What do you think?
Rate this book
The Making of Buddhist Modernism
A great deal of Buddhist literature and scholarly writing about Buddhism of the past 150 years reflects, and indeed constructs, a historically unique modern Buddhism, even while purporting to represent ancient tradition, timeless teaching, or the "essentials" of Buddhism. This literature, Asian as well as Western, weaves together the strands of different traditions to create a novel hybrid that brings Buddhism into alignment with many of the ideologies and sensibilities of the post-Enlightenment West.
In this book, David McMahan charts the development of this "Buddhist modernism." McMahan examines and analyzes a wide range of popular and scholarly writings produced by Buddhists around the globe. He focuses on ideological and imaginative encounters between Buddhism and modernity, for example in the realms of science, mythology, literature, art, psychology, and religious pluralism. He shows how certain themes cut across cultural and geographical contexts, and how this form of Buddhism has been created by multiple agents in a variety of times and places. His position is critical but empathetic: while he presents Buddhist modernism as a construction of numerous parties with varying interests, he does not reduce it to a mistake, a misrepresentation, or fabrication. Rather, he presents it as a complex historical process constituted by a variety of responses -- sometimes trivial, often profound -- to some of the most important concerns of the modern era.
In this book, David McMahan charts the development of this "Buddhist modernism." McMahan examines and analyzes a wide range of popular and scholarly writings produced by Buddhists around the globe. He focuses on ideological and imaginative encounters between Buddhism and modernity, for example in the realms of science, mythology, literature, art, psychology, and religious pluralism. He shows how certain themes cut across cultural and geographical contexts, and how this form of Buddhism has been created by multiple agents in a variety of times and places. His position is critical but empathetic: while he presents Buddhist modernism as a construction of numerous parties with varying interests, he does not reduce it to a mistake, a misrepresentation, or fabrication. Rather, he presents it as a complex historical process constituted by a variety of responses -- sometimes trivial, often profound -- to some of the most important concerns of the modern era.
299 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2008
37 people are currently reading
643 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
April 26, 2024
One of the most interesting academic books I've read. For a few years now, I've been interested in the selective popularity of Buddhism in the west—the fascination with meditation and mindfulness, especially in secular (or even atheist!) communities. Buddhism appears to be uniquely portable and palatable, readily adopted by people who have no cultural or ethnic ties to historically Buddhist communities. Why is that?
McMahan's book basically answers that question. He suggests that what we call "Buddhism" today is really a syncretized belief system that incorporates many Western philosophical, scientific aesthetic, and psychological ideas. In the mid-Victorian period, Westerners often saw Buddhism negatively—as a primitive and nihilistic belief system. Asian Buddhists, as well as Westerners who were curious and excited by Buddhist beliefs, sought to change the popular image of Buddhism. (It's worth noting that many Asian Buddhists did so because they wanted to increase Buddhism's prestige, during a historical period when Western colonizers depicted Asian culture and intellectual activity as lesser.)
Their efforts largely succeeded. Today, we often think of Buddhism as a desacralized philosophy (not a religion with "unscientific" cosmological beliefs) that has scientifically sound insights into the mind, psychology, and attention. We also see it as something that can save modernity from itself, and potentially inform solutions to capitalism, consumerism, ecological destruction, and a fetishization of science/technology over human flourishing.
Concretely, McMahan argues that key ideas from the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, 18th/19th century Romanticism, and 20th century modernism were (a) used to explain Buddhism to a Western audience; and (b) also influenced how Buddhism was understood in the West (this was especially true when Americans or Europeans wrote about Buddhism using ideas they were familiar with). That meant that Buddhism was seen as uniquely compatible with many Western concerns.
Some of my favorite arguments in the book:
Ch. 6, "A Brief History of Interdependence," discusses how Buddhist ideas influenced the deep ecology movement and the idea that humans are interdependent and connected to nature. It also notes that the canonical Buddhist texts that support interdependence are drawn more from east Asian Buddhist traditions (especially Chinese/Japanese) vs south Asian Buddhism in India.
Ch. 7, "Meditation and Modernity," asks why and how meditation became so popular in the west, as the Buddhist practice—when most traditional Buddhist cultures don't center it for laypeople in the same way!
Ch. 8, "Mindfulness, Literature, and the Affirmation of Life" is a super interesting reads for fans of modernist literature (Virginia Woolf, James Joyce, and of course PROUST)…it describes how Buddhist ideas of being mindful and attentive to everyday life (something the Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thích Nhất Hạnh emphasized) intersected with modernist literature and its obsession with everyday life as a window into interior and psychological concerns.
Throughout, the book also discusses how slippery the words "traditional" and "modern" are. What's seen as traditional is inevitably informed by what we, as modern and contemporary individuals, think was happening in the past. And our understanding of the past tends to be informed by contemporary biases! So any attempt to return to or revive tradition says as much about contemporary concerns as it does about what "actually" happened in the past.
McMahan's book basically answers that question. He suggests that what we call "Buddhism" today is really a syncretized belief system that incorporates many Western philosophical, scientific aesthetic, and psychological ideas. In the mid-Victorian period, Westerners often saw Buddhism negatively—as a primitive and nihilistic belief system. Asian Buddhists, as well as Westerners who were curious and excited by Buddhist beliefs, sought to change the popular image of Buddhism. (It's worth noting that many Asian Buddhists did so because they wanted to increase Buddhism's prestige, during a historical period when Western colonizers depicted Asian culture and intellectual activity as lesser.)
Their efforts largely succeeded. Today, we often think of Buddhism as a desacralized philosophy (not a religion with "unscientific" cosmological beliefs) that has scientifically sound insights into the mind, psychology, and attention. We also see it as something that can save modernity from itself, and potentially inform solutions to capitalism, consumerism, ecological destruction, and a fetishization of science/technology over human flourishing.
Concretely, McMahan argues that key ideas from the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, 18th/19th century Romanticism, and 20th century modernism were (a) used to explain Buddhism to a Western audience; and (b) also influenced how Buddhism was understood in the West (this was especially true when Americans or Europeans wrote about Buddhism using ideas they were familiar with). That meant that Buddhism was seen as uniquely compatible with many Western concerns.
Some of my favorite arguments in the book:
Ch. 6, "A Brief History of Interdependence," discusses how Buddhist ideas influenced the deep ecology movement and the idea that humans are interdependent and connected to nature. It also notes that the canonical Buddhist texts that support interdependence are drawn more from east Asian Buddhist traditions (especially Chinese/Japanese) vs south Asian Buddhism in India.
Ch. 7, "Meditation and Modernity," asks why and how meditation became so popular in the west, as the Buddhist practice—when most traditional Buddhist cultures don't center it for laypeople in the same way!
Ch. 8, "Mindfulness, Literature, and the Affirmation of Life" is a super interesting reads for fans of modernist literature (Virginia Woolf, James Joyce, and of course PROUST)…it describes how Buddhist ideas of being mindful and attentive to everyday life (something the Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thích Nhất Hạnh emphasized) intersected with modernist literature and its obsession with everyday life as a window into interior and psychological concerns.
Throughout, the book also discusses how slippery the words "traditional" and "modern" are. What's seen as traditional is inevitably informed by what we, as modern and contemporary individuals, think was happening in the past. And our understanding of the past tends to be informed by contemporary biases! So any attempt to return to or revive tradition says as much about contemporary concerns as it does about what "actually" happened in the past.
August 6, 2016
This is a well researched, informed and accessible book which provides an invaluable historical insight into the way the modern westerners (or Americans) conceive and understand Buddhism (why they think about and understand Buddhism the way they do).
Despite of the many merits of the book, only 3 stars, not 5.
Why?
It's because (as a South Korean who inherits the East Asian Buddhist tradition) I can't fail to notice that the author is all too often a shameless Orientalist (In the very negative sense of the term) in his presentation of the subject matter.
This book is actually about how the predominant modern western conception and discourses of Buddhism - such as mindfulness movement, western understanding of Zen Buddhism - have been created in the historical context of modernity, colonialism. Thus the scope of the discussion in the book is almost exclusively confined to "western-American things", and even the numerous names of Asian monks and Buddhist thinkers were dropped only when they are relevant to the author's discussion of the making of currently dominant western discourses of Buddhism.
The trouble begins when the author claims (or strongly implies in between lines) such western-american things (a transformed new kind of Buddhism under strong influence of Western romanticism, scientific rationalism, protestantism etc...) is not only western-american thing but global, being equally prominent and important phenomenon in modern East Asian Buddhism.
"It is tempting to think of the various modernizing forms of Buddhism as “Western Buddhism,” ..... Although I intend to look primarily at its manifestations in the West, such interconnections between them belie any attempt to categorize my subject as “western Buddhism,” for it is a global phenomenon with a wide diversity of participants."
To put it bluntly, the passage above is hardly distinguished from saying "since all these things are Western-american things and any American thing whatsoever is universal, standard and equally valid in any other cultures, they must be valid in any other modern East Asian Buddhism as well".
Here is an example. D. T. Suzuki is one of the main figures who played a crucial role in shaping modern western understanding of Zen Buddhism. Thus it is only natural his name is mentioned numerously when the author discusses the western reception of Zen Buddhism. However, his legacy and influence is almost negligible (if not non-existent) in the modern development of Japanese Zen Buddhism (let alone modern Korean Zen Buddhism) as the author himself (reluctantly...?) admits.
"Today, while many traditional Zen monasteries around the globe still hold to largely traditional structures of doctrine and practice, zazen also floats freely across a number of cultures and subcultures, particularly in the West"
Even the quotation above is somewhat misleading more or less. A more appropriate and accurate description would be as follows.
"Today, while many traditional Zen monasteries in the East Asian countries still hold to largely traditional structures of doctrine and practice, zazen also floats freely across a number of cultures and subcultures mostly in the West"
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the east Asian Buddhism(s) underwent no significant transformation but only preserved their pure(?) traditional identities intact in the face of modernity, the threat of colonization and westernization. The emergence of academic Buddhist studies by secular scholars, discourses of unique features of Korean Buddhism distinguished from Chinese and Japanese Buddhism (a consequence of the rise of nationalism in modern Korean history), the historical encounter with the so-called Southern Buddhism and its pali canon (남방불교, commonly called as Theravada Buddhism in English speaking world) and translation of numerous Buddhist sutra (which had been available only in Classical Chinese) into modern Korean language etc ... would be main topics, concerning modernity and its influence on Korean Buddhism.
None of those topics is mentioned or discussed in depth by the author. After all the author is American, and those are not so relevant to American things even if they are deeply connected to the relationship between modernity and Buddhism (yet another new form of Buddhism which appeared in modern times).
But it is plain as day that the type of new Buddhisms discussed by the author is "Western Buddhism and/or American Buddhism (and very selective discussion of Asian Buddhist figures who are relevant to Western Buddhism)". The scope of the subject matter dealt with by the author is very limited, almost being exclusively Western things. Thus many significant "forms of Buddhism that have emerged out of an engagement with the dominant cultural and intellectual forces of modernity" do not get a proper attention and discussion in the book.
It's unfortunate to see the author is unaware of it or deliberately ignores it.
Despite of the many merits of the book, only 3 stars, not 5.
Why?
It's because (as a South Korean who inherits the East Asian Buddhist tradition) I can't fail to notice that the author is all too often a shameless Orientalist (In the very negative sense of the term) in his presentation of the subject matter.
This book is actually about how the predominant modern western conception and discourses of Buddhism - such as mindfulness movement, western understanding of Zen Buddhism - have been created in the historical context of modernity, colonialism. Thus the scope of the discussion in the book is almost exclusively confined to "western-American things", and even the numerous names of Asian monks and Buddhist thinkers were dropped only when they are relevant to the author's discussion of the making of currently dominant western discourses of Buddhism.
The trouble begins when the author claims (or strongly implies in between lines) such western-american things (a transformed new kind of Buddhism under strong influence of Western romanticism, scientific rationalism, protestantism etc...) is not only western-american thing but global, being equally prominent and important phenomenon in modern East Asian Buddhism.
"It is tempting to think of the various modernizing forms of Buddhism as “Western Buddhism,” ..... Although I intend to look primarily at its manifestations in the West, such interconnections between them belie any attempt to categorize my subject as “western Buddhism,” for it is a global phenomenon with a wide diversity of participants."
To put it bluntly, the passage above is hardly distinguished from saying "since all these things are Western-american things and any American thing whatsoever is universal, standard and equally valid in any other cultures, they must be valid in any other modern East Asian Buddhism as well".
Here is an example. D. T. Suzuki is one of the main figures who played a crucial role in shaping modern western understanding of Zen Buddhism. Thus it is only natural his name is mentioned numerously when the author discusses the western reception of Zen Buddhism. However, his legacy and influence is almost negligible (if not non-existent) in the modern development of Japanese Zen Buddhism (let alone modern Korean Zen Buddhism) as the author himself (reluctantly...?) admits.
"Today, while many traditional Zen monasteries around the globe still hold to largely traditional structures of doctrine and practice, zazen also floats freely across a number of cultures and subcultures, particularly in the West"
Even the quotation above is somewhat misleading more or less. A more appropriate and accurate description would be as follows.
"Today, while many traditional Zen monasteries in the East Asian countries still hold to largely traditional structures of doctrine and practice, zazen also floats freely across a number of cultures and subcultures mostly in the West"
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the east Asian Buddhism(s) underwent no significant transformation but only preserved their pure(?) traditional identities intact in the face of modernity, the threat of colonization and westernization. The emergence of academic Buddhist studies by secular scholars, discourses of unique features of Korean Buddhism distinguished from Chinese and Japanese Buddhism (a consequence of the rise of nationalism in modern Korean history), the historical encounter with the so-called Southern Buddhism and its pali canon (남방불교, commonly called as Theravada Buddhism in English speaking world) and translation of numerous Buddhist sutra (which had been available only in Classical Chinese) into modern Korean language etc ... would be main topics, concerning modernity and its influence on Korean Buddhism.
None of those topics is mentioned or discussed in depth by the author. After all the author is American, and those are not so relevant to American things even if they are deeply connected to the relationship between modernity and Buddhism (yet another new form of Buddhism which appeared in modern times).
But it is plain as day that the type of new Buddhisms discussed by the author is "Western Buddhism and/or American Buddhism (and very selective discussion of Asian Buddhist figures who are relevant to Western Buddhism)". The scope of the subject matter dealt with by the author is very limited, almost being exclusively Western things. Thus many significant "forms of Buddhism that have emerged out of an engagement with the dominant cultural and intellectual forces of modernity" do not get a proper attention and discussion in the book.
It's unfortunate to see the author is unaware of it or deliberately ignores it.
February 1, 2016
A nearly perfect book. A beautifully and compellingly written account of the cultural and historical forces that shaped the emergence of global Buddhist modernism. McMahan has a deep grasp of the scientific, religious, philosophical and artistic history of Western modernism and its critical fault lines, all of which set the preconditions for how Buddhism would be understood, interpreted, and made use of as it Westernized, and how this modernizing process was abetted by Asian Buddhists who both absorbed lessons from and attempted to defend themselves against Western colonialism. He doesn't go into great depth in terms of the details of the 19th Century Asian invention of Buddhist modernism (e.g., Ledi Sayadaw's reinvention of vipassana in Burma, or the reformation of Soto Zen in the Meiji era), but this is material well-covered elsewhere. This is a book every Buddhist should read to understand modern Buddhism's continuity with, discontinuity from, and at times inversion of more traditional forms of Buddhism. McMahan "gets it" that "Buddhism" has always been and continues to be an ever-evolving set of traditions that undergoes change and revision each time it crosses boundaries into new countries and eras, creating heterodox, heteropractic, and hybrid forms that coexist with and interact with older forms. The tension between old and new creates questions of authenticity that are eventually only answered by history. He does make small errors every once and a while - Jon Kabat-Zinn is neither a psychologist or a psychotherapist - for example, but the errors are minor and his erudition regarding Buddhism, Western cultural history, and modern sociology, is impressive.
January 22, 2016
Though it was published in 2008, I only just got to this important and necessary book! It shouldn’t be too much of a surprise to anyone with any understanding of the history of buddhism to hear that what is generally purported to be “buddhism” by leading contemporary teachers (whether western or asian) is almost certainly not what has been understood to be buddhism for most of its 2600 years.
McMahan, in this never less than interesting exploration, charts the development of the various buddhist modernisms that arose from the intermingling of various discourses and historical conditions from colonialism, nationalism, scientific rationalism, romanticism and religious pluralism.
His take is critical in the best sense of the word, not denigrating the hybridizations, but rather presenting buddhist modernism as the complex, mixed, nuanced historical process arising from traditional buddhism’s meeting with, being influenced by and influencing the various discourses of modernity.
As someone who positions himself as a ‘zen naturalist,’ I am consciously aware that I offer a modernist interpretation, but along the continuum that McMahan traces, zen naturalism is certainly more traditionally influenced in its forms and practices, than some other forms of buddhist modernism.
McMahan’s final sections offer a cautionary warning about the popularity of buddhism becoming merged with “new-age spiritualities, self-help therapies, and purely personal paths of self-improvement” so thoroughly absorbed into western commercialized pop culture as to have any potential radical critique buddhism could offer western culture neutralized. He speaks of a “global folk buddhism” as the extreme form of such a de-neutered buddhism. But he also offers some hope for those forms of buddhist modernism that can form a viable response to the (post)modern issues so central to western culture – “its narcissism, consumerism, militarism and so on, as well as of traditionalism’s sexism, hierarchism and dogmatism.”
If you have any interest in understanding buddhism and how it is currently presented in modernist culture, you must read this book.
McMahan, in this never less than interesting exploration, charts the development of the various buddhist modernisms that arose from the intermingling of various discourses and historical conditions from colonialism, nationalism, scientific rationalism, romanticism and religious pluralism.
His take is critical in the best sense of the word, not denigrating the hybridizations, but rather presenting buddhist modernism as the complex, mixed, nuanced historical process arising from traditional buddhism’s meeting with, being influenced by and influencing the various discourses of modernity.
As someone who positions himself as a ‘zen naturalist,’ I am consciously aware that I offer a modernist interpretation, but along the continuum that McMahan traces, zen naturalism is certainly more traditionally influenced in its forms and practices, than some other forms of buddhist modernism.
McMahan’s final sections offer a cautionary warning about the popularity of buddhism becoming merged with “new-age spiritualities, self-help therapies, and purely personal paths of self-improvement” so thoroughly absorbed into western commercialized pop culture as to have any potential radical critique buddhism could offer western culture neutralized. He speaks of a “global folk buddhism” as the extreme form of such a de-neutered buddhism. But he also offers some hope for those forms of buddhist modernism that can form a viable response to the (post)modern issues so central to western culture – “its narcissism, consumerism, militarism and so on, as well as of traditionalism’s sexism, hierarchism and dogmatism.”
If you have any interest in understanding buddhism and how it is currently presented in modernist culture, you must read this book.
January 22, 2022
Quite an in depth exploration into the study of Modern Buddhism in the West. I am grateful for what this book has done for my understanding towards Western Buddhism, which is one of cynicism and disdain. What this book does to alleviate that skepticism to my personal qualms with Westernised and Whitewashed Buddhism, is provide a context into the Western history of ideas which brought about such changes and ultimately syncretised forms of Buddhism to the West. Novel to me was the foray into romanticism, transcendentalism, german idealism, rationalism, psychoanalysis, ecology, social activism, psychology, neuroscience, and the various pros and cons of each of these philosophies, and the various authors and writers who syncretised ideas and strands from each of these philosophies including ethnic lineage based practitioners who sought to modernise Buddhism for the West. It was a great exploration, and it helps me have more empathy for the Western Mind and the Western Practice of Buddhism, as opposed to purely seeing it as a form of cultural misappropriation and whitewashed neoliberal commodification, obviously there is still that element, but there is now a more nuanced view which has helped from the reading of this book.
September 24, 2018
A well done summation of the forces shaping Buddhism over the last two hundred or so years and a clear overview of where it stands now. Academic in style, but an easy read if you are interested.
September 20, 2025
McMahan’s book is a genealogy in the Foucaultian sense: he doesn’t just describe “modern Buddhism,” he unearths the forces that conspired to produce it. His thesis: the Buddhism many Westerners and global cosmopolitans embrace—meditation, rationality, ethics stripped of ritual, democracy of access—isn’t timeless dharma but a hybrid creation forged in contact with modernity’s obsessions: Protestant reform, Romanticism, transcendentalism, and scientific naturalism.
The brilliance here is McMahan’s refusal to moralize. He doesn’t call modernism a “corruption” or a “liberation.” Instead, he stages its contradictions: how “mindfulness” echoes Protestant interiority, how “interdependence” dovetails with ecological holism, and how “Zen simplicity” owes as much to European aesthetics as to Dōgen. Reading it is like watching cultural DNA recombine in real time.
The book is postmodern in structure too. It doesn’t pretend to tell a linear story; instead, it offers thematic clusters—individualism, rationalism, romanticism—showing how each is refracted through Buddhist practice. It’s also quietly polemical: against the fantasy of a “pure Buddhism” retrieved from Oriental wisdom. Every Buddhism we encounter is already mediated, already constructed.
For readers of Batchelor, McMahan’s analysis is almost meta-commentary: secular Buddhism itself is one offspring of Buddhist modernism. Yet McMahan keeps enough ethnographic texture—Zen gardens, meditation retreats, eco-Buddhists—to remind us these aren’t just ideas but lived practices.
By the end, you realize Buddhist modernism is not an error to be corrected but an archive to be read. It’s a condition of possibility for global Buddhism today, and a reminder that what we call “tradition” is often just yesterday’s modernity, naturalized.
The brilliance here is McMahan’s refusal to moralize. He doesn’t call modernism a “corruption” or a “liberation.” Instead, he stages its contradictions: how “mindfulness” echoes Protestant interiority, how “interdependence” dovetails with ecological holism, and how “Zen simplicity” owes as much to European aesthetics as to Dōgen. Reading it is like watching cultural DNA recombine in real time.
The book is postmodern in structure too. It doesn’t pretend to tell a linear story; instead, it offers thematic clusters—individualism, rationalism, romanticism—showing how each is refracted through Buddhist practice. It’s also quietly polemical: against the fantasy of a “pure Buddhism” retrieved from Oriental wisdom. Every Buddhism we encounter is already mediated, already constructed.
For readers of Batchelor, McMahan’s analysis is almost meta-commentary: secular Buddhism itself is one offspring of Buddhist modernism. Yet McMahan keeps enough ethnographic texture—Zen gardens, meditation retreats, eco-Buddhists—to remind us these aren’t just ideas but lived practices.
By the end, you realize Buddhist modernism is not an error to be corrected but an archive to be read. It’s a condition of possibility for global Buddhism today, and a reminder that what we call “tradition” is often just yesterday’s modernity, naturalized.
February 16, 2024
Necessary reading for its perspective. This book seems to have introduced a dichotomization of Buddhism along lines of "modern" and "traditional" which is very influential today, mostly to discredit the former. I'm not saying that's the intention of the author, who might even be favorable to it. While the book highlights many contributions by Western thought into contemporary Buddhism it attributes far too much. The strongly syncretic forms that Buddhism has taken in most societies throughout its history (even in India!) is hardly explored though of vital importance to the topic. Despite the author's insistence, one is left with the impression that there is a true, traditional Buddhism and an orientalized Romanticism posing as it. Chan, which has been argued to share a quite similar affinity to Taoism, is considered perfectly orthodox and even traditional. The notion of a traditional (i.e. singular) Buddhism to which Buddhist Modernism might or might not be affiliated is every bit as modern. Truly in this Age of Dharma Decline such knowledge is beyond us. There is only to be have faith we might be reborn in a Pure Land (Walden).
April 7, 2024
This book is incredibly dense and for that reason I doubt many people will read it. However, it also has reshaped my perspective on Buddhism, meditation, and art in one fell swoop, all of which I have some level of passion and interest over several years in. I think westerners especially with an interest in meditation or Buddhism should read this to better understand the relationship between the practices they have developed and learned, and Buddhism as a global tradition extending millennia. There is so much nuance captured in this research that contextualizes the specifically American Buddhist experience but also presents Asian Buddhism not in the trap of "perfectly untouched original practice" but as itself a growing, morphing, highly varied, and influential force. Getting to reconfigure my perception of what an artistic practice is and contextualize that against the impact of Romanticism and the way Zen especially has interplayed with that was icing on the cake of learning.
February 7, 2023
An excellent and thoroughly illuminating look not only at the historical development of buddhism and how it has been shaped in contact with Modernist ideas and processes, but also offers a general understanding of Romanticism and other historical ideological/ philosophical currents in the west that today may have faded into popular obscurity, but remain thoroughly influential.
My only issue is that the books feels like it repeats material often, sometimes within chapters, in ways that could have been written more directly - but much of it seems in service of allowing chapters to be more self-contained.
My only issue is that the books feels like it repeats material often, sometimes within chapters, in ways that could have been written more directly - but much of it seems in service of allowing chapters to be more self-contained.
December 11, 2022
I really quite liked this book. The first parts introduces the reader to a variety of different forms and shapes that makes up global Buddhism, and the latter part instead focuses on how several modernist waves shaped Buddhism until it became perceived the way it is today in the west. It’s also interesting because the way Buddhism was shaped is also true for many other religions, and this book almost becomes an interesting case study.
July 31, 2018
A must read for anyone interested in 21st Century Buddhism.
April 3, 2019
Almost a perfect book.
July 24, 2019
ty david !!!!!!! tbh i read almost all the chapters but not every chapter pls just let this one count i have read so much for this project that i can't put on goodreads
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 24, 2024
fantastic analysis of how western intellectual history has interacted with buddhist thought to produce the varieties of modern western understandings of the dharma.
November 27, 2012
David McMahan does an excellent job of explaining the intersection of Buddhism with the West - both the rationalism of the Enlightenment and the Romantic reaction to that - in the past 100-125 years or so.
But, he also notes that it's more than just an intersection. It was a reaction to colonialism penetrating ever more of the Buddhist heartland. And, while Emerson and other Transcendentals may have made Eastern religion (much more focus by them on Hinduism, though) synthesized with new thoughts from the west, Buddhist thinkers, in trying to defend Buddhism against colonialism and reinvigorate it, willingly did their own synthesis.
And, not all Buddhist modernism, certainly not in its homeland, nor even in the West, has been demythologized today, McMahan notes. For example, though he professes to be willing to drop any belief incompatible with science, the Dalai Lama still holds firm to both karma and reincarnation.
McMahan focus on specific areas of "dialogue" in Buddhist modernism, such as science, meditation, Buddhism as psychology and more. He then concludes with a chapter on the idea of Buddhism postmodernism.
If you're looking for a great intro to where today's ideas about Buddhism, both West and East, have arisen, just how selective they may be in what parts of traditional Buddhism they use as their base and more, this is the book to read.
But, he also notes that it's more than just an intersection. It was a reaction to colonialism penetrating ever more of the Buddhist heartland. And, while Emerson and other Transcendentals may have made Eastern religion (much more focus by them on Hinduism, though) synthesized with new thoughts from the west, Buddhist thinkers, in trying to defend Buddhism against colonialism and reinvigorate it, willingly did their own synthesis.
And, not all Buddhist modernism, certainly not in its homeland, nor even in the West, has been demythologized today, McMahan notes. For example, though he professes to be willing to drop any belief incompatible with science, the Dalai Lama still holds firm to both karma and reincarnation.
McMahan focus on specific areas of "dialogue" in Buddhist modernism, such as science, meditation, Buddhism as psychology and more. He then concludes with a chapter on the idea of Buddhism postmodernism.
If you're looking for a great intro to where today's ideas about Buddhism, both West and East, have arisen, just how selective they may be in what parts of traditional Buddhism they use as their base and more, this is the book to read.
March 31, 2013
I have read many Buddhist books over the years and found myself lost in a sea of ideas. Buddhism exists in many different forms for many different cultures. All the ideas bounced around in contradiction, messiness, and confusion.
This book really addressed many of the ideas I became lost in. At least it places them in a historical perspective.
I highly recommend this book if you wish to see how Buddhism has evolved over the years. It is either my first or second favorite book on Buddhism. I will reread this book a few times over the years.
I would like to thank the Professor who wrote it. He is extremely educated in Philosophy, History an Religion, thus giving the topic of Buddhism a new and fresh perspective.
I am tired and rambling. Read this book, however it isn't an Intro to Buddhism book.
This book really addressed many of the ideas I became lost in. At least it places them in a historical perspective.
I highly recommend this book if you wish to see how Buddhism has evolved over the years. It is either my first or second favorite book on Buddhism. I will reread this book a few times over the years.
I would like to thank the Professor who wrote it. He is extremely educated in Philosophy, History an Religion, thus giving the topic of Buddhism a new and fresh perspective.
I am tired and rambling. Read this book, however it isn't an Intro to Buddhism book.
January 22, 2014
Excellent philosophical points and a good, honest reminder or revelation to new Buddhist practitioner s or sympathizers that like other world religions, new interest shift emphasis in a tradition and cloud it's true history. It does not debunk Buddhism but sends a reminder of its earlier main themes: less about meditation and mindfulness and more about ritual, perhaps until Christian missionaries came into contact with Buddhism and Buddhists themselves wanted a world religion that could resist such inroads.
April 20, 2014
This helped me put my Buddhist practice (and hell, pretty much all of my Buddhistic tendencies) into context--I was surprised at just how much what I thought of as "purely" Buddhist practices and beliefs were directly inspired and augmented by Western Romantic literature and philosophy. Like all things, the dharma too is a protean, changeable thing, and Buddhism even now is changing into a new globalized philosophy, for better or worse.
April 13, 2015
This is an intense book that took me a long time to read (and hopefully digest). Many interesting questions and it has a depth and breath that is quite interesting. There is an academic element to it, there is also a kind of tour de force of ideas, but it also goes after more specifics at times. I really think it's an indispensable book for the modern Buddhist.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews