| | Well, basically and most generally, traditionalist view is delineated by myth and scripture, with rigid institutional expressions. Modernist view is based in rationality and critical thinking, with democratic organizational structures. Postmodernist view may be seen as a bold embrace of multiple perspectives in every area, which thus creates a sharp relativism. It's useful to recognize a moderate and extreme version of all three.
Each of these has had precedents before actual historical emergence on the wide scale. Nowadays there are also quite a few examples of hybrids, including sometimes all three in some way, but without distinguishing their specific features, and thus such hybrids poorly integrate the components.
Typically, a traditional Buddhism would be conservative, scripture based, proclaiming Buddha's boldness in shaking the spiritual life of his times, but quite unwilling to shake the present status quo in the way practice is done, dharma is taught, sangha is organized etc. Perpetuation of "genuine Buddhism" and purity of transmission, orthodoxy and orthopraxis - those are typical traditional fixations. ("Buddhadharma is the one and only true way," or, more humorously, "Buddha loves me, this I know, 'cause the sutra tells me so.")
Further, traditional Buddhism will regularly produce chauvinism and sectarianism, whether hard or soft, at various levels and in every sphere, from doctrine manipulation (see how many great teachers have found it necessary to criticize the teachings of other great teachers as heresy) to social policy (see Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese, and other histories for examples). Sutra texts will be re-written to suit momentary needs, everything teaching will be attributed to Gautama the Buddha, and hagiographies will even today be treated as bona fide biographies etc. However, this ancient structure also generates great virtues.
(to be continued) |