"A sense of bewilderment is often apparent when news of violence appears with regard to Sri Lanka and Burma. The incredulity could be summarized in two ways. For the Asian Buddhist the idea is dismissed that the teachings of the Buddha could ever lead to hostility. ?Buddhism? is airbrushed from the scenes of violence and in its place the only thing seen is the threat to the nation, a threat to the culture and a threat to the religion. For the Western observer there is the idea that those committing these acts are not ?real? Buddhists. The original teachings have mingled with culture to such an extent as to become unrecognizable ? dig beneath the culture, to the text, and there the ?real? message of the Buddha will be found. For the West (and I use the term ?West? not in a geographic sense but to imply those societies irrevocably influenced by modernity), Buddhism has to be separated from its cultural environment. This is out of necessity ? for it is assumed that Buddhism is not a ?religion? at all. It is a pristine ?other?, standing alone and somewhat aloof from the messiness of the masses. The notion that Buddhism is not a ?religion is often a shared idea of the modern West and modern Asia..."