In the perspective of entangled history, museumification (heritagisation) of Buddhism was resulted from the Age of New Imperialism, under the initiation of scientific expeditions sent to Asia and contributed by antique art dealers emigrated to the West—for instance, Aurel Stein was sent by the British Empire and Paul Pelliot by France to the Chinese Central Asia and C. T. Loo moved from Southern China to Europe. Substantially, such a transcontinental and transcultural practice has actualised the meaning of ‘in flux’ that heritage objects often are given, as seen in the fact that during this heritage process the Buddhist objects in questions are not only transferred from temple or grotto to museum and gallery but also redefined as being secular instead of sacred.
After decolonisation in the postcolonial era, the museumification of Buddhism, embodying a colonial legacy, was well-kept and continued by local polities in pursuit of modernity. One significant example is as seen in the former semi-colonised country, China, where Mahayana Buddhism as a traditional belief and way of thinking and living had been prevailing. Like mentioned, market has played an important role in the early stage of this heritage process from Asia to the West. Following the rise of Asian economies, the market centre for the acquired taste of 'Buddhist art' has shifted back from London, Paris or New York to Asia, like in Hong Kong the first private collectors’ club of Buddhist art was established in the 1960s and in Taipei in the 1990s.
It is worth noting that in Taiwan a peculiar phenomenon has emerged in the beginning of the 21st century—the building of Buddhist museum-temples by Buddhist groups themselves. For example, Chung Tai Shan and Fo Guang Shan, respectively located in Taichung and Kaohsiung. In addition to collecting dispersed Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as well as sacred relics of Buddhism into the museum-shrine, these Buddhist groups also vowed to implement a revival of Buddhist faith through museum praxis and heritage enterprise. Investigating the networking of such religious heritage across the Strait and beyond, it is made explicit how a religious tradition can be delivered from the past to future generations, regardless of the form or mechanism it may adapt for its transcendental purpose.
Shuchen Wang, DA., PhD. Affliated Researcher, Jyväskylä University, Finland (ORCID:https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8401-225X)
Western expeditions of New Imperialism had initiated the museumification of Buddhism during the Belle Époque, and local governments continued it in pursuit of modernity after decolonization. Through this heritage process, the religious artefacts became secular artworks instead of sacred objects and the traditional faith decreased. However, in the 21st century, globalized archaeological art market has brought forth a peculiar phenomenon in Asia’s cultural landscape—the rise of museum-temple, as seen in Taiwan’s Chung Tai Shan or Fo Guang Shan, a leading Buddhist group vowed to revive Buddhism with extended networks across the Strait and overseas in the Chinese diasporic areas.