Toward a definition of this, I'm collecting perspectives that I find. Thay talks about the term from a Vietnamese Theravadin perspective which, unsurprisingly calls for radical action in every moment to recognize one's true nature.
Other groups like the Buddhist Peace Fellowship and The Interdependence Project are looking at developing their own definitions from a social activist standpoint.
A professor of mine is working on a paper striving toward a Buddhist theory of conflict transformation. He is coming from a Japanese Buddhist perspective but makes the point that dependent origination is the glue that holds together the conditions to create conflict and peace, or merely interaction between two sentient beings. From that understanding, one can unpack that judgments and meanings that we, ourselves, place on the interaction creating the aversion or the attachment to each interaction.
This professor of mine calls for responsibility on the inner level as well as the outer level in order to be engaged.
I can't help but continue to be the cynic and say that even according to Buddhism, my understanding is that we are human and predisposed given our afflictions in this realm of existence to humanity and its constraints and opportunities. We can recommit to being 'engaged' on many levels but the real activism is what Thay says it is - reconfirming that commitment by recognizing every time we stray and coming back to the radical nature of the moment.
but who knows.
