This dissertation attempts to explore how a new set of Humanistic Buddhism discourse and practice can be established through the organizational process of the Humanistic Buddhist organizations in Taiwan that is moving towards modernity. Through a comparative case analysis of the Buddhist organizations of Fo Guang Shan, Tzu Chi and Dharma Drum Mountain, we explore that how the modern meaning of Buddhist practice could be reinterpreted and constructed from the mechanism of governmentality and the dimension of cultural innovation to define the ways of practicing “new Buddhist”. At the level of discourse, including Master Hsing Yun, Master Sheng Yen, Master Cheng Yen all followed the road of Master Taixu and Master Yinshun’s modern interpretation to bring Buddhism back to the "human world". Master Hsing Yun advocated “Buddha in the Human World”, focused on the human-oriented, and returned to the Buddha nature. Master Sheng Yen advocates “Pure Land in the Human World”, focused on "building a pure land on earth" by uplifting the quality of Human Mind from the modern interpretation of Chan. Master Cheng Yen advocates “Bodhisattva in the Human World”, focused on the modern suffering discourse and encouraged volunteers to reach the modern salvation from following the road of being human Bodhisattva through charity work. At the level of space production, the three Humanistic Buddhist organizations all emphasized on the modern spatial deployment for building main temple and large religious parks to promote their organizational influence. Fo Guang Shan constructed modern missionary spaces. Dharma Drum Mountain constructed modern meditation spaces. Tzu Chi constructed modern charity spaces. On the one hand, they all constructed collective practice field through the representations of space for Humanistic Sacred places. On the other hand, they also deeply manages social space for expanding public practice and promoting the representational space of pure land on earth. On the level of practice and technology of self, Fo Guang Shan constructed the model of “Buddhist in Dharma.” Dharma Drum Mountain constructed the model of “Buddhist in Practice.” Tzu Chi constructed the model of “Buddhists in action.” They all promoting three important kinds of technology of self, including innovative spiritual rituals, meditation in everyday life, and multiple ways of Bodhisattva. By doing so, they reinterpreted Buddhism practice as technologies of self in response to the condition of modernity. Humanistic Buddhism advocates for returning to every life and promoting the modern revival of Buddhism. This study regards Humanistic Buddhism as an important case of investigating modernity and Buddhism Revival. We could also reevaluate Western secularization theory from the perspective of multiple modernity by this study of Taiwan Humanistic Buddhism.
