Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T13:44:37.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Model for the Study of Thai Buddhism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

B. J. Terwiel
Get access

Extract

THIS paper constitutes an attempt to reconcile—at least for one region of Southeast Asia: central Thailand—one of the discrepancies in analyses of contemporary Theravada Buddhism. The model proposed below—which is the outcome of comparing some of the relevant literature with my own field data—encompasses two distinct sections of society, each holding a different attitude towards Buddhism. The interaction between different interpretations of religion may well be one of the major factors n i the process of religious change in Thailand. Furthermore, this model may be of use for other Theravada Buddhist countries.

Literature on the Subject

A survey of the literature on the practice of religion in Theravāda Buddhist countries reveals what may be a unique situation in the study of religions. Many authors state unequivocally that Theravāda Buddhists adhere to more than one religious tradition. Apart from “otherworldly” Buddhism, these Southeast Asian peoples adhere to other strands of religion, generally classed under rubrics such as “non-Buddhist beliefs,” “folk religion,” “animism,” or “supernaturalism.” Yet, though virtually all authors recognize this situation, there is no consensus in their views on how the different subsystems are interrelated.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , May 1976 , pp. 391 - 403
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 1I am grateful to Dr. R. Davis for critical comments on an earlier version of this paper.

2 Research was sponsored by a grant from the Australian National University. Fieldwork in Thailand covered three periods: Oct and Nov 1967, Apr 1968 to Mar 1969, and Oct 1969 to Jan 1970.

3 Among those who have given explicit expression o t this theory are: Trager, F. N., “Reflections on Buddhism and the Social Order in Southern Asia,” Burma Research Society Fiftieth Anniversary Publications 1 (1960), pp. 533–34Google Scholar; Mendelson, E. M., “The Uses of Religious Scepticism in Modern Burma,” Diogenes, 41 (1963), pp. 94–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Obeyesekere, G., “The Great Tradition and the Little in the Perspective of Sinhalese Buddhism,” Journal of Asian Studies [hereafter JAS], XXII, 1 (1963), p. 140Google Scholar; Nash, J. C., “Living With Nats: An Analysis of Animism in Burman Village Social Relations,” Anthropological Studies in Theravāda Buddhism, Yale Univ. SE Asian Studies 13 (1966) [hereafter ASTBj, pp. 7–35Google Scholar; Wright, M. A., “Some Observations on Thai Animism,” Practical Anthropology, 1968, p. 1Google Scholar; and Rajadhon, Anuman, Essays on Thai Folklore (Bangkok: The Social Science Association Press of Thailand, 1968), p. 33.Google Scholar

4 Such syncretist opinions can be found in: Young, J. E. de, Village Life in Modern Thailand (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1955), p. 110Google Scholar; Klausner, W. J., “Popular Buddhism in Northeast Thailand,” in Northrop, F.S.C. and Livingston, Helen H. (eds.), Cross Cultural Understanding, Epistemology in Anthropology (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), pp. 89–90Google Scholar; and J Ingersoll, “The Priest Role in Central Village Thailand,” ASTB, p. 51.

5 These views have been expressed by: Velder, C., “Chao Luang Muak Kham,” Journal of the Siam Society, LI, 1 (1963), p. 92Google Scholar; May, R. Le, The Culture of South-East Asia: The Heritage of India (London: Allen & Unwin, 1954), p. 163Google Scholar; Amyot, J., Changing Patterns of Social Structure in Thailand, 1851–1965 (Delhi: Unesco Research Centre, 1965), pp. 153–54Google Scholar; Ebihara, M., “Interrelations between Buddhism and Social Systems in Cambodian Peasant Culture,” ASTB, pp. 189–91Google Scholar; and recently also Bunnag, J., Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman: A Study of Urban Monastic Organization in Central Thailand (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1973), pp. 18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Spiro, M. E., “Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation” in Banton, M. (ed.), Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion (London: Tavistock, 1966), pp. 93–94Google Scholar; and Burmese Supernaturalism (EnglewoodCliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967), pp. 265–71Google Scholar.

7 These include: Aung, Maung Htin, Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1962)Google Scholar, passim; Wales, H.G.Q., Siamese State Ceremonies: Their History and Function (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1931), pp. 300–07Google Scholar; Ames, M. M., “Magical-Animism and Buddhism: Structural Analysis of the Sinhalese Religious System,” JAS, XXIII (1963), pp. 21–49Google Scholar; Dutt, S., Buddhism in East Asia (New Delhi: Indian Council for Cultural Relations, 1966), p. 78Google Scholar; Pfanner, D. E., “The Buddhist Monk in Rural Burmese Society,” ASTB, pp. 94–95Google Scholar; and Rabibhadana, A., The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period, 1782–1873, Cornell Univ. SE Asian Program, Data Paper 74, 1969, p. 11.Google Scholar

8 Adherents to the idea that religion in Theravāda Buddhist countries is made up of three separate traditions include: Credner, W., Siam, das Land der Tai (Stuttgart: Engelhorns Nachf, 1935), pp. 342–43Google Scholar; Kingshill, K., Ku Daeng—The Red Tomb. A Village Study in Northern Thailand (Chiangmai: The Prince Royal's College, 1960), p. 92Google Scholar; R. B. Textor, “An Inventory of Non-Buddhist Supernatural Objects in a Central Thai Village,” Cornell Ph.D. dissertation, i960, pp. 8–12; A. T. Kirsch, “Phu Thai Religion Syncretism, A Case Study of Thai Religion and Society,” Harvard Ph.D. dissertation, 1967; and Attagara, K., The Folk Religion of Ban Nai, A Hamlet in Central Thailand (Bangkok: Kurusapha Press, 1968)Google Scholar, passim. And Tambiah, S.J., Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in North-East Thailand (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), pp. 1–5Google Scholar, even proposes that four major cults dominate the religious field of villagers in Northeast Thailand.

9 Preparation for this fieldwork included obtaining a working knowledge of Thai, as well as studying Pāli and the history of Buddhism.

10 Since my fieldwork, the situation has changed drastically. In Feb 1974 I found that a bridge had been built, allowing motorized traffic to reach the monastery. Consequently, the influence of urban life was everywhere visible. New houses had been built, electricity had been introduced; in a recently erected roadside cafe I noticed the first television set.

11 Nānamoli, Thera, The Patimokkha: 227 Fundamental Rules of a Bikkhu (Bangkok: The Social Science Association Press of Thailand, 1966), p. 42.Google Scholar

12 “It is destroyed and exhausted; no rebirth is produced.”

13 Vajiranānavaraorasa, , Nawakowâad (Bangkok: The Buddhist Univ. Mahāmukuta Educational Council, 1966), pp. 1–28.Google Scholar

14 Textor (n. 8 above), p. 105.

15 Consul in Paradise (London: Souvenir Press, 1965), p. 88.Google Scholar

16 The Far Province (London: Hutchinson, 1965), p. 84.Google Scholar

17 “Merit and Power in the Thai Social Order,” American Anthropologist, LXIV (1962), pp. 1247–61Google Scholar.

18 See my “The Five Precepts and Ritual in Rural Thailand,” Journal of the Siam Society, LX, 1 (1973), pp. 333–43Google Scholar.

19 “Buddhism and Animism in a Burmese Village,” JAS, XXII, 2 (1963), pp. 155–67Google Scholar.

20 For example, Sararas, Phra, My Country Thailand: Its History, Geography, and Civilization (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1942), pp. 248–49Google Scholar; Mendelson (n. 3 above), pp. 106–07; Ames (n. 7 above), pp. 40–41; C. Jayawardena, “The Psychology of Burmese Supernaturalism: A Review Article,” Oceania, XLI (1970). p. 18; and Leach, E. R., “The Politics of Karma,” The New York Review of Books, 18 Nov. 1971, p. 44.Google Scholar

21 Leach, E. R., “Pulleyar and the Lord Buddha: An Aspect of Religious Syncretism in Ceylon,” Psycho-analysis and The Psycho-analytic Review, XLIX, 2 (1962), p. 84.Google Scholar

22 “Living Buddhism in East Bengal: A Comparative View,” mimeographed, n.d., p. 22.