Freedom and Rationality as an Instrument of Social Transformation in Won Buddhism

This study examines the perception and transformation of religion within Won Buddhism (圓佛敎), with a particular emphasis on the reconfiguration of freedom and practicality. It investigates how this organization redefines religious authority, individual agency, and public responsibility, positioning itself as both spiritually and socially engaged. Employing an anthropological and sociological approach, this study deconstructs the ways in which Won Buddhism adapts to contemporary societal dynamics while negotiating its religious identity.

Won Buddhism is striving today, in the spirit of Buddhist and Korean modernity, to evolve into an “ideal religion” (理想宗敎). This organization, founded in Korea in the early 20th century by Sotaesan, is a transnational new religious movement (NRM) that draws upon and innovates on modern Buddhism and Tonghak (東學) and is well known for its syncretic approach. It operates in 23 countries worldwide, with a particularly strong presence in the United States, where it has branches in all major cities, runs several educational institutions, and even has a representation in the military.

Its founder aimed to rejuvenate Korean Buddhism or, to be precise, “Buddha-dharma”, which had been severely suppressed and nearly eradicated during a prolonged period of persecution. This era of banishment and contempt spanned from the early 15th century and ended only in the late 19th century. It coincided with mounting influences from Japanese schools and Western Christianity. Consequently, I propose that Won Buddhism represents a quintessential outcome of modernity. Likewise, while embracing discourses of social engagement, Won Buddhists — in contrast to many modern mindfulness organizations — continue to identify themselves as a religion, or rather as a “super religion” (超宗敎), one that transcends traditional boundaries. Sotaesan himself “would have borrowed the tenet of any religion if it were sound and useful for his plan to lay out a blueprint to save sentient beings and cure the world of moral illness”.

A key aspect of this universalism and practicality is the emphasis on freedom—the freedom, for example, to engage with multiple religious traditions without exclusivity and the freedom to shape one’s life path. Won Buddhists frequently underscore the idea that an individual, simply by participating in or associating with any religious tradition, is inherently considered a part of the Won Buddhist community. This perspective rejects rigid, dogmatic boundaries, offering a more fluid and inclusive approach to religious identity.

These ideas are reflected even in the organizational structure of Won Buddhism. The movement has not only rejected traditional religious hierarchy but has also replaced it with a republican system, limiting the number of terms for its leader and granting a high level of local autonomy. Particularly noteworthy is its unique approach to gender inclusivity, which is rare not only among Korean religious organizations but also in Buddhism as a whole. A significant number of clergy or kyomu (敎務) are women, for whom this organization provides an opportunity for leadership and self-realization in a religious sphere traditionally dominated by patriarchal norms.

Despite this inclusive and tolerant approach, Won Buddhism remains centered on the idea of kaebyŏk (開闢) — not just as an ultimate transformation of social paradigms but also as a personal transformation aimed at strengthening and improving relationships between all living beings. Within this paradigm, religion is often perceived not as a distinct spiritual tradition but rather as an “instrument (手段)” for serving society. That is why Won Buddhism often presents itself not as a separate religion but rather as an enhancement of existing ones and a different understanding of the concept of religion itself, skilfully navigating the tensions between collective and individual, secular and spiritual, modern and traditional, global and authentic.

This qualitative study includes critical discourse analysis of related media and in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 25 followers of Won Buddhism in South Korea and New Zealand, with a special focus on why they perceive Won Buddhism as a rational or even scientific religion. Participants were recruited from the Won Buddhist Centre for Mindfulness and Wellbeing in Auckland. In Korea, they were selected from Wonkwang University, as an affiliated Won Buddhist educational and research institution, along with members of Won Buddhist centers in Seoul, Iksan, and Jeonju. The sample includes followers at different stages of organizational involvement, academic representatives from institutions and external entities connected with this religion, leaders at various levels of hierarchy, meditation teachers, foreign students at Won Buddhist Seminary (靈山禪學大學校), and former clergy.

In the context of “rational religion”, many interviewees highlighted ideas of freedom and social participation. A key theme, especially among Korean members with prior experience in Protestant churches, was freedom from collective constraints and obligations. Another crucial aspect of rationality, according to participants, was the possibility of being both a Won Buddhist and, for example, a Protestant or Catholic. This sometimes extended to describing Won Buddhism as a kind of mediator, helping to harmonize Korean often antagonistically divided religious communities. This may explain the exceptionally positive reputation of Won Buddhism, which, unlike many other new Korean religions, has largely avoided public scandals and eccentric leadership.

During my presentation, I will explore what narratives and discourses Won Buddhism and its followers use for its reinterpretation and representation in a largely secular world. My theoretical approach specifically emphasizes the role of individual perception, interpretation, and social context in shaping the perception of religion. It suggests that religious phenomena are not inherent or fixed but constructed by people and communities based on their cultural, historical, and personal experiences. Any kind of meanings and symbols in this paradigm are not taken as objective or universal truths but rather subjective constructions that emerge through interactions between individuals and social environments.