The literature on the diffusion of new religion is strongly influenced by the voluntaristic paradigm that highlights the agency of individual migrants. This article examines and compares the diffusion process and outcome of Tzu Chi (Buddhist Compassion Relief Tzu Chi Association) in four Southeast Asian countries—Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, and the Philippines—to illustrate the complex relationship between migration, diffusion, critical events, and local conditions. Using a comparative research design and original materials, this article proposes a coevolutionary framework inspired by organization studies on the emergence of novelty. This article argues that the different diffusion processes and diffusion outcomes in the four cases are best explained through looking at network genesis mechanisms. This research contributes to the current studies on the diffusion of religion and scholarly interests in the global Tzu Chi movement.
BaroneC. (2007). A Neo-Durkheimian analysis of a new religious movement: The case of Soka Gakkai in Italy. Theory and Society, 36(2), 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-007-9023-3
2.
BraunK. (2004). The Tzu Chi Foundation and the Buddha’s Light International Association: The impact of ethnicity in the transmission of Chinese Buddhism to Canada. University of Alberta (Canada).
3.
CadgeW. (2004). Heartwood: The first generation practices Theravada Buddhism in America. University of Chicago Press.
4.
CadgeW.SigalowE. (2013). Negotiating religious differences: The strategies of interfaith chaplains in healthcare. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 52(1), 146-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12008
DenoonG. (2006). Tzu Chi: The practice of non-self and its unintended consequences [Unpublished doctoral dissertation.]. New York University.
7.
DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
8.
GoossaertV.PalmerD. A. (2011). The religious question in Modern China. University of Chicago Press.
9.
HuangC. (2009). Charisma and compassion: Cheng Yen and the Buddhist Tzu Chi Movement. Harvard University Press.
10.
HuangC. (2012). Religion-based social capital and civic engagement: A case study of a Buddhist welfare organization in Malacca, Malaysia. In DaniereA.LuongH. V. (Eds.), The dynamics of social capital and civic engagement in Asia (pp. 127-144). Routledge.
11.
HuangC. (2013). Buddhism and its trust networks between Taiwan, Malaysia, and the United States. Eastern Buddhist, 44(2), 1-18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44362568
12.
HuangW. (2010). Between nations: Three transnational Ethnic Chinese religious organizations and their presence in New York Chinese immigrant communities [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. New School University.
13.
JohnsonV.PowellW. (2015). Poisedness and propagation: Organizational emergence and the transformation of civic order in 19th-Century New York City. National Bureau of Economic Research.
14.
KatzE. (1999). Theorizing diffusion: Tarde and Sorokin revisited. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 566(1), 144-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271629956600112
15.
KuahK. E. (2009). State, society and religious engineering: Towards a reformist Buddhism in Singapore. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
16.
LalibertéA. (2013). The growth of a Taiwanese Buddhist Association in China: Soft power and institutional learning. China Information, 27(1), 81-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0920203X12466206
17.
LalibertéA.PalmerD. A.WuK. P. (2011). Religious philanthropy and Chinese Civil Society. Oxford University Press.
LeeC.HanL. (2015). Recycling Bodhisattva: The Tzu Chi Movement’s response to global climate change. Social Compass, 62(3), 311-325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037768615587809
20.
LeeC.HanL. (2016). Mothers and moral activists: Two models of women’s social engagement in contemporary Taiwanese Buddhism. Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, 19(3), 54-77. https://doi.org/10.1525/nr.2016.19.3.54
21.
LeeC.HanL. (2017). Faith-based organization and transnational voluntarism in China: A case study of the Malaysia Airline MH370 incident. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(5), 2353-2373.
22.
LevittP.LuckenK.BarnettM. (2011). Beyond home and return: Negotiating religious identity across time and space through the prism of the American experience. Mobilities, 6(4), 467-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2011.603942
23.
LimC. H. (2013). Migration as a spiritual pathway: Narratives of Chinese Falungong practitioners in Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 14(1), 57-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14442213.2012.750683
24.
MadsenR. (2007). Democracy’s dharma: Religious renaissance and political development in Taiwan. University of California Press.
25.
McAdamD.RuchtD. (1993). The cross-national diffusion of movement ideas. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528(1), 56-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716293528001005
26.
PadgettJ. F.PowellW. W. (2013). The emergence of organizations and markets. Princeton University Press.
27.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
28.
SnowD. A.PhillipsC. (1980). The Lofland-Stark conversion model: A critical reassessment. Social Problems, 27(4), 430-447. https://doi.org/10.2307/800171
TanC. S. (2009). Religious alternation, spiritual humanism: Tzu Chi Buddhist Foundation in Singapore [Unpublished master’s thesis]. National University of Singapore.
31.
TongC. K. (2007). Rationalizing religion: Religious conversion, revivalism, and competition in Singapore Society. Brill.
32.
WuthnowR. (2009). Boundless faith. University of California Press.
