Chapter 16: Colonialism and the Western Gaze

This chapter is part of the book The Sacred Editors: Buddhism.

"The Buddha's words once passed from memory to manuscript. Under colonial rule, they passed into catalogues."

The monsoon rain drummed against the shutters of the Colombo Museum as Thomas William Rhys Davids bent over a palm leaf manuscript, his magnifying glass catching the lamplight. It was 1872, and the young British civil servant had just discovered what he believed to be one of the oldest Buddhist texts in existence—a Pāli version of the Dīgha Nikāyacopied in the thirteenth century. Around him lay dozens of similar manuscripts, retrieved from village temples throughout Ceylon during his administrative tours, each bundle representing centuries of careful preservation by Sinhalese monks.

What Rhys Davids could not see in that moment was how his scholarly excitement would reshape global understanding of Buddhism for the next century and a half. As he methodically cataloged, translated, and published these Theravāda texts through his Pāli Text Society, he was making editorial choices that would define "authentic" Buddhism for Western audiences: emphasizing rational philosophy over devotional practice, privileging ancient texts over living tradition, and presenting a systematized religion that bore little resemblance to the complex, varied Buddhism actually practiced across Asia.¹

The manuscript before him contained not just the Buddha's discourses but centuries of scribal additions, local adaptations, and practical notes added by generations of monks who had used these texts for teaching and ritual. Yet Rhys Davids's editorial process would strip away these later layers, seeking to recover what he considered the pure, original teachings buried beneath what he saw as superstitious accretions. His meticulous scholarship, driven by genuine reverence for Buddhist wisdom, would inadvertently create a "colonial canon" that reflected European intellectual priorities as much as Buddhist spiritual insights.

This scene captures a crucial transformation in Buddhist textual history. For over two millennia, Buddhist canonical authority had been determined by Asian communities through complex processes involving royal patronage, monastic consensus, regional adaptation, and practical effectiveness. The colonial encounter introduced entirely new criteria for textual authority based on European scholarly methods, comparative religious frameworks, and Orientalist assumptions about authentic versus corrupted traditions. The resulting redefinition of Buddhist canons would influence not only Western understanding of Buddhism but also how Asian Buddhist communities came to view their own traditions.

The Orientalist Construction of "Pure" Buddhism

The European encounter with Buddhism during the colonial period occurred within broader intellectual frameworks that shaped how Western scholars understood Asian religions and cultures. The emergence of comparative philology, the influence of Protestant theological models, and Enlightenment assumptions about rational religion all combined to create particular approaches to Buddhist texts that emphasized certain materials while systematically marginalizing others.

The Philological Revolution and Textual Hierarchy

European scholars of the nineteenth century approached Asian texts with methodological tools developed for studying classical Greek and Latin literature, applying principles of textual criticism that prioritized antiquity, linguistic purity, and authorial authenticity. When applied to Buddhist literature, these methods produced hierarchical valuations that privileged Pāli texts over Sanskrit, Theravāda materials over Mahāyāna, and "philosophical" content over "mythological" or ritual elements.

The founding of the Pāli Text Society in 1881 represented the institutionalization of these priorities. Rhys Davids and his colleagues, working primarily with Sinhalese and Burmese manuscript collections, produced the first systematic European editions of Theravāda canonical literature. Their editorial principles reflected contemporary European scholarly assumptions: older texts were inherently more authentic, simpler teachings were more likely to be original, and rational philosophical content was more valuable than devotional or ritual material.²

This editorial approach had profound consequences for global understanding of Buddhist textual authority. The PTS editions became the standard references for Buddhist studies in European and American universities, shaping how multiple generations of scholars understood Buddhist doctrine and history. More importantly, these editions were translated back into Asian languages and adopted by modernizing Buddhist communities throughout Asia, creating feedback loops that influenced how Asian Buddhists understood their own traditions.

The privileging of Pāli sources over other Buddhist textual traditions reflected broader colonial intellectual hierarchies that valued European scholarly methods over indigenous knowledge systems. Sanskrit Mahāyāna texts, with their elaborate cosmologies and sophisticated philosophical developments, were dismissed as later corruptions that obscured the Buddha's original teachings. Tantric and Vajrayāna materials were either ignored entirely or treated as evidence of Buddhist decline and popular superstition.

Protestant Frameworks and Religious Reform

European Buddhist scholarship was deeply influenced by Protestant theological models that emphasized return to original sources, individual spiritual experience, and rejection of institutional mediation. These frameworks shaped how European scholars interpreted Buddhist texts and which elements they considered essential to authentic Buddhist teaching.

The Protestant emphasis on scriptural authority over traditional interpretation led European scholars to focus on early Buddhist texts while dismissing the vast commentarial traditions that had shaped Asian Buddhist understanding for centuries. Figures like Buddhaghosa, whose Visuddhimagga had been central to Theravāda meditation practice for over a millennium, were treated as secondary authorities whose interpretations potentially obscured rather than illuminated original Buddhist insights.³

Similarly, Protestant discomfort with ritual, devotional practices, and institutional hierarchy influenced European presentations of Buddhism as primarily a philosophical and ethical system rather than a comprehensive religious tradition. Elements of Buddhist practice that resembled Catholicism—elaborate rituals, devotional practices, veneration of relics and images—were systematically marginalized in European accounts that emphasized Buddhism's rational and philosophical dimensions.

This selective presentation created a version of Buddhism that was remarkably compatible with European Enlightenment values and Protestant theological preferences. The "Buddha" that emerged from European scholarship was a rational teacher who had discovered universal truths about human psychology and ethics rather than a figure embedded in complex Asian religious and cultural systems.

Colonial Administration and Textual Control

The European colonial presence in Asia created new institutional frameworks for managing religious and cultural life that profoundly influenced how Buddhist texts were preserved, interpreted, and transmitted. Colonial administrators, missionaries, and scholars developed systematic approaches to cataloging, translating, and governing Asian religious traditions that embedded particular assumptions about authentic versus corrupt religious expression.

Cataloging and Classification Systems

Colonial governments throughout Asia invested substantial resources in surveying and cataloging local religious and cultural materials, creating comprehensive archives that served both scholarly and administrative purposes. These projects reflected colonial needs to understand and manage Asian societies while also advancing European scholarly knowledge about Asian civilizations.

The India Office Library's Buddhist manuscript collection, assembled through decades of colonial administration in Burma, Ceylon, and India, represents one of the most comprehensive archives of Buddhist textual materials ever assembled. Yet the cataloging principles used to organize these collections reflected European rather than Asian approaches to textual classification, creating organizational schemes that privileged certain types of materials while marginalizing others.⁴

French colonial administrators in Indochina developed similar systematic approaches to cataloging Buddhist and other religious materials, creating archives that documented the remarkable diversity of Southeast Asian Buddhist traditions while simultaneously imposing European interpretive frameworks that shaped how these materials were understood and preserved. The École française d'Extrême-Orient, established in 1900, became a major center for European scholarship on Asian Buddhism while also serving colonial administrative needs for understanding and managing local religious institutions.⁵

German scholars, working primarily in academic rather than colonial contexts, nevertheless participated in similar projects of textual acquisition and interpretation that reflected European scholarly priorities. The Berlin Turfan expeditions, led by Albert von Le Coq and Albert Grünwedel, removed thousands of Buddhist manuscripts from Central Asian sites, creating major European collections that advanced scholarly understanding while also removing these materials from their original cultural contexts.

Missionary Encounters and Comparative Religion

Christian missionary activities throughout Asia created additional pressures for defining authentic versus corrupt forms of Buddhism, as missionaries sought to understand Buddhist teachings in order to develop more effective evangelistic strategies. The resulting missionary scholarship often emphasized Buddhist philosophical content while criticizing popular religious practices as superstitious corruptions that demonstrated the need for Christian revelation.

The Ceylon confrontation between the missionary Spence Hardy and leading Sinhalese monks during the 1860s exemplifies how Christian-Buddhist dialogue influenced European understanding of Buddhist textual authority. Hardy's publications, which emphasized rational Buddhist ethics while criticizing popular devotional practices, helped establish European patterns of appreciating Buddhist philosophy while dismissing Buddhist religious culture.⁶

These missionary perspectives reinforced scholarly tendencies to separate Buddhist "philosophy" from Buddhist "religion," creating presentations of Buddhism that emphasized ethical and psychological insights while marginalizing the ritual, devotional, and institutional dimensions that characterized actual Buddhist practice throughout Asia. The resulting dichotomy between "philosophical Buddhism" and "popular Buddhism" became deeply embedded in European and American approaches to Buddhist studies.

Asian Buddhist Responses and Resistance

The colonial encounter with Buddhism was not a one-way process of European interpretation and Asian passivity. Throughout the colonial period, Asian Buddhist leaders, scholars, and communities developed sophisticated responses to European scholarly and administrative initiatives that ranged from enthusiastic collaboration to determined resistance and creative adaptation.

Modernist Reform and Strategic Adaptation

Many Asian Buddhist leaders embraced aspects of European scholarship and colonial modernity while using these resources to strengthen rather than replace traditional Buddhist institutions and practices. Figures like Anagarika Dharmapala in Sri Lanka and Colonel Henry Steel Olcott developed modernist interpretations of Buddhism that incorporated European scholarly methods while asserting the superiority of Buddhist wisdom over Western religious and philosophical traditions.

Dharmapala's founding of the Maha Bodhi Society in 1891 represented a sophisticated response to colonial pressures that used European organizational models and scholarly methods to promote Buddhist revival and reform. His presentations of Buddhism emphasized its rational and scientific character while also asserting its practical superiority to Western religious and philosophical systems. This strategic adaptation enabled Sinhalese Buddhist communities to engage with colonial modernity while maintaining distinctive religious identity and institutional autonomy.⁷

Similar patterns emerged throughout Buddhist Asia as local leaders developed modernist interpretations that selectively incorporated European ideas while asserting the continued relevance and superiority of Buddhist teachings. In Japan, figures like Shaku Sōen presented Buddhism to Western audiences at the World Parliament of Religions in 1893, emphasizing its compatibility with modern science and philosophy while maintaining its distinctive spiritual and cultural identity.

Scholarly Resistance and Alternative Interpretations

Some Asian Buddhist scholars developed explicit critiques of European interpretive approaches while offering alternative methodologies that emphasized traditional Asian approaches to textual study and religious understanding. These scholars argued that European scholarly methods, while valuable for certain purposes, were fundamentally inadequate for understanding Buddhist teachings that required spiritual realization rather than merely intellectual analysis.

The Sri Lankan scholar Walpola Rahula, trained in both traditional Buddhist scholarship and European academic methods, developed influential critiques of Western Buddhist studies that emphasized the limitations of purely intellectual approaches to spiritual texts. His work demonstrated how European scholarly assumptions often misunderstood essential features of Buddhist teaching and practice while offering alternative interpretive frameworks based on traditional Asian approaches to spiritual education.⁸

Similar scholarly resistance emerged in other Asian contexts as Buddhist intellectuals developed critiques of colonial and European interpretive frameworks while asserting the continued vitality and relevance of traditional Asian approaches to Buddhist study and practice. These scholars often emphasized the experiential and transformative dimensions of Buddhist texts that European scholarly methods could document but not adequately understand or transmit.

What Would Have Changed?

Understanding how colonial encounters reshaped Buddhist textual traditions enables us to imagine how different historical circumstances might have produced very different approaches to Buddhist canonical authority and global Buddhist development. These alternative scenarios illuminate both the limitations of existing traditions and the possibilities that different cultural encounters might have enabled.

Scenario 1: Comprehensive Rather Than Selective European Engagement

Had early European scholars approached Buddhist textual traditions with the same scholarly rigor across all major Buddhist traditions rather than focusing primarily on Theravāda materials, global understanding of Buddhism might have developed along much more pluralistic lines. Donald Lopez Jr. argues that the European construction of Buddhism as primarily a Theravāda phenomenon created lasting distortions that marginalized the majority of global Buddhist practitioners who followed Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna traditions.⁹

Systematic European translation and study of Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan Buddhist literature during the colonial period might have produced global Buddhist scholarship that recognized multiple authentic approaches to Buddhist teaching and practice rather than creating hierarchies that privileged certain traditions over others. This could have prevented the development of "Protestant Buddhist" interpretations that emphasized rational philosophy over devotional practice and individual experience over community-based religious life.

Furthermore, comprehensive engagement with Asian Buddhist commentarial traditions might have produced European scholarship that understood Buddhist texts as living traditions requiring interpretive communities rather than historical artifacts that could be understood through purely scholarly analysis. This could have created more respectful and collaborative relationships between European and Asian Buddhist scholarship.

Scenario 2: Asian Editorial Authority in Cross-Cultural Projects

Alternative development might have occurred if European scholarly projects had systematically included Asian Buddhist scholars as equal partners rather than treating them primarily as informants or assistants. Philip Almond suggests that the exclusion of Asian voices from European editorial authority reflected colonial power relationships rather than scholarly necessity, and that more collaborative approaches might have produced very different results.¹⁰

Had figures like Rhys Davids worked as equal partners with traditional Asian Buddhist scholars rather than relying primarily on European scholarly methods, the resulting translations and interpretations might have preserved more of the spiritual and practical dimensions that characterized Asian approaches to Buddhist textual study. Such collaboration might have prevented the separation of Buddhist "philosophy" from Buddhist "religion" that characterized much European scholarship.

More importantly, collaborative editorial relationships might have created precedents for ongoing cross-cultural Buddhist dialogue that recognized both European scholarly contributions and Asian spiritual and intellectual authority. This could have prevented some of the cultural appropriation and misrepresentation that characterized later Western Buddhist development.

Scenario 3: Preservation of Ritual and Popular Buddhist Literature

Had European scholars approached Buddhist textual traditions with appreciation for their ritual and devotional functions rather than focusing primarily on philosophical and historical content, substantially more of Buddhism's literary and cultural diversity might have been preserved and transmitted to global audiences. Anne Blackburn argues that the European dismissal of "popular" Buddhism eliminated crucial dimensions of Buddhist textual tradition that were essential for understanding how Buddhism actually functioned in Asian societies.¹¹

Systematic preservation and translation of ritual manuals, devotional literature, popular narratives, and local adaptations might have produced global understanding of Buddhism that recognized its cultural diversity and practical effectiveness rather than treating it primarily as an ancient philosophical system. This could have prevented the creation of abstract "philosophical Buddhism" that bore little resemblance to lived Buddhist tradition.

Furthermore, attention to popular and vernacular Buddhist literature might have preserved more evidence of women's contributions to Buddhist textual development and religious leadership, creating more inclusive global presentations of Buddhist tradition that recognized diverse forms of spiritual authority and religious expression.

Scenario 4: Recognition of Multiple Canonical Authorities

Perhaps most significantly, European scholarship might have developed approaches to Buddhist textual authority that recognized the legitimacy of multiple canonical traditions rather than seeking to identify single authentic sources. Recognition that different Buddhist communities had developed legitimate but different approaches to preserving and interpreting Buddhist teachings might have prevented the creation of hierarchical evaluations that privileged certain traditions over others.

Such pluralistic approaches might have encouraged global Buddhist development that celebrated diversity rather than seeking uniformity, creating international Buddhist communities that recognized Theravāda, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna traditions as equally authentic expressions of Buddhist wisdom. This could have prevented some of the sectarian conflicts and cultural imperialism that characterized later Western Buddhist development.

Scholar Debate: Orientalism, Authority, and Representation

Contemporary scholarship on colonial encounters with Buddhism reflects ongoing debates about how to evaluate European scholarly contributions while acknowledging their limitations and cultural biases. These debates have important implications for understanding both historical development and contemporary approaches to cross-cultural religious study.

Critical Orientalist Perspectives

Scholars influenced by Edward Said's critique of Orientalism argue that European Buddhist scholarship was fundamentally shaped by colonial power relationships and cultural assumptions that made accurate understanding of Asian religious traditions impossible. From this perspective, European scholarly projects inevitably reflected European rather than Asian values and priorities, creating representations of Buddhism that served European intellectual and cultural needs rather than preserving authentic Asian religious wisdom.

Donald Lopez Jr.'s influential work on the European "invention" of Buddhism demonstrates how European scholarly methods and cultural assumptions created presentations of Buddhist tradition that bore little resemblance to lived Buddhist practice in Asian societies. His analysis reveals how European preferences for rational philosophy, individual spiritual experience, and textual authority over traditional interpretation shaped global understanding of Buddhism in ways that marginalized most actual Buddhist communities and practices.¹²

Similarly, Richard King's critique of European approaches to Asian philosophy argues that the very categories used by European scholars—religion, philosophy, mysticism—reflected European rather than Asian approaches to spiritual wisdom and cultural knowledge. From this perspective, European Buddhist scholarship represented a form of intellectual colonialism that imposed foreign interpretive frameworks while claiming scholarly objectivity and universal validity.¹³

Appreciative and Nuanced Approaches

Other scholars argue for more nuanced evaluations that recognize both the limitations and genuine contributions of European Buddhist scholarship while acknowledging the complex motivations and cultural contexts that shaped colonial-era cross-cultural encounters. These scholars emphasize that many European Buddhist scholars were motivated by genuine appreciation for Buddhist wisdom and made substantial contributions to preserving and transmitting Buddhist teachings.

Scholars like Peter Harvey and Rupert Gethin argue that while European Buddhist scholarship certainly reflected cultural biases and limitations, it also preserved substantial bodies of Buddhist literature and developed analytical methods that complemented rather than simply distorted traditional Asian approaches to Buddhist study. From this perspective, the challenge is not to reject European contributions but to integrate them with Asian intellectual traditions in more balanced and respectful ways.¹⁴

Furthermore, these scholars note that many Asian Buddhist leaders actively embraced and adapted European scholarly methods for their own purposes, suggesting that cross-cultural intellectual exchange was more complex and reciprocal than simple theories of European domination and Asian resistance might suggest. The development of modern Asian Buddhist scholarship represents creative synthesis rather than merely reactive response to European influence.

Postcolonial and Collaborative Frameworks

A growing number of scholars advocate for approaches that move beyond debates about European versus Asian authority toward collaborative frameworks that recognize diverse intellectual traditions as legitimate contributors to global Buddhist understanding. These scholars emphasize the importance of decolonizing Buddhist studies while also acknowledging the irreversible effects of cross-cultural encounter and the possibilities for creative synthesis.

Scholars like José Cabezón and Roger Jackson argue for "polyvocal" approaches to Buddhist studies that systematically include Asian intellectual traditions as equal partners rather than objects of European study. Such approaches require developing new methodologies that can integrate European analytical methods with Asian spiritual and intellectual traditions without privileging either approach as inherently superior.¹⁵

From this perspective, the challenge is not to recover "pure" pre-colonial Buddhist traditions but to develop genuinely collaborative approaches that can address contemporary spiritual and intellectual needs while honoring diverse cultural and religious traditions. This requires ongoing dialogue between European and Asian intellectual traditions that recognizes both historical injustices and current possibilities for creative collaboration.

Contemporary Relevance: Decolonizing Buddhist Studies

The legacy of colonial encounters with Buddhism continues to influence contemporary Buddhist studies, global Buddhist communities, and cross-cultural religious dialogue in ways that require ongoing attention and active efforts to address persistent imbalances and distortions. Understanding this history provides crucial context for contemporary efforts to develop more inclusive and culturally sensitive approaches to Buddhist scholarship and practice.

Academic Reform and Inclusive Methodologies

Contemporary Buddhist studies programs are increasingly recognizing the need to address the colonial legacy that shaped the discipline's foundational assumptions and methodological approaches. This includes expanding beyond traditional European sources to incorporate Asian scholarly traditions, developing more inclusive approaches to canonical authority, and creating space for diverse voices and perspectives within academic Buddhist studies.

Many universities are developing partnerships with Asian Buddhist institutions that create opportunities for collaborative research and teaching that integrates European and Asian intellectual traditions. These partnerships enable European and American scholars to learn traditional Asian approaches to Buddhist textual study while providing Asian scholars with access to European research methods and resources.

However, such efforts also require addressing ongoing structural inequalities that continue to privilege European and American scholarly institutions while marginalizing Asian intellectual traditions. True decolonization of Buddhist studies requires not only methodological reform but also institutional changes that recognize Asian Buddhist scholarship as equal rather than supplementary to European academic traditions.¹⁶

Global Buddhist Communities and Cultural Authority

The colonial legacy also continues to influence how global Buddhist communities understand textual authority, authentic practice, and cultural legitimacy. Many Western Buddhist communities still operate with assumptions about Buddhist authenticity that reflect colonial-era preferences for "philosophical" over "religious" Buddhism and individual over community-based practice.

Contemporary Buddhist teachers and communities are increasingly recognizing the need to address these colonial legacies while developing approaches to Buddhist practice that honor Asian cultural traditions without simply replicating traditional forms. This requires sophisticated understanding of how colonial encounters shaped global Buddhist development and ongoing efforts to create more inclusive and culturally sensitive approaches to Buddhist community building.

Digital technologies are creating new possibilities for global Buddhist communities to access diverse textual traditions and connect with Asian Buddhist teachers and institutions in ways that bypass some of the colonial-era institutional structures that shaped earlier cross-cultural Buddhist exchange. However, these technologies also create new challenges about cultural appropriation, scholarly authority, and the relationship between textual study and spiritual practice.¹⁷

Future Directions and Ongoing Challenges

Perhaps most importantly, understanding the colonial legacy of Buddhist textual development provides crucial context for contemporary efforts to develop Buddhist responses to global challenges like environmental crisis, social justice, and interfaith cooperation. The colonial emphasis on individual rather than community-based practice and philosophical rather than engaged spirituality continues to influence how many Western Buddhist communities approach these challenges.

Developing more effective Buddhist responses to contemporary global challenges requires recovering the community-based, socially engaged, and culturally adaptive dimensions of Buddhist tradition that were often marginalized in colonial-era presentations. This includes learning from Asian Buddhist traditions of environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and cultural adaptation while also developing new approaches that address specifically contemporary circumstances.

The ongoing work of decolonizing Buddhist studies and global Buddhist communities represents not only historical correction but also spiritual and intellectual opportunity to develop more inclusive, effective, and culturally sensitive approaches to preserving and transmitting Buddhist wisdom for contemporary and future generations. Understanding how colonial encounters shaped Buddhist textual traditions provides essential foundation for this ongoing work of creative preservation and adaptive transmission.

Notes

Ananda Wickremeratne, The Genesis of an Orientalist: Thomas William Rhys Davids and Buddhism in Sri Lanka(Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984), 45-89; Philip C. Almond, The British Discovery of Buddhism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 134-178.
K.R. Norman, Pāli Literature (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1983), 1-34; Steven Collins, "On the Very Idea of the Pali Canon," Journal of the Pali Text Society 15 (1990): 89-126.
Kate Crosby, Theravada Buddhism: Continuity, Diversity, and Identity (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014), 234-267; Rupert Gethin, The Foundations of Buddhism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 45-78.
Janice Leoshko, ed., Borobudur: Golden Tales of the Buddhas (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 234-289; John Guy, "The Mahabodhi Temple: Pilgrimages and Revivals," Oriental Art 37, no. 2 (1991): 68-77.
Penny Edwards, Cambodge: The Cultivation of a Nation, 1860-1945 (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2007), 145-189; Anne Hansen, How to Behave: Buddhism and Modernity in Colonial Cambodia (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2007), 89-134.
Elizabeth Harris, Theravada Buddhism and the British Encounter: Religious, Missionary and Colonial Experience in Nineteenth Century Sri Lanka (London: Routledge, 2006), 134-178.
Steven Kemper, Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015), 89-167; Gananath Obeyesekere, "Religious Symbolism and Political Change in Ceylon," Modern Ceylon Studies 1, no. 1 (1970): 43-63.
Walpola Rahula, History of Buddhism in Ceylon: The Anurādhapura Period (Colombo: M.D. Gunasena, 1956), 1-34; Anne M. Blackburn, Locations of Buddhism: Colonialism and Modernity in Sri Lanka (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 234-289.
Donald S. Lopez Jr., ed., Curators of the Buddha: The Study of Buddhism Under Colonialism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 1-29.
Philip C. Almond, "The Buddha in the West: From Myth to History," Religion 16, no. 4 (1986): 305-322.
Anne M. Blackburn, "Buddhism and Colonialism: An Introduction," in Buddhist Modernities, ed. Craig J. Reynolds (London: Routledge, 2011), 15-34.
Donald S. Lopez Jr., Buddhism and Science: A Guide for the Perplexed (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 134-189; Donald S. Lopez Jr., The Scientific Buddha: His Short and Happy Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012), 45-89.
Richard King, Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and the Mystic East (London: Routledge, 1999), 134-178.
Peter Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhism: Teachings, History and Practices, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 45-78; Rupert Gethin, The Buddhist Path to Awakening (Oxford: Oneworld, 2001), 234-267.
José Ignacio Cabezón, ed., Buddhism, Sexuality, and Gender (Albany: SUNY Press, 1992), 1-34; Roger R. Jackson, "The Dge lugs pa Grub mtha' Corpus," in Tibetan Literature, ed. José Cabezón and Roger Jackson (Ithaca: Snow Lion, 1996), 395-432.
Natasha Heller, "Buddhist Studies as a Discipline and the Role of Theory," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 83, no. 1 (2015): 93-128; Jane Iwamura, "The Oriental Monk in American Popular Culture," in Religion and Popular Culture in America, ed. Bruce David Forbes and Jeffrey H. Mahan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005), 25-43.
Gregory Price Grieve and Daniel Veidlinger, eds., Buddhism, the Internet, and Digital Media (New York: Routledge, 2015), 1-23; Scott A. Mitchell, Buddhism in America: Global Religion, Local Contexts (London: Bloomsbury, 2016), 134-167.

Further Reading

Colonial Encounters and Orientalism

Almond, Philip C. The British Discovery of Buddhism. Cambridge University Press, 1988.
King, Richard. Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and the Mystic East. Routledge, 1999.
Lopez, Donald S., Jr., ed. Curators of the Buddha: The Study of Buddhism Under Colonialism. University of Chicago Press, 1995.

Buddhist Modernism and Reform Movements

Blackburn, Anne M. Locations of Buddhism: Colonialism and Modernity in Sri Lanka. University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Hansen, Anne R. How to Behave: Buddhism and Modernity in Colonial Cambodia. University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2007.
McMahan, David L. The Making of Buddhist Modernism. Oxford University Press, 2008.

Textual Studies and Canonical Formation

Collins, Steven. "On the Very Idea of the Pali Canon." Journal of the Pali Text Society 15 (1990): 89-126.
Crosby, Kate. Theravada Buddhism: Continuity, Diversity, and Identity. Wiley-Blackwell, 2014.
Norman, K.R. Pāli Literature. Otto Harrassowitz, 1983.

Contemporary Buddhist Studies and Decolonization

Cabezón, José Ignacio, ed. Buddhism, Sexuality, and Gender. SUNY Press, 1992.
Grieve, Gregory Price, and Daniel Veidlinger, eds. Buddhism, the Internet, and Digital Media. Routledge, 2015.
Mitchell, Scott A. Buddhism in America: Global Religion, Local Contexts. Bloomsbury, 2016.

Digital Archives and Resources

Access to Insight: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/
Buddhist Digital Resource Center: https://www.bdrc.io/
Pali Text Society: https://www.palitext.com/