ポスト王政期ネパールにおける "仏教の政治" とヒマラヤ仏教徒の社会参画

Abstract

In this paper, the strained relations between the Tibetan diaspora's monastic communities and the Himalayan Buddhist society in the new environment in contemporary Nepal are explored. The political deformation of Nepal had been caused by rapid Chinese development capital while there was a great change in the political architecture of "De-Hinduisasion" and inclusive democracy. The results of the survey of the Tibetan communities and Himalayan Buddhist's social organizations revealed the two main aspects of contemporary Tibetan and Himalayan Buddhist communities' social participation in Nepal. The first was public participation through adult education. Today's monastic education system promotes the Re-Buddhicisation process to lay Himalayan communities in the northern fringes of Nepal to revive the endangered Buddhist identity because of the former monarchy system. This had been evident throughout the era of monarchism from the 18th century until 2006. The second aspect was political participation. Tibetan Buddhists opposed the influx of Chinese capital by the monastic associations with which high religious cultural authority could mobilize the native Himalayan Buddhists at the time of the decline of Hinduism as the basis of the Nepalese society. In conclusion, China is going to promote the development plan that made Buddhism a core issue in the Tibetan-Himalayan border of the nation as part of its "One Belt, One Road" initiative and "China Dream" policy. In this respect, I provide three rationales for making Buddhism a "Soft Power" in China's foreign/international relations strategy: 1) The Buddhist monument development is only profitable for China. 2) Reasonable compensation for a cultural gap between East and South Asia. 3) Approaching national prestige as a "leader of Buddhism" in the broader Asian region while controlling and defeating "Tibetan nationalism." However, on the other hand, China's official efforts toward enhancing its soft power will face difficulties because of its own deeds, particularly those against refugee Tibetan and Himalayan Buddhists, under western universal interest regarding the "Tibetan issue" and domestic identity politics arising from the imbalance between the domestic majority (Hindu) and minority (Buddhist) .