Buddhist Mountains’ Plans for Stock Market Initial Public Offerings in China: Raising Money as Upāya-Kauśalya

Cheung, Kin (Temple University, Philadelphia, USA)

Since Emei Shan, one of the four famous Chinese Buddhist mountains, became a publicly traded stock in 1997, other Chinese Buddhist sites have made plans for their own IPOs to raise money, citing the need for maintenance and development. This has elicited sharp criticism by Chinese officials denouncing these actions as greed and against the spirit of Buddhism. There is a lack of scholarly attention towards this modern development in Chinese Buddhism, the plans of the other Chinese Buddhist mountains and Shaolin Monastery to join Emei Shan, and the implications and assumptions behind the rebukes of Chinese officials.

I investigate whether an argument can be made that this money raising enterprise may be read as a form upāya-kauśalya, or skillful means, instrumental to maintaining and spreading Buddhist dharma. I examine the use of upāya-kauśalya in the case of Vimalakīrti the merchant bodhisattva, and in the parables of the Lotus Sutra and the Nikayas to offer a response to Alicia and Daigan Matsunaga who characterize money raising and prosperity rituals as exclusively mundane goals, “hopefully [i.e. at best] viewed as upaya.” While the Matsunagas address a different context, their attitude towards fundraising in Buddhism resonates with those who criticize these IPO plans. If a case can be made for these actions as a form of upāya-kauśalya in a positive light, it will provide the Chinese Buddhist institutions with a doctrinal justification for raising capital. They can also respond to a related, more general critique launched by Slavoj Žižek directed towards the use of Buddhism as an “ideological supplement” in reinforcing what Glenn Wallis calls a “destructive form of capitalism.” While Žižek and Wallis have in mind “western Buddhism’s complicity in what is arguably a rabid capitalistic system,” the Chinese Buddhist mountains cannot escape the same criticism.

I explore a possible retort using Peter Singer’s arguments for maximizing one’s contribution to society. William Crouch founded a service that provides a utilitarian calculator of what job one should pursue to earn the most money and enjoy going to work, so that one can sustainably donate the most of one’s earning potentials. Case in point, Singer calls Bill Gates and Warren Buffet the “the most effective altruists in history” because although they were complicit in the capitalist system (the ethics of their business decisions aside) they were able to use the wealth they’ve accumulated skillfully, within a capitalist system where capital grows exponentially. Buffet and Gates were the wealthiest persons in the world in 2008 and 2009, respectively, and used their wealth towards donations and to set up altruistic foundations. Had they donated more money or focused less on earnings at the beginning of their careers, they would be less effective altruists. The Chinese Buddhist mountains can use Singer’s line of reasoning to argue their IPOs function as upāya-kauśalyas in an increasingly capitalistic global economy, where one efficient means of spreading Buddhist dharma is through growing capital. This will have implications on how to view the encounter of modern economies with sacred sites, in China and elsewhere, and on the more general subject of contemporary Buddhism’s encounter with money.