed in public a enas in conce wi h o he people o o ganiza ions, wi h
he pu pose o con ibu ing o he shaping o he li es o indi iduals and com-
muni ies (see below).
The choice o he wo coun ies was based on hei di e se socio- eligious
backg ounds, hei dissimila in e nal s uc u es (Swiss can ons and I alian
egions ha e di e en ea u es and powe s), he peculia ela ionships Bud-
dhis o ganiza ions ha e wi h he cen al s a e, and he ways in which eligious
mino i ies a e o a e no publicly unded.
This a icle poses he esea ch ques ion: To wha ex en and why do Bud-
dhis s and Buddhis o ganiza ions in I aly and Swi ze land engage in ci ic
ac ions? To answe he ques ion, he nex sec ion will delinea e he analy ical
pe spec i e on ci ic engagemen , ollowed by an ou line o he me hodological
app oach and a desc ip ion o he sample. An in oduc ion o he coun y-
4baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
speci ic p o iles o Buddhism and he s a e– eligion ela ions p ecedes he
h ee old p esen a ion o esul s: a ypology o ci ic engagemen , ollowed by
he enume a ion o impo an mo i a ions o ci ic engagemen , and conclud-
ing wi h a discussion o he scope o ci ic engagemen and he easons o he
coun y- ela ed di e ences. As ou s udy a gues, he ange o ci ic engagemen
appea s o di e ma kedly be ween I aly and Swi ze land and equi es expla-
na ion. We sugges ha na ional and cul u al speci ics and also he di e ences
in he legal sys ems ega ding he go e nance o eligions as well as he com-
posi ion o he Buddhis popula ions a e c ucial in explaining he dissimila
scope o Buddhis ci ic engagemen in he wo coun ies.
1 Analy ical Pe spec i e: Ci ic Engagemen
We concei e ci ic engagemen o Buddhis pe sons and Buddhis o ganiza-
ions in I aly and Swi ze land as ac i i ies wi hin he b oad s and o engaged
Buddhism. As men ioned, he coinage o he e y e m is c edi ed o he Vie -
namese Buddhis monk, ac i is , and poe Thich Nha Hanh (1926–2022) in he
1960s, and he ounding o heTiep Hien O de o O de o In e being in 1966 in
Vie nam (King 1996; Hun -Pe y and Fine 2000, 38–40). Du ing he 1970s and
he 1980s, agains he backd op o he Vie nam Wa and nuclea a manen s,
he idea and app oaches o engaged Buddhism inc easingly gained momen-
um among Buddhis leade s in No h Ame ica,Wes e n Eu ope, and coun ies
in Asia. New ins i u ional o ms we e ounded, such as he Buddhis Peace Fel-
lowship (1978), he In e na ional Ne wo k o Engaged Buddhism (1989) wi h
subsequen na ional b anches, and he Zen Peacemake O de (1996) c ea ed
by Be na d Te sugen Glassman Rōshi (1939–2018), as well as he Japanese Nip-
ponzan Myōhōji O de , ounded ea lie in 1945. Fo Eu ope, Sand a Bell (2000)
and F anz-Johannes Li sch (2000) su eyed he scope and ac i i ies o engaged
Buddhism in G ea B i ain and Ge man-speaking coun ies, which has been
upda ed by Paul Fulle and coau ho s in an o e iew o Buddhis ins i u-
ions and ac i i ies in F ance, Finland, Sweden, Po ugal, Poland, Spain, G ea
B i ain, Ge many and I aly (Fulle , o hcoming).
Engaged Buddhism comp ehends i sel as a global, social mo emen wi h
loosely connec ed Buddhis o ganiza ions, ne wo ks, and ini ia i es, o ming
a “new pa adigm o Buddhis libe a ion,” as Queen s a es (2000a, 2). As King
holds, “engaged Buddhism is a con empo a y o m o Buddhism ha engages
ac i ely ye non- iolen ly wi h he social, economic, poli ical, and ecological
p oblems o socie y” (2009, 1). Recen ly, Paul Fulle challenged he idea o
non iolence, a guing o he inclusion o iolen e hnocen ic and na ionalis
engaging o he common good 5
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
Buddhis mo emen s in he de ini ion o engaged Buddhism. His poin o iew
depa s om Queen and King’s asse ion ha “Buddhis mo emen s a e always
non iolen ” (Queen and King 1996a, x). Fulle calls his idea in o ques ion by
p oposing a b oade de ini ion o engaged Buddhism (Fulle 2021, 6), and his
monog aph aised a li ely deba e wi h con ibu ions in he Jou nal o Buddhis
E hics (B own 2023; King 2023; Queen 2023).
In a ious s udies, Buddhis s and Buddhis schola -p ac i ione s commonly
ci e—as mo i es and a ionales o engaged Buddhis ac i i ies—p inciples
such as he Buddhis eachings o ecip ocal in e connec edness/dependen
o igina ion (Pāli paṭiccasamuppāda), ka ma, causali y, ka uṇā (compassion),
me ā/mai i (lo ing-kindness), dāna (gi ing o gene osi y), bodhici a ( he
hough o enligh enmen ), he Fi e P ecep s, and sel lessness and non io-
lence (Jones 1989; Queen and King 1996b; King 2009; Fulle 2021). In con-
as o such a Buddhis -inspi ed unde s anding and as obse e s in o med
by he discipline o he s udy o eligions, aking a posi ion o me hodologi-
cal agnos icism, we p e e o speak o ci ic engagemen o ci ically engaged
ac i i ies ca ied ou by Buddhis s and Buddhis o ganiza ions. De ining ci ic
engagemen ep esen s indeed an in ica e exa a quaes io as schola s p o ide
nume ous al e na i es on he basis o hei esea ch ields and app oaches.
In he ligh o his, Cyn hia Gibson highligh s ha “ he e is a lack o consen-
sus on wha cons i u es ci ic engagemen ” (2001, 17). In his ega d, Richa d
P. Adle and Judy Goggin (2005) lis di e en de ini ions p o ided by au ho s
ocusing on se e al aspec s o ci ic engagemen . Fu he mo e, hey p opose
de ining ci ic engagemen as “ he ways in which ci izens pa icipa e in he li e
o a communi y in o de o imp o e condi ions o o he s o o help shape
he communi y’s u u e” (2005, 236). Looking a he di e en possible de i-
ni ions, Elisa Dille sugges s ex ending he meaning o ci ic engagemen o
include an “expe iencing [o ] a sense o connec ion, in e ela edness, and,
na u ally, commi men owa d he g ea e communi y (all li e o ms)” (Dille
2001, 22, quo ed in Adle and Goggin 2005, 240). This peculia cha ac e iza-
ion esona es wi h a ionales some p ac i ione s p o ided abou he impo -
ance o silen medi a ion as a o m o engagemen , albei seemingly de oid
o any angible e ec on socie y. Ne e heless, we decided o ocus on he
socie al dimension o engagemen , as exp essed by he e m “ci ic,” which
de i es om he La in wo d ci is and e e s o collec i e dimensions, and pub-
lic and poli ical a enas (see Adle and Goggin 2005, 238). The wo d “ci ic,”
in combina ion wi h he e m “engagemen ,” e e s o ac i i ies o a collec-
i e na u e in he public, in ela ion o he local a ea, ci y, na ion, and in
mode ni y—e en he en i e globalized wo ld. Bea ing in mind his c ucial
poin , we de ine ci ic engagemen as consis ing o indi idual o collec i e
6baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
ac ions, implemen ed in public a enas in conce wi h o he pe sons o o ga-
niza ions, wi h he pu pose o con ibu ing o he shaping o he li es o indi-
iduals and communi ies. Examples o ci ic engagemen wi h an impac on
socie y a e helping o se up humani a ian co ido s o ecei e asylum seeke s
om wa - o n coun ies o o ganizing a na ional campaign in a o o nuclea
disa mamen .
Adle and Goggin (2005, 240) di e en ia e ci ic engagemen on a con in-
uum spanning om in o mal indi idual ac ion (such as helping a neighbo )
o o mal collec i e ac ion (such as sus ained in ensi e se ice), dis inguish-
ing be ween communi y ac i i ies and poli ical ac i i ies. Below, we sugges
adop ing he idea o a con inuum, and in he analysis, we s i e o ypologically
concep ualizeBuddhis ci ic engagemen ona spec um spanning be ween he
poles o nonengagemen and ac i is engagemen .
2 Me hod
We ga he ed da a o sc u inize he scope o engaged ac i i ies o Buddhis pe -
sons and o ganiza ions by way o quali a i e guideline-based in e iews wi h
na a i e pa s (Luh mann 2022, 345–364). We deduc i ely cons uc ed he
in e iew guidelines on he basis o he aim and pu pose o he hi d-pa y
unded esea ch p ojec “Engaging o he Common Good,”1 and induc i ely
complemen ed he guidelines on he basis o he i s in e iews done. In addi-
ion, we comple ed an analysis o he websi es o nume ous Buddhis o gani-
za ions in o de o gain insigh ega ding he po en ial ci ic engagemen o he
g oups and cen e s.
In I aly, based on he s a e o esea ch (Falà 2016; In o igne and Zocca elli
2024) and ou own obse a ions (Bielli, o hcoming), we conduc ed hi y-
eigh guideline-based in e iews in 2021 and 2022 and nume ous websi e anal-
yses o Buddhis o ganiza ions. Due o he co id-19 pandemic, he in e iews
we e no done as in-pe son in e iews in Buddhis cen e s bu by means o
Zoom ideo exchange. Fo his s udy we p ima ily make use o he de ailed
analysis o wel e in e iews and w i en memos. In e iewees we e no an-
domly ec ui ed; he nondenomina ional umb ella o ganiza ion I alian Bud-
dhis Union (ibu) and he I alian Buddhis Ins i u e Sōka Gakkai (ibisg) ac ed
as ga ekeepe s in he p ocess o inding in e iewees. In ac , due o he co id-
1 The esea ch p ojec and his wo k we e suppo ed by he Swiss Na ional Science Founda ion
om Oc obe 2020 o Janua y 2025, unding numbe 10001F_197197 / 1.
engaging o he common good 7
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
19 pandemic, i was no possible o a end public e en s a ele an Buddhis
enues, which commonly a e aluable occasions o mee po en ial in e ie-
wees and in o man s. The e o e, i was necessa y o con ac he Buddhis o ga-
niza ions di ec ly. In he case o he ibisg, he names we e p o ided by he
o ganiza ion’s manage s and canno be conside ed ep esen a i e o all he
sensibili ies p esen in he o ganiza ion wi h ega d o i s social ac i i ies. E en
in he case o he ibu, al hough he con ac s we e no p o ided di ec ly by
he o ganiza ion’s op managemen , we mus bea in mind ha he cen e s
ha we e willing o pa icipa e in he esea ch (which was only a ac ion
o all he I alian cen e s) necessa ily selec ed he names gi en o he in e -
iews. Thus, we can easonably assume ha hey did no indica e he less
socially ac i e esponsible pa ies o membe s. The o ganiza ions and cen e s
p o ided us p ima ily wi h names o leade s, and hus we ca ied ou only a
ew in e iews wi h o dina y membe s. As a esul , he sample may ha e an
o e - ep esen a ion o he mo e ac i e app oach o social engagemen . How-
e e , a ca e ul look e eals cha ac e is ic elemen s in each in e iew, poin -
ing o a di e si ica ion o iewpoin s, which enables u he esea ch in he
u u e. Po en ial ca ego ies eme ging in he analysis o he i s in e iews
p omp ed us o conduc u he in e iews in o de o heo e ically sa u a e
he eme ging ca ego ies on he basis o g ounded heo y ene s. The in e ie-
wees ( ec ui ed also ia con ac ing he ibu und he ibisg) we e bo h lead-
e s and o dina y membe s, laymen, laywomen, monks, and nuns a ilia ed o
di e seBuddhis adi ions. In he as majo i y o cases hey we e con e Bud-
dhis s.
In Swi ze land, p oceeding om a de ailed s udy o Buddhis eache s,
g oups, cen e s, and monas e ies (see below, Baumann 2022), we conduc ed
se en guideline-based in e iews wi h na a i e pa s, h ee elephone o email
in e iews, and wen y-six websi e analyses o Buddhis o ganiza ions. The
in e iews we e done as ace- o- ace mee ings a he Buddhis cen e s in la e
2022 and ea ly 2023. We selec ed he Buddhis cen e leade s o in e iews on
he basis o he sel -desc ip ion o he Buddhis o ganiza ions on hei websi es
and on he long ime backg ound knowledge o one o he coau ho s (Bau-
mann 1998; 2012; 2022; o hcoming). The in e iews we e in ended o ob ain
i s -hand knowledge o he ange o ci ic ac i i ies o Buddhis s and Bud-
dhis o ganiza ions, and o inqui e abou he mo i es and a ionales o ca -
ying hese ou . In addi ion, he in e iews p o ed aluable in e iewing o
wha ex en he ange o social and ci ic ac ions lis ed on he Buddhis cen-
e ’s websi e ma ched wi h he ac i i ies ha we e ac ually ca ied ou . The
b oad websi e analysis was in ended o p o ide in o ma ion use ul o selec ing
o ganiza ions o in e iews. While he numbe o in e iews— ace- o- ace,
8baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
elephone, and email—is limi ed, we accomplished a heo e ical sa u a ion
inso a as he in e iews did no lead o addi ional ca ego ies o he ypology
p esen ed below.
Wi h ega d o e hical aspec s o he s udy, in e iewees we e in o med o
he la ge aim o he in e iew wi hin his compa a i e s udy.To he ex en pos-
sible,weanonymized he iden i ies o he in e iewees,whose s a emen swe e
quo ed, hough in o med obse e s o he na ional Buddhis ields may in e
he iden i y o a speake , pa icula ly in he case o known Buddhis leade s.
We numbe ed he anonymized in e iews in ch onological o de in which hey
we e conduc ed (each coun y has i s own sequence); hus, In e iew 7 (i 7)
ela es o he se en h in e iew comple ed. The I alian pa icipan s ecei ed
an in o ma ion shee wi h explana ions conce ning he esea ch me hodology,
anonymi y and p i acy issues, and signed an in o med consen o m o ake
pa in he esea ch. They we e in o med o hei igh o wi hd aw om he
esea ch a any ime and o ha e ee access o he esea ch documen a ion.
Bo h au ho s a e schola s in he s udy o eligions, employing a social-
scien i ic me hodology o s udying con empo a y Buddhism in Eu ope. Bo h
ha e isi ed nume ous Buddhis g oups and assemblies and main ain a ious
con ac s wi h Buddhis leade s and common membe s. While he a icle’s i s
au ho conside s himsel an agnos ic and non-Buddhis , he second au ho
g ew up in a amily en i onmen cha ac e ized by bo h a Ch is ian Ca holic
he i age and a Buddhis backg ound.
3 Na ional Con ex s: P o iles o Buddhism and S a e–Religion
Rela ions
In I aly and Swi ze land, as in o he Wes e n Eu opean coun ies, in e es in
Buddhis eachings and p ac ices has s eadily inc eased since he 1970s. The
ecep ion o Japanese Zen medi a ion was soon ollowed by he es ablish-
men o nume ous Tibe an Buddhis cen e s and monas e ies and hen by
he ounding o g oups and cen e s a o ing ipassanā medi a ion, Ko ean
Zen, pan-Buddhis app oaches, and o he s. Also, bo h coun ies saw he a i al
o e ugees and immig an s om Asian majo i y Buddhis coun ies and he
es ablishmen o saṅghas om Thailand, Vie nam, Taiwan, and Tibe . Now, in
he ea ly wen y- i s cen u y, a plu ali y o schools and adi ions cha ac e izes
he p esence o Buddhism in he wo coun ies (Falà 2016; Baumann 2022).
Rega ding he size o he Buddhis popula ion in I aly, In o igne and Zoc-
ca elli (2024) es ima e he o e all numbe o Buddhis s in he coun y o be
app oxima ely 358,000 as o 2023, making up 0.6 pe cen o he I alian popula-
engaging o he common good 9
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
ion o abou i y-nine million inhabi an s in 2023. This numbe comp ises an
es ima ed 140,000 Buddhis s wi h o eign ci izenship and 218,000 I alian Bud-
dhis s.This las igu e is composed o a ound 100,000 people om he a ea con-
cep ually ep esen ed by he ibu, belonging o he Vaj ayāna, Zen, The a āda,
Nichi en, Chan, In e buddhis , Seon, and Tendai adi ions, 96,700 membe s
o he ibisg, and 21,300 p ac i ione s belonging o o he adi ions (In o i-
gne and Zocca elli 2024). Wi h ega d o Buddhis o eign ci izens, he is a
epo (2015) on eligious a ilia ion and p ac ice among o eign ci izens s a es
ha hese p edominan ly come om China (63.8 pe cen ) and S i Lanka (18.8
pe cen ).
Use ul da a on ibu-a ilia ed cen e s is p o ided by a epo summa izing
he esul s o esea ch ca ied ou on he ibu and edi ed by Giuseppe Gio dan,
S e ania Palmisano, and Pie Luigi Zocca elli (2023). Acco ding o his epo ,
Vaj ayānacen e scons i u e heno able majo i y ( hi y-se enou o six y- ou
cen e s), wi h Zen ( i een) and The a āda g oups (six) ollowing. The la ges
numbe o membe s is in he Vaj ayāna cen e s (9,727), ollowed by The a āda
(6,215) and Zen (838). Mos cen e s a ilia ed o he ibu a e in he no h ( o y),
wi h smalle numbe s in he cen e (eigh een) and only a ew in he sou h (six).
The numbe o membe s, when conside ed egionally, is highes in he cen e
(12,237), he no h is in second place (4,623), and he lowes is he sou h (181)
(Gio dan, Palmisano, and Zocca elli 2023, 77–80).
Wi h ega d o he ele ance o he numbe o ibisg membe s, Sōka Gakkai
success in I aly may be connec ed o: (1) an in ense impulse on he pa o Bud-
dhis membe s o sp ead and sha e Buddhis eachings, (2) he secula na u e
o he o ganiza ion, wi h lay membe s who a e imme sed in I alian socie y and
he e o e ha e mo e social con ac s han monks and nuns, (3) he ac ha i s
ac i i ies a e less adi ional and mo e sui ed o a lay audience, (4) he ac ha
Sōka Gakkai p ac ice may appea o new p ac i ione s as simple and mo e
s aigh o wa dwhen compa ed omo e adi ionalBuddhis p ac ices,and (5)
a conscious e o o simpli y, popula ize, and democ a ize Buddhism in o de
o make i s p ac ice accessible o e e yone.
Fo Swi ze land, he numbe o Buddhis s aged i een yea s and olde was
es ima ed o be 36,800 in 2022 (Bundesam ü S a is ik 2024). When also
conside ing child en aged one o ou een, a igu e o 45,000 o 50,000 Bud-
dhis s seems ealis ic (0.5 pe cen o he Swiss popula ion o almos nine
million people). This numbe consis s o an es ima ed 18,000 Thai Buddhis s
( he as majo i y Thai women), some 8,000 e hnic Tibe an Buddhis s, and
oughly 7,000 Buddhis s o Vie namese o igin. App oxima ely 3,000 Buddhis s
a e o Cambodian descen , and a ew housand people o Chinese and Japanese
descen mos likely also pa icipa e in Buddhis i uals. “Con e s” o “alpine
16 baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
human e olu ion o a single indi idual will con ibu e o changing he
des iny o a na ion and e en ually o all humani y” (i 1, 15:07–17; see Ikeda,
n.d.). An I alian Zen p ac i ione (lay, emale, mid 40s) unde sco ed he
impo ance o silen medi a ion as a “ e y indi idual, in ima e momen ”
(i 12, 8:04–14), du ing which “one uly ge s in ouch wi h onesel and
aces onesel ” (8:14–23). She added ha “Dōgen says o know you sel
in o de o o ge you sel ” (8:28–44). All his led he o ecognize ha
she is e y di e en om he way she pe cei es he sel and a he same
ime “absolu ely he same as e e yone else” (8:44–9:01). This inspi ed he
o do hings o o he s, s a ing wi h saṅgha ac i i ies, conside ed o be
a o m o ci ic engagemen . Along a simila line, he abo e-men ioned
long- e m Swiss Zen and ipassanā eache conside ed his medi a ion
ins uc ions as a o m o ci ic engagemen , as he pa icipan s would
bene i om i o be e handle he challenges o social li e (i 1, 6:26–
46).
2. Changing indi iduals, changing socie y: Wi h ega d o he goals o he
Senza omica campaign, he ibisg leade s essed ha “ he main objec-
i e was o gene a e public awa eness … in o de o each a c i ical mass
o in luence go e nmen s, he Uni ed Na ions … o nego ia e wha was
hen called he Con en ion o he P ohibi ion o Nuclea Weapons” (i 1,
26:16–52). He also held ha he main peculia i y o he exhibi ion lies
in i s sub i le, ha is, “T ans o ming he Human Spi i o a Wo ld F ee
o Nuclea Weapons” (28:10–14). In e es ingly, he cla i ied: “I is a pa h
ha leads one o e lec … on he ac ion ha he indi idual can ake …
so i is a pa h o empowe men ” (28:19–32). In he same ein, he abo e-
men ioned I alian leade o a Zen cen e a ilia ed o he ibu explained
ha his ac i i ies in schools we e e y help ul o ecognizing “mu ual
knowledge” and o “c ea ing a socie y ha is as, shall we say, welcoming
as possible, and, awa e o di e ences” (i 8.2, 3:31–51). Bo h in e iewees
based hei mo i a ions o ci ic engagemen on he aim o shaping he
a i udes and alues o indi iduals, in o de o each speci ic goals. Simi-
la easons, hough no as goal-o ien ed, we e also oiced by some o ou
Swiss in e iewees (i 1, 11:13–12:12; i 4.2, 16:00–22; i 5, 41:19–52).
3. Explaining/cla i ying Buddhism o o he s: The Zen leade men ioned
ano he eason o Buddhis ci ic engagemen . Al hough he Buddhis
p esence in I aly is g owing, “ he e is s ill a lo o be done and explained”
(i 8.2, 01:58–02:26). He added ha “ o he majo i y o I alians, Buddhism
is s ill some hing ha has a … magical, mys ical la o , a bi like ha ,
mys e ious” (2:16–35) and “mos I alians hink ha we Buddhis s only
ca e abou ou sel es … and ha we li e a kind o … looking only a ou -
engaging o he common good 17
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
sel es” (2:35–50). Fo hese easons, he concluded ha “[i ] is impo an
o con ibu e as Buddhis s” (2:50). Thus, in his case, ci ic engagemen is
assumed o be help ul in changing speci ic pe cep ions abou Buddhism
in I alian socie y. On simila lines, he leade (lay, emale, la e 60s) o a
Chan cen e in Swi ze land old us ha hey o ganized p og ams o chil-
d en, which a ac ed bo h Buddhis s and non-Buddhis s alike, and could
hus in o m he pa icipan s abou mind ulness and Buddhis ideas (i 5,
22:50–23:43).
4. Indi ec dissemina ion o Buddhis alues: An ibisg leade (lay, male,
60) s a ed ha wi h he new exhibi ion conce ning clima e change and
en i onmen al issues, hey wish o “b ing a Buddhis iew ha is no
Manichaean, ha is, he bad guys and he good guys on one side” (i 2,
11:53–12:06). He emphasized he impo ance o “c ea ing oppo uni ies so
ha Buddhis humanism can be ans e ed in o people’s hea s,” wi hou
he need o con e anyone, bu simply “sha ing hese alues o espec
o li e, o he di e si y o people” (23:40–24:04). Likewise, a nun om a
Fo Guang Shan cen e in Swi ze land epo ed o e en s ha ook place
and mee ings ha we e held o in o m a endees abou Buddhism and
he ou p inciples o Humanis Buddhism as de ined by Hsing Yun, he
ounde o Fo Guang Shan (i 6, 19:54–20:00).
Theabo e-s a edmo i a ionsdono exclusi ely e e oBuddhis concep s and
ideas o ci ic engagemen . Howe e , ou in e iewees also men ioned a ious
Buddhis concep s o hei ci ic engagemen . In he ollowing, we e e o ou
such concep s.
1. Reducing su e ing (Pāli dukkha): The abo e-men ioned ac i is Swiss
Zen p ies , p omo ing animal wel a e and a egan die , explained his
engagemen as he educ ion o su e ing (i 2, 5:42, 21:35). A less animal-
and p o ein-based, and mo e plan -based die would be bene icial o
oday’s animal a ming and he en i e plane (5:51–6:16). One o he lead-
e s o a Swiss sgi cen e also men ioned he mo i a ion being o educe
su e ing and o p omo e happiness (i 3, 44:51–45:00). In e es ingly, he
pu pose o educing su e ing was no men ioned among he i s wel e
I alian in e iewees.
2. Compassion (Sk . ka uṇā): As one o he ou “di ine abodes” (b ahma i-
hā a), compassion has been men ioned by in e iewees as a a ionale o
a ious kinds o ci ic engagemen (Swiss i 2, 21:29).
3. In e connec edness: Buddhis leade s and membe s e e ed o he
insigh ha a pe son only ealizes ue happiness by unde s anding he
ela ional connec ion wi h he en i onmen and o he people. The leade
o a Swiss sgi cen e old us: “I can’ be happy jus o mysel in my snail
18 baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
shell, bu ha i ’s only possible i you build a posi i e ela ionship wi h
he en i onmen and wi h na u e and wi h o he people” (i 3, 11:17–41).
The Swiss leade o a Chan cen e also e e ed o he idea o connec -
edness and “seeing hings as hey eally a e” (i 5, 37:59–38:03). Likewise,
speake s a he opical day o he sbu “Buddhism in Socie y” epea edly
emphasized he impo ance o in e connec edness o a mind ul in e -
ac ing o he indi idual wi h na u e and socie y.4 In I aly, an ibisg leade
(lay, emale, 60s) highligh ed he “in e connec ion o all phenomena”
(i 3, 1:26:35–41). She poin ed ou ha “e e yone’s li e is connec ed o he
li es o o he s and he e o e he ac ions, he beha io o each indi idual
pe son has a global impac and also a ec s hemsel es. So he nondu-
ali y be ween us and o he s is compelling” (1:26:41–27:05). Fu he mo e,
a Tibe an cen e leade (lay, male, 60s) exp essed in e dependence as
ollows: “indi idual phenomena, including people, o cou se, don’ ha e
a s able, le ’s say g ounded, in insic exis ence in hemsel es, indepen-
den o causes, so hey’ e dependen on in e ac ion wi h he en i on-
men in gene al” (i 10, 14:55–15:10). He also s essed ha a human being
alone “doesn’ go hal a me e wi hou some hing someone else has done”
(15:18–33).
4. Bodhisa a: Closely ela ed o he idea o in e connec edness is he con-
cep o he s a e o a bodhisa a. “This is a s a e in which one eally
anscends ou o he small ego o he uni e sal, he g ea e sel ,” as he
leade o a Swiss sgi cen e explained ega ding one o he mo i a ions
o ci ic engagemen (i 3, 12:15–27). In I aly, an ibisg leade (lay, male,
60s) emphasized: “ he eaching says ha we a e ac ually bodhisa as
o he ea h, so by pu suing ha kind o p o ound li e ha is mani-
es ed by chan ing daimoku [ eci a ion o he i le o he Lo us su a] and
doing shakubuku [compassiona ely sha ing Buddhis eachings], one’s
own happiness becomes he happiness o o he s” (i 2, 7:48–8:06). Mo e-
o e , a Zen cen e leade (monk, 60s) unde lined he impo ance o he
bodhisa a igu e in he Mahāyāna con ex . Acco ding o him he bod-
hisa a isape sonwho“ enounces his/he ownenligh enmen and ows,
be o e enligh ening, o sa e all li ing beings” (i 8.2, 21:54–22:08).
4.3 Scope o Ci ic Engagemen
Wi h ega d o he scope o ci ic engagemen , o Swi ze land he a ious
in e iews and he websi e analysis o nume ous Buddhis g oups and cen e s
4 Held on 19 Ma ch 2023.
engaging o he common good 19
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
poin o a a he low deg ee o ci ic engagemen . Only a e y ew g oups pub-
licly engage wi h ci ic ac i i ies. Why is his so? Repea edly, we ecei ed he
esponse ha in Swi ze land he social wel a e sys em is e y well o ganized
and unc ioning (i 1, 58:57–58:09; i 2, 34:13–30). One leade (lay, emale, la e
60s) o a socially engaged, in e na ional Buddhis o ganiza ion wi h nume ous
elie p og ams wo ldwide old us: “I almos ha e a bad conscience ha he e
[in Swi ze land] we do almos no hing because we … li e in a wel a e s a e”
(i 5, 10:13–23). The bene icial social con ex hus leads o a low scope o ci ic
ac i i ies among Buddhis g oups. Alongside his, he ypical Swiss insis ence
on ocusing on one’s own can on and local iden i y (i 1, 1:01:16–02:15; i 4.2, 14:18–
38) ansla es o a e y low a e o exchange and coope a ion among Buddhis
g oups in Swi ze land. We may speak o a speci ically amed Swiss Buddhism,
cha ac e ized by insis ence on one’s own pa icula lineage and eache , a low
in e es in coope a ion wi h o he Buddhis g oups, and a small scope o Bud-
dhis ci ic engagemen (i 4.2, 17:11–49; Baumann, o hcoming).
In I aly, acco ding o ou in e iews and websi e analyses, he si ua ion is
di e en , and i appea s ha compa ed o Swi ze land, many mo e Buddhis
o ganiza ions a e ci ically engaged. Bu why is his? In he ollowing sec ion, we
s i e o o mula e some hypo he ical explana ions. Fi s , he socioeconomic
si ua ion wi h ega d o he wel a e sys em and economic co e age o amilies
in I aly is less de eloped han in Swi ze land. To p o ide wo indica o s, while
he expendi u e on social p o ec ion bene i s was simila in bo h coun ies in
2022 (I aly: 28.9 pe cen o gdp; Swi ze land: 26.6 pe cen o gdp), he employ-
men a e was only 66.3 pe cen in I aly compa ed o 83 pe cen in Swi ze land
in 2023 (Eu os a 2024; 2025). Thus, al hough a gene ous wel a e sys em exis s
in I aly, i appea s o be much less e icien and e ec i e han he Swiss one. In
he eyes o many o he in e iewees, he sho comings o he I alian socioe-
conomic sys em call o g ea e social engagemen . This di e ence in social
p o ec ion bene i s could hypo he ically jus i y he eadiness o g ea e social
commi men among I alian Buddhis o ganiza ions.
Second, i we look a o he possible ya ds icks o compa ison, acco ding o
he O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen (oecd), high
o e u nou is a measu e o ci izens’ pa icipa ion in he poli ical p ocess: “In
he mos ecen elec ions o which da a a e a ailable, o e u nou in I aly
was 73 pe cen o hose egis e ed. This igu e is highe han he oecd a e -
age o 69 pe cen ” (oecd 2020). Howe e , in he las gene al elec ion held in
Sep embe 2022, I alian u nou had a d ama ic collapse om 72.94 pe cen
o 63.91 pe cen (Minis e o dell’In e no 2022). These da a mus also be ead
by looking a he u nou map, which clea ly shows ha he highes u nou
a es a e in he egions o cen al and no he n I aly (Ca aldi 2022). I we con-
20 baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
side ha he majo i y o Buddhis cen e s, bo h ibisg and ibu, a e loca ed
in he cen e -no h, we unde s and well ha hey a e in egions whe e poli ical
pa icipa ion is s onges . The in ensi y o social engagemen o Buddhis o ga-
niza ions could be ela ed o his. Wi h ega d o Swi ze land, he oecd s a es
ha “in he mos ecen elec ions o which da a a e a ailable, o e u nou in
Swi ze land was 45 pe cen o hose egis e ed. This igu e is one o he lowes
a es in he oecd, whe e a e age u nou is 69 pe cen . This, howe e , does no
ake in o accoun Swi ze land’s highly pa icipa o y o m o di ec democ acy”
(oecd 2020). In ligh o his da a, he g ea e social commi men o I alian
Buddhis o ganiza ions could be linked o hei oo edness in I alian egions
cha ac e ized by g ea e poli ical commi men and highe olun ee ing a es.
In ac , da a om he i s su ey on olun ee ing p o ided by is a (2013) ell
us ha in I aly he numbe o olun ee s is es ima ed a 6.63 million ( o al
olun ee a e 12.6 pe cen ), and olun ee wo k is mo e widesp ead in he
no he n pa o he coun y. The no heas has he highes o al olun ee ing
a e (16 pe cen ), while he sou h is cha ac e ized by signi ican ly lowe le -
els o pa icipa ion (8.6 pe cen , is a 2013). In Swi ze land, olun ee social
engagemen has a s onghold in u al a eas (Lamp ech , Fische , and S amm
2020, 47) while Buddhis g oups commonly clus e in he ci ies and conu ba-
ions.
Thi d, he huge amoun o public unds om he 8×1000 egula ion has
an impac ha is a om being homogeneous. In 2023 he ibu alloca ed in
excess o €6 million o mo e han wo hund ed humani a ian p ojec s. This
included ci ic engagemen ac i i ies such as bee Woman (Pale mo), a ain-
ing cou se consis ing o heo y classes and p ac ical ac i i ies, dedica ed o
mig an emale ic ims o a icking and emale ic ims o iolence. This
p ojec was s a ed on a ac o land on he ou ski s o Pale mo, which was
con isca ed om he Ma ia.This ini ia i e consis s o he se ing up o a na u al
beekeeping ac i i y, which o e s he women he oppo uni y o lea n a ade
and achie e economic au onomy and social ein eg a ion. Ano he example
was F iendly Ho se (Ca allo amico) (Ve bania), a p ojec dedica ed o child en
wi h disabili ies, who lea n how o ake ca e o ho ses, g oom hem, become
amilia wi h hem, and ul ima ely ide hem (ibu 2024). In addi ion, in 2020,
andcon inuing o e he cou se o he co id-19pandemic, he ibu alloca ed€3
million o he Ci il P o ec ion Depa men and he inancing o an eme gency
und o hi d sec o o ganiza ions suppo ing ulne able people (ibu 2020).
The ibisg ecei ed 8×1000 unds o he i s ime in 2020, o aling mo e han
€4 million. In Ma ch 2020 he Na ional Council o he Ins i u e esol ed o
alloca e he en i e amoun o deal wi h he co id-19 eme gency in I aly and
he se ious social and economic epe cussions linked o i . Bo h o ganiza ions
engaging o he common good 21
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
ac ed di ec ly by means o hei local cen e s and indi ec ly by means o pub-
lic appeals o ci il socie y o ganiza ions and olun ee ing associa ions, o en
non-Buddhis .
I is wo h no ing ha be o e he app o al o he ag eemen s (in ese) he e
was no a lack o ci ic engagemen , on he con a y. As men ioned abo e, he
ibisg launched he Senza omica campaign in 2011, and i also coope a ed wi h
he Communi y o San ’Egidio in he ea ly 2000s o collec signa u es in o de
o ou law he dea h penal y. Addi ionally, se e al ibu local cen e s had imple-
men edspeci ic social ac i i ies p io o he eceip o public unds.These ac i -
i ies include ini ia i es such as he Mee ings P ojec (P oge o Incon i) o p o-
mo e in e eligious dialogue, educa ion, and accep ance o eligious di e ence
in middle and seconda y schools, he pa icipa ion o one cen e ’s membe s in
ce emonies a he Fosse A dea ine massac e memo ial in Rome, and suppo
o ea hquake ic ims in o eign coun ies and in I aly.
In he case o he ibu cen e s, hus a he in e iews e eal he high ele-
ance o he 8×1000 unds, bo h o main ain he cen e s as well as o o ganize
ci ic engagemen ac i i ies. These ac i i ies seem o ha e inc eased due o
hese unds,al hough only in speci ic egionsand odi e ing deg ees.I welook
a local cen e s o he ibu, we no ice ha no all o hem ha e inc eased ci ic
engagemen ac i i ies in iew o he eceip o he 8×1000 unds. Fo exam-
ple, he a o emen ioned lay p ac i ione o a Tibe an cen e poin ed ou ha
hey ha e eques ed 8×1000 unds om he ibu o speci ic p ojec s ha we e
no socially engaged. She men ioned he cons uc ion o a s ūpa con aining
he ashes o hei la e esiden mas e and he eno a ion o he cen e (i 7,
38:23–40:37). Howe e , in answe ing a ques ion ega ding u u e ac i i ies, she
exp essed he desi e o inc ease ac i i ies in schools, p isons, and hospi als.
These h ee se ings a e o en men ioned in ibu discou ses (i 7, 42:53–46:11).
She also alked abou an upwa d end o such p ojec s in ecen yea s, bu
belie es ha wi h he 8×1000 unds i will be possible o ad ance and s abi-
lize hem (46:01–45). The p e iously men ioned Zen monk cla i ied ha “ he e
is an impo an exchange” be ween he ibu and I alian socie y, since he ibu
employs he unds “no only wi h ega d o wo ship needs o dhamma sp ead-
ing” bu also o “ e u n some hing” o I alian ci izen y (i 8.2, 01:17–29). He
also no ed ha he e a e di e en ypes o p ojec s unded wi h he 8×1000
esou ces, such as suppo o eligious ac i i ies, sp eading he dhamma, as
well as social and humani a ian ac i i ies (51:47–52:12). In e es ingly, he cla -
i ied ha his cen e ook ad an age o 8×1000 unded p ojec s in o de o
suppo a els o Japan o he pu pose o monas ic educa ion, o sp ead he
dhamma h ough con e ences, in i a ions o eache s o I aly, and he publica-
ion and dissemina ion o dhamma ex s (52:12–45). Howe e , hey did no ake
22 baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
ad an age—a leas a he ime o he in e iew—o 8×1000 unds o a ange
ci ic ac i i ies. The eason is ha “ hey’ e p ojec s equi ing a e y complex
o ganiza ion ha ou cen e doesn’ ye ha e, hey’ e p ojec s ha a e made by
much mo e s uc u ed cen e s han ou s, wi h much mo e inances oo” (52:52–
53:07).The a o emen ioned Zen lay nun emphasized ha he en y in o he ibu
ep esen ed a wa e shed, a u ning poin . Be o e he cen e became pa o he
ibu, hey had o do e e y hing by hemsel es wi h no op ions o cul u al o
social p ojec s. She s a ed: “You couldn’ do hem be o e, o you wouldn’ ha e
paid he en .” Gi en he now g ea e economic s abili y hanks o he eceip
o 8×1000 unds, he cen e can also de o e i sel o social and c ea i e p ojec s
(i 6, 43:01–44:10).
Fou h, he much highe absolu e numbe o Buddhis p ac i ione s in I aly
as compa ed o he igu e in Swi ze land mos likely also explains he disc ep-
ancy. The as majo i y o I alian Buddhis p ac i ione s a e I alian ci izens,
well in eg a ed in socie y, many o hem wi h a ich ne wo k o p o essional
and use ul connec ions. While he la e ce ainly is also ue o Swiss p ac i-
ione s, he numbe o “alpine Buddhis s” (i 4.1, 32:34) is compa a i ely small
when one conside s ha an es ima ed 70 o 80 pe cen o he Buddhis s in
Swi ze land a e om Asian coun ies. In his ega d, i is no ewo hy—as he
su ey o olun ee s in Swi ze land e eals— ha in compa ison o Swiss peo-
ple, o eigne s a e less socially engaged (Lamp ech , Fische , and S amm 2020,
49), which educes he scope o ci ic engagemen . Fu he mo e, while he
Thai, Tibe an, Vie namese, and o he Asian monas e ies p ima ily engage in
ci ic aspec s wi h elie and educa ional p og ams in he coun y o o igin, he
“alpine Buddhis s” place emphasis on hei own g oup: “Each one has one’s own
g ouple and own eache , and he close hey a e, he mo e hey mus dis in-
guish hemsel es om each o he ,” as he p esiden o he sbu exp essed (i 4.1,
33:00–06). Coope a ion and exchange a e low, and join public and ci ic ac i -
i ies a e a e.
Fi h, coope a ion be ween Buddhis o ganiza ions o di e en schools and
adi ions seems o be much mo e app ecia ed by Buddhis leade s and mem-
be s in I aly han i is in Swi ze land. A leade (a lay nun in he 30s, wai ing
o comple e o dina ion) o a Zen cen e ecalled ha pa icipa ion in com-
mon ac i i ies o he ibu would gene a e a sense o in e -Buddhis belong-
ing. Acco ding o he , eeling pa o some hing is mo e aluable han he
economic aspec (i 6, 43:01–44:42). Likewise, a membe o a Zen cen e (lay,
male, mid 50s) emphasized ha he connec ions o his cen e wi h he ibu
and he in e connec ions be ween di e en Zen and non-Zen cen e s wi hin
he ibu ha e in ensi ied (i 9, 42:54–43:33). In addi ion, he men ioned e en s
whe e i was possible o lis en o di e en eachings o mas e s om di e se
engaging o he common good 23
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
Buddhis schools and adi ions wi hin he ibu. He app ecia ed “ his sha ing
o di e en eachings wi h di e en saṅgha[s]” (i 9, 43:50–57). By o ganizing
join e en s and ac i i ies ( o example, he Vesak), he ibu is enabling dia-
logue be ween di e en saṅghas and, o a ce ain ex en , pe haps pa ing he
way o a so o uni ied saṅgha. We migh hypo hesize a g adual ansi ion in
he u u e om mul iple saṅghas o a single saṅgha in he ibu. This migh
a o a g adual loss o in e nal di e si y wi hin he ibu, leading o a p ocess
o in e nal homogeniza ion. The need o an umb ella o ganiza ion ha could
ga he he many I alian Buddhis cen e s o he pu pose o being ecognized
by he s a e will ha e an impac on he appea ance o Buddhism in I aly in he
u u e.
Six h and inally, is i possible o accoun o di e ences o ci ic engagemen
be ween di e en Buddhis adi ions? While schola ly accoun s o engaged
Buddhism p o ide examples om he adi ions and schools o The a āda,
Mahāyāna, and Tibe an Buddhism, as well as nondenomina ional o ganiza-
ions (Queen and King 1996b; Queen 2000c; 2018; King 2018; Fulle 2021),
in ou s udy, p ima ily leade s and membe s o Mahāyāna-inspi ed o gani-
za ions, such as om Zen cen e s and Sōka Gakkai g oups, epo ed abou
hei ci ic ac i i ies. The high membe ship numbe wi hin he I alian ibisg
migh also explain he conside able amoun o ci ic engagemen o Buddhis s
in I aly. Ra ionales o ci ic ac i i ies a e g ounded in he Mahāyāna con-
cep s o nonduali y/in e connec edness and he bodhisa a ideal (see abo e).
Websi e analyses also show ha a ious Tibe an Buddhis o ganiza ions, bo h
“con e ” and “immig an ,” suppo cha i ies ha bene i Tibe an schools and
monas e ies in India, Nepal, and Tibe . Thus a , ou s udy sugges s a la ge
scopeo ci ic engagemen among Mahāyāna-inspi ed o ganiza ions(including
Tibe an Buddhis o ganiza ions) han among The a āda and ipassanā o gani-
za ions.
5 Conclusion
As he in oduc ion s a es, ollowing he ini ial wo ld-wi hd awal, h ough-
ou he cen u ies, he di e en Buddhis saṅghas ha e es ablished close ela-
ions wi h he oyal ule s and go e ning classes. Cu en ly, in I aly we a e
obse ing a p ocess o ins i u ionaliza ion o a composi e Buddhis saṅgha,
consis ing o wo di e en and complex o ganiza ions, he ibu and he ibisg.
The ag eemen wi h he s a e ep esen s a undamen al junc u e: On he one
hand, i is he culmina ion o a p ocess o ecogni ion o Buddhism and i s
eligious and social ac i i ies, and on he o he , i is a s a ing poin as i
24 baumann and bielli
10.1163/18748929-bja10130 | Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29
assigns new igh s and du ies o he ecognized o ganiza ions. The ag eemen s
enable a g ea ly enla ged socie al isibili y and access o conside able pub-
lic unds, and also in ol e g ea e esponsibili ies in he public a ena. These
p ocesses o ins i u ionaliza ion o Buddhis o ganiza ions and hei social
ac i i ies will ha e an impac ex e nally on he pe cep ion ha I alian soci-
e y as a whole has o hese o ganiza ions. E en wi hin he Buddhis o gani-
za ions, li ely deba es ake place on he ela ionship Buddhism should ha e
wi h he s a e. Issues deba ed ela e o he bene i s o disad an ages o pub-
lic unding, and o he oppo uni ies and isks associa ed wi h he ongoing
ins i u ionaliza ion, and he e y na u e o ci ic engagemen in i s my iad
ace s.
The compa ison o he ci ic engagemen o Buddhis o ganiza ions in I aly
and Swi ze land poin s o appa en simila i ies, which he ypology aims o
sys ema ize, and he lis ing o impo an mo i a ions. Howe e , he scope o
ci ic engagemen di e s be ween he wo neighbo ing coun ies. A main ea-
son appea s o be he high s anda d and e iciency o he Swiss social wel a e
sys em in con as o he I alian one. The lack o such a well- unc ioning social
secu i y sys em appea s o ha e c ea ed a need o he I alian Buddhis o ga-
niza ions o suppo he I alian sys em and o ci ically engage, whe eas Swiss
Buddhis g oups and cen e s end o ocus mo e on dissemina ing Buddhis
eachings and medi a ion p ac ices. The ecogni ion o he ibu and ibisg by
he I alian s a e has led o he s abiliza ion and he p o essionaliza ion o he
cen e s’ p ocesses, enla ging he scope o ci ic engagemen and in ensi ying
in e nal coope a ion and join ac i i ies. In con as , in Swi ze land a he a
eluc ance o in e -Buddhis coope a ion is appa en , due o he insis ence on
one’s pa icula Buddhis school and skep icism owa d ede al ep esen a ion.
O e all, in bo h I aly and Swi ze land, Buddhis o ganiza ions appea o ha e
aken on ai s o cul u al mimesis in adap ing o na ional cha ac e is ics and
cul u al habi s. In his ega d, hey do no di e om p e ious expe iences o
Buddhis s and Buddhis saṅghas in Asian coun ies in cul u ally adap ing o
he local con ex s.
In I aly, he enla ged scope o ci ic engagemen appea s o be ela ed o he
loca ion and composi ion o Buddhis o ganiza ions (made up mos ly o “con-
e ” ci izens), coupled wi h he scope o highe poli ical commi men and a
highe olun ee ing a e in he cen al and no he n egions. In con as , in
Swi ze land immig an people and hei descendan s make up he la ge majo -
i y o Buddhis s. Also, a s onghold o olun ee ci ic engagemen can be ound
in u al a eas, whe eas he majo i y o Swiss Buddhis o ganiza ions a e loca ed
in conu ba ions. Also, coope a ion among Buddhis g oups and adi ions is
much mo e a o ed in I aly han in Swi ze land. Due o his, he umb ella o ga-
engaging o he common good 25
Jou nal o Religion in Eu ope (2025) 1–29 | 10.1163/18748929-bja10130
niza ion ibu has gained an inc eased social and poli ical legi imacy, a legi i-
macy con i med by he s a e ag eemen and he eceip o conside able public
unds.
The new, s ong, inancial suppo seems o consolida e and ein o ce he
exis ing ci ic commi men o Buddhis o ganiza ions. I has acili a ed new ini-
ia i es by cen e s and o ganiza ions ha ha e hi he o s uggled inancially.
The massi e low o ax money has engende ed a willingness o implemen
ci ic ac i i ies, coupled in a ious ins ances wi h he in en ion o ac esponsi-
bly wi h ega d o socie y and i s ci izens. This has, in u n, ein o ced he social
legi imacy o he Buddhis o ganiza ions.
Howe e , he impac o public unds on Buddhis ci ic engagemen is no
uni o m. I di e s acco ding o he ea u es o cen e s, o ganiza ions, leade -
ships, and he con ex s in which hey ope a e. Buddhis social engagemen
appea s mul idimensional in na u e and a ises om he in e play o nume -
ous d i ing ac o s: (1) he unds gua an eed by he s a e as a esul o he
ag eemen s undoub edly play a ele an ole, bu we should no unde es i-
ma e he impo ance o o he aspec s. Men ion needs o be made o (2) he
o iginal ap i ude and willingness o a cen e o implemen ci ic ac ions; (3)
speci ic, inspi ing p inciples and alues ha a e a he hea o he o ganiza-
ion o a he co e o i s leade s’ o mas e s’ eachings; (4) pa icula ly ac i e
pe sonali ies wi h aluable connec ions and p o essional ne wo ks, and he (5)
p esence o an adminis a i e s uc u e sui ed o ha nessing he new lows o
public unds. Fu u e esea ch will e eal how and o wha ex en I alian and
Swiss socie ies a e shaped by hese ac i i ies, how hey in e ac wi h Buddhis
o ganiza ions and p ac i ione s in he public a ena, as well as how I alian and
Swiss ins i u ions and ci izen y pe cei e and eac o Buddhis ci ic engage-
men .
Acknowledgmen s
We would like o hank he wo anonymous e iewe s o insigh ul poin e s, as
well as he pa icipan s o he esea ch colloquium in he s udy o eligions a
he Uni e si y o Luce ne o he c i ical discussion o he d a o he a icle.
Fu he mo e, we a e p o oundly g a e ul o he esea ch pa icipan s.
