Modern challenges to the sangha, not primordial identity, explain monks’ political engagement.

Evidence

In a seminal article and subsequent related publications, Obeyesekere referred to the cultural and political shifts postindependence Theravada Buddhism in Sri Lanka was experiencing as “Protestant Buddhism,” given that “many of its norms and organizational forms are historical derivatives from Protestant Christianity” and that “it is a protest against Christianity and its associated Western political dominance prior to independence” (Obeyesekere 1970: 46–47). 
 Although it may be a misnomer to refer to Theravada Buddhism as Protestant Buddhism (Holt 1990), Obeyesekere was seeking to explain the significant ways in which the sangha was being challenged by the modern milieu confronting it. The political Buddhism of the sangha may indeed be due to such challenges. — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist Ideology, 94

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Defines ‘Protestant Buddhism,’ a coinage that reframes politicized Buddhism as a reactive, modern construction rather than an ancient essence.
  • ADDENDUM: Directly relevant to the ‘Complaints About Immodesty Go Way Back’ essay — a parallel case of a ‘tradition’ being a reactive modern construction against Western influence.
  • XREF: Parallels the constructed-enemy theme: here Buddhism’s political form is manufactured in response to Christian/Western dominance, not primordial. — connects to: Buddhist monks entered national politics only very gradually over decades — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist
, 170; Monks built anachronistic historical claims to legitimize politicized Buddhism — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist
, 51; Sinhalese Buddhist nationalism is reactive, not primordial — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist
, 105 (+2 more)

Broader Connections