Thanks, gavesako,gavesako wrote:Another nice summary:
A Tale of Three Buddhist Modernisms
http://drwillajahn.blogspot.com/2011/10 ... rnism.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Some food for thought there. Here's some (if only a snack ) in return.
In defence of "Modern Buddhism" (if it needs defending, which I'm not too sure about), how else could anyone have introduced Buddhism to the west except in a stripped-down form? There is no way that any single teacher in any western country could have gotten ten or twenty curious but dubious westerners to adopt the whole-of-culture Thai, Chinese or Japanese Buddhism, because the students would have had to adopt the whole culture - while still living in their own. It doesn't work - ask any immigrant.
So what does the teacher do? Teaches what is (or what he sees as) central and authoritative, and as much of the rest as the students can easily assimilate.
If we could go back 1400 years or so and watch the first Buddhist teachers in China, I think we would see just the same.
I was going to suggest that the Christian missionaries in the Pacific Islands in the 19th century would have done the same but it's not quite true - but the only reason it's not true is that they were in a position of economic/military power.
Kim