p. 139

ABSTRACT
　

　　 As we approach the end of both this century and this millennium, it seems appropriate to ask about the meaning of Buddhism. What are Buddhists seeking and finding from their religion at this point? Or to put it another way, how do Buddhists construct the meaning and intention/direction of Buddhism at the end of the century? For Sri Lanka -- from which the two paradigms are selected, the end of the century marks fifty years since their nation gained its independence and almost fifty years since the Buddha Jayanti, the highpoint of the Theravada Buddhist Revival. So we can say that in asking about the meaning of Buddhism in Sri Lanka today, we are also attempting to discover what has been the legacy of the Buddhist Revival.
　　 This paper contends that the legacy of the Buddhist Revival and the true meaning and intention of Buddhism today can be seen not in the twin movements that are usually said to be the dominant forces in Sri Lankan Buddhism, Sinhala Buddhist Fundamentalism and Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism (hereafter, SBF and SBN). Rather, the ferment in Sri Lankan Buddhism today can be seen more clearly in two other movements that express a more humanistic Buddhism: the lay meditation movement and the socially engaged Buddhist movement exemplified particularly by the Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement. It is in these latter two movements that we can see what Buddhists in Sri Lanka are seeking from Buddhism today and what discourses they are using to set the contemporary direction for this ancient spiritual tradition. In the following, I will show how the lay meditation movement and the socially engaged Buddhism movement have emerged to provide alternatives to SBF and SBN that redefine Buddhism in a more humanistic light.

I. Humanistic Buddhist Interpretations
　　 The two movements that I seek to examine as paradigms of Humanistic Buddhism are, constructs and interpretations of what Buddhism means in the contemporary context in Sri Lanka. They grew out of the revival and owed much to the colonial reification and interpretation of Buddhism. But they represent alternatives to the dominant discourse of SBN and political Buddhism, alternative interpretations that construct the meaning and significance of Buddhism quite differently. They may not be any more "authentic" but they clearly provide some different perspectives on the meaning of Buddhism today. The point of our study is to show that these two movements emphasize very different ideas of "what it means to be a Buddhist today, at the end of the twentieth century." They differ from SBN in that they are concerned with the soteriological tradition and the classical values of the sasana. These lay movements emphasize the other side of the sasana, the soteriological dimension. [1] They draw on different sources -- more on the suttas and ethical teachings and less on the nationalistic and historical narrative. They see themselves as representing or reintroducing the Buddhist ideals of Wisdom and Compassion. But like fundamentalists everywhere, these reformers are not simply reviving a past form but are negotiating with the past to arrive at an understanding of

p. 140

Buddhism that applies to the present context. As Marty has said, such reformers are "selectively traditional and selectively modern." The conceptions of Wisdom and Compassion that they introduce are clearly constructions that have been shaped by both classical ideals and by modern/post-modern forces and powers. The space in which they seek Wisdom and Compassion is distinctly a modern space and the Wisdom and Compassion they seek are to a significant extent shaped by this space. But in their expressions of the meaning of Buddhist Wisdom and Compassion, we can see the flux and ferment that is shaping Buddhism today.

　　 These movements represent elements or expressions of a process of interpretation that extends through the period called the Buddhist Revival and has continued to evolve into the present. This process can be seen as the way that Buddhist discourse develops and evolves. Within this process as expressed by these two movements, we can identify a number of themes. We can also see that these themes tend to develop in "waves" so that there are earlier themes from the period of the Buddhist revival and other themes that have developed in the years since the revival -- e.g. post-modern themes shaped by a post-modern context. These themes in particular demonstrate the nature of the flux in contemporary Buddhism.

A. Some of the earlier themes that appeared in the early period of the revival and link these movements to the revival are: Orientalism, Individualism, and World affirmation.

Orientalism --- This theme appears in the groups' tendencies to reject the practices that define what Scott terms "contemporary Buddhist orthodoxy," practices such as temple rituals and deva worship. To a great extent, the groups also rebel against the authority of the Sangha in general. In these ways they are expressing ideas that can be said to have begun with Olcott and Dharmapala. Olcott's ideas for rationalizing Buddhist spirituality may have gone through many changes since he first visited the island in 1880, but the thrust of his reforms underlies many of the current Buddhist ideas and values. His reforms were, of course, continued in many ways by Dharmapala, whose influence on the Buddhist process in Sri Lanka has been even more pervasive. [2] Even the very emphasis on meditation as a path for the laity could be viewed as an example of Orientalism. This emphasis can be traced back to the early revival when colonial proponents of Buddhism advocated reviving what they saw as the 'pure' practice of the path. Meditation appealed to the western educated laity for many of the same reasons that it appealed to the West: it represented a rational way to cope with or control one's life and it fit in with an acceptance of the naturalistic paradigm.