14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Battle of the Buddhist Encyclopedias, August 2, 2010
This review is from: Encyclopedia of Buddhism (Hardcover)
There are only two serious contenders around these days if you are limited to the English language and are looking for a serious encyclopedia of Buddhism. This one and the one-volume set by Keown [9780415556248]. The subject of this review has sadly gone out of print, however, since you may get one used or look it up at a library, I am going to review both encyclopedias here.
I bought each when they were first released and have been using them for many years at this point. One cannot complain about either the editors or contributors chosen for both works. They are stellar and represent a who's who of established and rising scholars working in the field of Buddhist studies. Either product is an excellent choice and the publishers should be commended for making them available.
Both encyclopedias clock in at just under a thousand pages. Buswell's contains around 470 entries, while Keown's is closer to 340. However, a great deal of this difference is due to the fact that the first breaks out into separate articles many things that are covered within larger-range articles in the second. The coverage is fairly comparable overall, in my experience. Both projects represent a critical Western approach to Buddhism, as should be expected. Don't look here for warm devotional insights or a thoughtless repetition of standard histories. These books represent the current edge of scholarship at the first decade of the twenty-first century, not a mere repetition of Asian sources that have been handed on to the West. This criticism is mostly limited to correcting historical issues, not engaging Buddhist thought critically, a project for another book, which is long past due.
A key content difference is the result of how the contributors were asked to work. In Buswell, a huge group of authors [about 200] were assigned to specific entries. Thus, where there is overlap of coverage between different articles, you could be exposed to different viewpoints on it. In Keown, however, a smaller group of authors [less than 25] were assigned areas of coverage. This means that you are getting mostly one person's perspective on an entire area of Buddhist studies and it often results in a lot of repetition between articles that overlap; and by repetition I mean near cut-and-past from one article to the other. For this reason, even though both works are similar in size, I have had the sense that I am receiving a broader range of unique information from Buswell.
Buswell has a number of unique things that stood out for me. First was the fact that this team seemed more willing to give full articles to topics, such as Buddhist folk religion or the role of faith in Buddhism, that get ignored elsewhere. There also seemed to be a greater effort made to integrate the field of Buddhist studies with that of religious studies in general, with articles on topics such as evil, hermeneutics, worship, modernity, nationalism, and gender. There is also more coverage on the relationship of Buddhism to other religions, which I appreciated, but, for my likes, too much space devoted to art. Buswell indicates that their key emphases were on history, national traditions, doctrine, texts, biography, schools, meditation, liturgy, lay training, art history, and material culture.
With Keown, I saw a wider coverage of contemporary issues, particularly where Buddhism intersected with modern media. There are also a number of articles showing that the team is aware of their place in Buddhist studies and reflecting on the issues involved, showing a level of self-criticism. He sets their emphases on history, doctrine, schools, rituals, sacred places, biography, basic ideas & concepts, and issues involving the globalization of Buddhism. Due to the way it is organized, there are more and larger key articles, which then form the focus for a series of sub-topics relating to it. However, this is where a lot of the cut-and-paste repetition I mentioned above comes in. Also, the smaller number of in text photos is particularly conspicuous in places where they are truly needed, such as art. On the other hand, I have the impression that some important subjects, such as the Buddha and issues surrounding him, are given broader coverage, while, at the same time, some articles are in strange places; for example, "Buddhism in Tibet Today" is under B, instead of something like "Tibet, Buddhism Today."
The reference structure of both books is very similar. They each have an alphabetical listing of articles, an index that is more than a mere repetition of the article list [Keown is more useful], a subject outline with sub-topics [Keown is again more useful], and cross references to other articles at the end of each signed entry. The points Keown gains are partly off-set by the fact that Buswell moves much of these same cross-referencing features right into the articles, using capital letters to indicate them. Buswell's bibliographies are also with their articles, which is more helpful than Keown's more general by-subject list at the back. Aesthetically, Buswell has far more in text black and white photos, plus each of his volumes contains a middle section of color plates. The page layout is also nicer to look at and easier to read, with more space for making notes.
At the end of the day, the bottom line is that Buswell is expensive and out of print, while Keown has been republished in this inexpensive, one-volume, paperback edition, so most of you will go with the latter. Having completely read both encyclopedias (I know, I have no life), if I had to take only one to a desert island, it would be Buswell, so I recommend you pick up a used copy or a new one if it is ever reprinted. I felt it was more focused on core Buddhism and was a better over-all package; though you can't beat Keown's price for similar coverage. Really, each is an excellent resource and, if you can afford both, they nicely compliment each other's strengths and weaknesses.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
