Sangha, State, and Society. Thai Buddhism in History 0824809939, 0824809947

Citation preview

Monographs of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies Kyoto University English-language Series, No. 15

Sangha, State, and Society: Thai Buddhism in History

Monographs

of the Center for Southeast Studies Kyoto University

English-language

Series:

1.

Takashi

Sato,

2.

Tadayo

Watabe,

3.

Kiyoshi

Takimoto

4.

Keizaburo

5.

Keizaburo

6.

Kiyoshige

Field Crops in Thailand, Glutinous

Kyuma,

Kawaguchi

and Kazutake

Kyuma, Lowland

Shinichi Ichimura Masashi

9.

Shinichi Ichimura

Alor Janggus:

and Kazutake

Kunio Yoshihara,

Yoneo Ishii ( e d . ) , Thailand:

13.

Lee-Jay

Japanese

1969 1969 1969

1967

of East and Southeast Asia, 1975 1976

Society and Development,

1977

Paddy Soils in Tropical

Asia, 1 9 7 7

in Southeast Asia, 1978

A Rice-Growing

and Kazumasa

Tsubouchi

West Malaysia,

Society, 1 9 7 8

Kobayashi

( e d . ) , Fertility

Transitions

of the East Asian

S. Suharto,

An Analysis

Japanese-language from

and Maeda,

Three Malay

Villages:

A Sociology of Paddy Growers in

1979

Cho,

Indonesia:

Available

Investment

Rice Soils in Malaya,

in Malaya,

Indonesia,

Kyuma,

and Malaya,

Rice Soils in Thailand,

1980

Kuchiba, Lee-Jay

and Sukarno's

(ed.), Southeast Asia: Nature,

12.

15.

A Chinese Community

The Japanese

Kawaguchi

Cho

Lowland

( e d . ) , The Economic Development

Nishihara,

11.

14.

1967

Resources in Thailand

and Kazutake

7.

Populations,

Thailand,

(ed.), Geology and Mineral

Maeda,

Keizaburo

1966

Rice in Northern

Kawaguchi

8. 10.

Asian

G . McNicoll,

of Fertility

and S. G. M . Mamas,

and Mortality

Population

Based on the 1971 Population

Growth of

Census, 1980

Series:

the Center for Southeast

1.

Joji Tanase,

Primitive

2.

Toru Yano,

Modem

3.

Takeshi Motooka,

4.

Yoshihiro

5.

Shigeru Iijima, Social and Cultural

Asian

Studies, Kyoto, Japan.

Form of the Idea of the Other World, Political

History of Thailand

Agricultural

Development

and Reiko Tsubouchi,

1966

and Burma,

1968

of Southeast Asia, 1968

Divorce, 1 9 7 0 Change of Karens, 1 9 7 1

6.

H. Storz

7. 8.

Shinichi Ichimura ( e d . ) , Southeast Asia: Nature, Society and Economy, Yoneo Ishii ( e d . ) , Thailand: A Rice-Growing Society, 1 9 7 5

(trans, by H. Nogami), Burma: Land, History and Economy,

1974 1974

Yoneo Ishii, Political Sociology of Theravada Buddhism, 1975 Shinichi Ichimura ( e d . ) , The Economic Development of East and Southeast Asia, 1975 Takeshi

Motooka,

Kuchiba, Masashi

18.

The Structure and Change of Malayan

Nishihara

( e d . ) , Political

Corruption in Southeast Asia, 1 9 7 6

(trans, by S. Ichimura,

Watabe

et a l . ) , Economic Trends in Communist

Social Structure of a Thai Rural Community,

Kenji

A Study of Indonesian Nationalism:

Tsuchiya,

1982 Yoshikazu

1976

China, 1 9 7 9

Takaya,

Agricultural

1981

The Rise of the Taman Siswa Movement,

Development of a Tropical Delta:

1982

Kazumasa

Villages,

( e d . ) , The World of Southeast Asia: Identification of a Regional Image, 1980

Koichi Mizuno,

Delta, 19.

1975

and Maeda,

A. Eckstein Tadayo

Rice in Indonesia,

Tsubouchi

Kobayashi,

The Population

of Southeast Asia, 1984

A Study of the Chao Phraya

Sangha, State, and Society: Thai Buddhism in History YONEO ISHII

Translated

by peter

hawkes

Monographs of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies Kyoto University THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII PRESS

Honolulu

ISBN: 0-8248-0993-9 ISBN: 0-8248-0994-7

(cloth) (paper)

Copyright © 1986 by The Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. All rights reserved. The map on the cover is part of the Map of Asia by Cornelis de Jode, 1593, and is reproduced by courtesy of the Kobe City Museum.

Contents

Translator’s Note ............................... List of Abbreviations ............................ Introduction .................................................................................... Part I. The Structure of a State Religion ................................... Chapter 1. The Sangha and Society ......................... Chapter 2. The Sangha and the State ...................... Part I I . A State Religion in History ............................................ Chapter 3. Buddhism in Premodern Siam . . . . . . Chapter 4. Establishment of the Buddhist Ecclesia in Thailand ......................................... Chapter 5. The Establishment and Significance of The Ecclesiastical Examination System .................................................. Chapter 6. The Sangha Act under the Democratic System ...................... ......................... Chapter 7. National Integration and the Sangha’s Role ..................................................... Chapter 8. Thai Nationalism and Buddhism . . . . Chapter 9. Millenarian Movements in Thailand . . Index ................................................................................................

xiii ix xi 1 3 34 57 59 67

81 100 121 146 17.1 188

List of Figures

Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Figure 15. Figure 16.

The Sangha from a static point of view. The Sangha from a dynamic point of view. Determinism and the tham bun concept. Interrelationship of tham bun, the Sangha and “going forth.” The Sangha as a sanctifying force. The Sangha as an intellectual elite. Social structure of Theravada Buddhism. Kingship and the Sangha in Thailand. Kingship, the Sangha, and the Dhamma. Basic structure of the traditional polity and religion in a “Buddhist State.” Unitary norm of being Buddhist in Thailand. Establishment of the Thai Buddhist ecclesia. The Sangha organization based on the Sangha Act of 1902. Sangha organization under the Sangha Act of 1941. Internal structure of Lak Thai Lak Thai and Constitutional Government.

vi

9 9 16 19 23 27 28 42 43 47 49 51 71 105 165 166

List of Tables i

Table 1. Table 2. Table 3.

Rank of Merit-making Acts, after Kaufman Rank of Merit-making Acts, after Tambia Administrative Offices in the Sangha, under the Amendment of 19 12 Table 4. Educational Offices in the Sangha, under the Amendment of 1912 Table 5. Glassification of Pali Texts Set for Parian Examinations Table 6. Ecclesiastical Examination Statistics, 1967 (part 1) Table 7. Ecclesiastical Examination Statistics, 1967 (part 2) Table 8. Sectarian Membership of Supreme Patriarchs and Chairmen of the Ecclesiastical Cabinet Table 9. Annual Income of Wat Bangkhuad, 1953—1954 (after Kaufman) Table 10. Destination and Numbers of Thammathut Monks, 1967-1968 Table 11. Activities of Thammathut Monks, 1967 Table 12. The Project for Encouraging the Participation of Bhikkhus in Community Development (1966-1968)

vii

17 17 75 75 96 96 97 106 132 136 137 139

Translator’s

Note

This work is a translation of Professor Yoneo Ishii’s Jozabu Bukkyo no seijishakaigaku [A politicosociological study of Theravada Buddhism] (Tokyo: Sobunsha, 1975). The original work included two appendices, which have not been translated: the first contains extensive bibliographical notes for the Japanese student of Thai Buddhism; the second, translations intojapanese of the Sangha acts of 1902, 1941, and 1962 and other legal documents pertaining to the Sangha, for some of which English translations are available and are mentioned in the footnotes. In addition, chapters 3 and 4 of the original work, dealing respectively with the Sangha’s relationship with the monarchy in the Sukhothai period and the Ayutthaya and early Bangkok periods, were condensed into one chapter by the author for this translation, with the result that the later chapters dealing with the twentieth century, especially the establishment of a Buddhist “ecclesia” in Thailand, are brought more sharply into focus. In attempting to present Professor Ishii’s work in a readable form in English, I have made several editorial modifications. In the footnotes, works frequently cited and works with lengthy titles are fully documented in the first reference and are abbreviated thereafter; a list of abbreviations follows this translator’s note. For other sources, the full citation is given in the first reference, and subsequent references in the same chapter comprise a short title and the author’s last name or, in the case of Thai works, the author’s first (given) name, in accordance with Thai practice. Japanese names are cited in the order of given name followed by family name. For passages cited from works in Thai and other foreign languages, existing English translations have been used whenever they were available, when necessary with changes in spellings for the sake of consistency

X

Translator’s -Note

with the main text, or with minor alterations for the sake of clarity. Sources of these translations are acknowledged in the footnotes. Passages from texts in languages other than Japanese for which no English translation could be found were translated in collaboration with the author, with reference to the original text. The English translations of the Sukhothai stone-pillar inscriptions cited herein are based on those by A. B. Griswold and Prasert na Nagara in their series of “Epigraphic and Historical Studies” published in beginning in vol. 56, pt. 2 (1968). These translations have been modified for simplicity and to conform with the main text; epigraphic annotations have been omitted and proper names and toponyms in Thai have been transcribed phonetically in accordance with the simplified system employed herein. The numbering of the inscriptions is that of the Fine Arts Department of Thailand, and references to particular passages are given in the conventional form: 1/II/5, for example, denotes Inscription 1, face II, line 5. The transcription of Thai words is phonetic, employing the author’s own simplified system: long vowels are differentiated from short by use of the macron, and u is distinguished from u; for economy of typesetting, however, the aspirated and unaspirated forms of ch, and the open and closed forms of o are not distinguished, nor are tones indicated. Japanese is Romanized by the Hepburn system; Chinese by the Wade-Giles system; and Pali and Sanskrit by the system most commonly used by Indologists. Words associated with Buddhism are used in their Pali form, if both Pali and Sanskrit forms are listed in Webster’s Third New English Dictionary, 1976 edition: sutta is preferred to sutra, for example, and bodhisatta to bodhisatva, whereas chakravartin is preferred to the Pali cakkavattin,since the latter has not been adopted into English. Other important words that appear repeatedly are used in their Pali form and capitalized, for example, Dhamma, Vinaya, and Sangha. Where the context requires, the Thai form is given alongside or in place of the Pali form.

List of Abbreviations

I.E.S.S. J. A.S. J. S.S. K.T.S.D. P.K.P.S. P.P.B.K.

P.P.H.L.

P.P.R. 1

P.P.R. 2

International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences Journal of Asian Studies Journal of the Siam Society Kotmai tra sam duang [Laws of the three seals] 5 vols. Bangkok: Ongkankha khong khurusapha, 1962 Prachum kotmai pracham sok [Annual collections of laws] Bangkok: Nitiwet, 1935Prachum phratamra boromarachuthit phua kanlapana samai ayutthaya phak 1 [Collected royal decrees establishing religious foundations in the Ayutthaya period, Part 1] Bangkok: Khanakammakan chat phim ekasan thang prawatisat, watthanatham lae borannakhadi, samnak nayokratthamontri [Commission for the publication of historical, cultural and archeological documents, office of the prime minister], 1967 Phraratchaphongsawadan chabap phraratchahatthalekha [The royal chronicle, royal autograph version] 2 vols. Bangkok: The Odeon Store, 1962 Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 1 [Royal chronicle of the first reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty], by Chaophraya Thippakorawong. See P.P.R. 2 below. Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 2 [Royal chronicle of the second reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty], by Prince Damrong. P.P.R. 1 and P.P.R. 2 are published in one volume entitled Phraratchaphongsawadan chabap hosamut haeng chat: ratchakan thi 1—2 [Royal chronicles of the Bangkok dynasty: First and second reigns] Bangkok: Khlang Witthaya, 1962 xi

xii

P.P.R. 3

P.P.S.K.

S.B.B. S.B.E. S.E.A.S.

List of Abbreviations

Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 3 [Royal chronicle of the third reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty], by Chaophraya Thippakorawong. Cremation volume, Bangkok, 1938 Pramuan phraniphon somdetphramahasamanachao kromphraya wachirayanawarorot [Collected works of Prince Wachirayan], 14 vols. Bangkok: Mahamakutratchawitthayalai, 1971 Sacred Books of the Buddhists Sacred Books of the East Tonan Ajia Kenkyu [Southeast asian studies] Kyoto, The Center for Southeast Asian Studies

Introduction

The Buddhism today practiced in Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia, and other parts of South and Southeast Asia is known among Japanese Buddhologists as Nanpo Jozabu. Nanpo, “southern,” indicates its espousal by countries of South Asia, while jozabu is the Japanese reading of the classical Chinese translation of the Pali Theravada. Made up of the elements thera, an elder of the Buddhist Order, whose status derives from long years in the robe, and vada, the derivative noun of the verb stem vad-, “to speak or tell,” which translates as, for example, “speech,” “discussion,” “belief” or “doctrine,” Theravada thus means “Doctrine of the Elders” or, in other words, the orthodox Buddhist doctrine transmitted by the elders of the Order. More commonly in Japan, it is called Shbjo Bukkyb, “Small Vehicle Buddhism,” from the Pali Hinayana. Since, however, this has a pejorative nuance, implying an inferior (hina) vehicle (yana) concerned only with self-salvation and not with others, this usage is being discouraged in favor of Teravada or Jozabu, in deference to the resolution of the Congress of the World Fellowship of Buddhists.1 Followers of Theravada are today estimated to number in excess of seventy million, accounting for 94 percent of the population in Thailand, 85 percent in Burma and Cambodia, 64 percent in Sri Lanka, and 50 percent in Laos. In Cambodia and Laos, Theravada is the state religion; in Thailand it is in practice treated as such; while in Burma it is not so declared because of the political problems raised by the opposition of non-Buddhist ethnic minorities. 2 A monastic religion centered on “homeless” monks (bhikku), Theravada displays a strong conservative tendency, which is closely linked to conditions at the time of its establishment in the second century after the xiii

xiv

Introduction

parinibbana (death) of the Buddha. Legend tells us that a century after the Buddha’s parinibbana, monks of the Vajji clan of Vesali were advocating the legitimacy of “ten theses” (dasa vatthuni),including the accepting of gold and silver, that were prohibited by the Vinaya precepts. Thereupon, seven hundred elders met in the garden of Vesali, where, having considered the ten theses and rejected them as unlawful, they “rehearsed the whole of the Dhamma and the Vinaya in their original form and washed away all the dirt from the sacred teachings.” 3 The Mahavamsa records that, refusing to accept the elders’ decision, the Vajji monks assembled ten thousand followers and held an independent council (sanglti).4 In this way, the harmony of the Buddhist Order was shattered, and it split into the conservative School of the Elders (Theravada), which upheld the firm maintenance of the tradition, and the progressive Great Community (Mahasanghika), which advocated reform when circumstances so required. This was the “basic schism.” The basic schism can be understood as the result of a conflict between conservative and progressive factions over whether the precepts could be reformed in response to changes in the times. Underlying the conservative attitude of the elders in opposing the ten theses of the Mahasanghika was a historical precendent. Legend tells that at the First Council, held at Rajagaha shortly after the Buddha’s death, his disciple Ananda, having described the origin of the five Nikaya in response to Mahakassapa’s questioning, went on to make a crucial statement. “The Lord, honoured sirs, spoke thus to me at the time of his attaining nibbana: ‘If the Order, Ananada, after my death is willing, the lesser and minor rules of training may be abolished.’ ” 5 What “the lesser and minor rules” signified occasioned a fierce and inconclusive debate among the five hundred monks constituting the council: some held that they were all the rules except those covering the four parajika, the grave transgressions requiring permanent expulsion from the Order; others, for example, argued that they excluded the rules for the four pdrdjika and the thirteen sanghadisesa,serious offences decided by formal meeting and requiring suspension from the Order. Finally, Mahakassapa, convener of the council, brought matters under control by forwarding the motion that “the Order should not lay down what has not been laid down, nor should it abolish what has been laid down. It should proceed in conformity with and according to the rules of training that have been laid down.” 6 This episode set the basic tone of the Theravadin view of the precepts. Laid down by the Buddha when, as occasion arose, he told his disciples “This beseems you, this beseems you not,” 7 the precepts derived their “legality” from the Buddha’s charismatic authority. Confronted

Introduction

xv

with the death of its charismatic leader, the Order began the process of routinization of the Buddha’s charisma by affirming the inviolability of the precepts. Through this step, only those who transmitted the precepts faithfully could be deemed orthodox, while advocates of departure from the tradition would be condemned as heterodox. Thus the Mahasanghika monks were “the sinful monks” (pdpabhikkhu).8 Around the middle of the third century B.c., the Elder Mahinda, a son (or younger brother) of King Asoka, introduced the Theravada into Ceylon. Having converted the Sinhalese king, Devanampiya Tissa, and won his support, Mahinda founded the Mahavihara, or Great Monastery, at Anauradapura. And though later eclipsed when the heterodox Abhayagirivihara school usurped its royal support, the Mahavihara community’s authority was conclusively established in the middle of the twelfth century under King Parakramabahu I (1153-1168), when all monks in Ceylon were united under its aegis.9 In the thirteenth century, the Mahavihara school began propagating the Theravada tradition through continental Southeast Asia, establishing the archetype of today’s sphere of Theravada Buddhism. To this day, the Order in Theravada countries adheres strictly to the principle of inviolability of the precepts that was established at the First Council. As will be described later, the practice of the Thai Sangha, the Buddhist Order of Thailand, of not allowing even one word of the Patimokkha to be recited wrongly at the Uposatha ceremony, is directly symbolic of the Theravadin view of the precepts. The monastic Order is an organization of monks and novices (samanera).Since monks are literally “beggars of alms,” the word bhikkhu deriving from the Pali verb bhikkhati,“to beg alms,” the existence of the Order presupposes outside support. Without continuing outside support the Order cannot sustain itself, except in special circumstances, as when land donated by a king or other influential laity provides an economic base. That Theravada Buddhism is today flourishing with seventy million adherents can only mean, therefore, that Theravadin countries contain social mechanisms that allow the survival of a nonproductive monastic order. In the Kandy region of Sri Lanka there developed a system of monastic landownership, called “monastic landlordism” (Klostergrundherrschaften.) by Weber, that provided the Order with a solid economic basis.10 It was not, however, a common phenomenon to the countries to which Theravada spread. In Thailand, for example, though inscriptional and other evidence confirms the existence of monastic estates called thoranisong, and, in fact, monastery-owned lands known by this name still

xvi

Introduction

exist, such lands are limited in extent and in their significance to the economic basis of the Order. Far more significant to the survival of the Order has been the continuing material and moral support traditionally afforded by the king and the spontaneous daily offerings that this inspired from the populace. Although the basis of the nonproductive monastic Order thus varies from country to country and from age to age, underlying these apparent differences there can be thought to exist a framework within which a balance obtains between the Order and the laity, the laity being induced to support the Order, and the Order surviving by virtue of that support while retaining its essential conservatism. If we can elucidate this framework, it should be possible to explain coherently the various aspects of the phenomenologically diverse Theravadin tradition. This book presents an attempt to construct a model applicable to Theravada Buddhism in general, while seeking concrete examples in Thai Buddhism. Part I deals with the social and political structures of Theravada Buddhism. Chapter 1 examines the social functions of Buddhism in an attempt to define the forms of the religion at the base of society. Chapter 2 looks at the essential inseparability of the kingship and Buddhism, of which the latter is bound to the lives of the people through the agency of the Sangha. Part II examines the history of Thai Buddhism since the thirteenth century, within the theoretical framework elaborated in Part I . Chapter 3 deals with the'nature of the kingship as the “defender ofBuddhism” in the Sukhothai, Ayutthaya, and early Ratanakosin periods, citing evidence from stone-pillar inscriptions and the Laws of the Three Seals of 1805 for the duality of monarchical protection in support and control of the Sangha. Chapters 4 and 5 explain the conditions under which a Buddhist ecclesia was established in Thailand through the enactment of the Sangha Administration Act of 1902. Chapter 5 deals concretely with the process by which ecclesiastical examinations were introduced soon thereafter. Chapter 6 looks at the tightening ofstate control over the Sangha through the new Sangha acts passed following the Constitutional Revolution of 1932. Chapters 7 and 8 attempt to explain the function ofBuddhism in national unification, the former examining the Sangha’s participation in the social development planning that began in the latter half of the 1960s, the latter considering the historical role of Buddhism as a symbol of national unity in the times of three statesmen, King Mongkut, King Wachirawut, and Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat. Chapter 9, which examines the millenarian movements that emerged in Northeast Thailand in 1902, attempts to show that Buddhism can also function as a dissolutive factor of national unity.

Introduction

xvii

NOTES 1.

2.

3. 4. 5.

6. 7.

8. 9.

10.

“Vehicle” here means “the vehicle that carries mankind from the world of illusion to the world of satori (the Other World of Enlightenment).” Yutaka Iwamoto, Nichijb Bukkyogo (Buddhist terms in daily use) (Tokyo: Chuokoronsha, 1972), p. 140. The most comprehensive work on the state of Thera vada Buddhism in these countries is Heinz Bechert, Buddhismus Staat und Gesellschaft in den Landem des Theravada-Buddhismus, vol. 1, Allgemeines und Ceylon (Frankfurt am Main and Berlin: Alfred Metsner Verlag, 1966); vol. 2, Birma, Kambodscha, Laos, Thailand (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1967) . Another standard work, though somewhat out of date, is Sir Charles Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism,3 vols. (1921; reprint ed., London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954). Fumio Masutani, Gendaigoyaku Bukkyoseiten (Buddhist scripture in modern translation) (Tokyo: Zaikebukkyosha, 1953), p. 285. Mahavamsa 5: 3-4. Translated into English in Wilhelm Geiger, trans., The Mahaiiamsa (1912; reprint ed., London: Luzac & Co., 1964), p. 26. Cullavagga11:9. Translated into English in Sacred Books of the Buddhists (hereafter cited as S.B.B.), vol. 20, The Book of the Discipline , part 5, trans. L B . Horner (London: Luzac & Co., 1952), p. 398. Cullavagga I I : 9; see ibid., p. 399. Mahaparinibbana Suttanta 6: 20. Translated in S.B.B., vol. 3, Dialogues of the Buddha, part 2, trans. T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys Davids (1910; reprint ed., London: Luzac & Co., 1959), p. 184. Dipavamsa 5: 27. Translated into English in Bimala Churn Law, ed., “The Dipavamsa,” The Ceylon Historical Journal 7, nos. 1-4 (July 1957-April 1958): 162. On the history of Buddhism in Ceylon, see Kyosei Hayashima, Shoki Bukkyo to Shakaiseikatsu (Early Buddhism and social life) (Tokyo: Iwanamishoten 1964), pp. 107—183; Walpola Rahula, History of Buddhism in Ceylon (Colombo: M. D. Gunasena & Co., 1956). Max Weber, Gesammelte Aufsatse zur Religionssoziologie, vol. 2 (Tubingen: Tubingen J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1963). A sociological analysis of the present state of monastic landlordism in Ceylon may be found in Hans-Dieter Evers, “‘Monastic Landlordism’ in Ceylon: A Traditional System in a Modern Setting,” The Journal of Asian Studies (hereafter cited as J. AB.) 28, No. 4 (1969): 685-692.

PART

I

The Structure

of a State Religion

1 The Sangha

and Society

THE SOTERIOLOGY OF THE THERA V ADA Theravada Buddhism shows man the way to salvation through his own endeavor. In the dichotomy between “The Holy Path” and “The Pure Realm” dating back to Tao Gh’ao, the Theravada belongs to “The Holy Path,” the doctrine of salvation by self-effort. In Thai, this doctrine is called Kammalikhit.1 A compound of Kamma, “an act,” and likhit, “to write,” this word can be understood from its etymology as meaning “the doctrine that one’s acts determine one’s salvation.” The antithesis of Kammalikhit is phromlikhit, phrom being “Brahma,” and broadly meaning “deity.” This is the doctrine ofsalvation by grace, salvation through utter faith, for example, in the Amitabha Buddha. The soteriology of the Theravada is pervaded by the idea of selfeffort: “The self is lord of self; who else could be the lord? With self well subdued a man finds himself a lord who is difficult to obtain.” 2 The doctrine of self-salvation is presented concisely in the Mahavagga. This O Bhikkhus, is the Noble Truth of Suffering: Birth is suffering; decay is suffering; illness is suffering; death is suffering. Presence of objects we hate, is suffering; separation from objects we love, is suffering; not to obtain what we desire, is suffering. Briefly, the fivefold clinging to existence is suffering. This, O Bhikkhus, is the Noble Truth of the Cause ofsuffering: Thirst, that leads to re-birth, accompanied by pleasure and lust, finding its delight here and there. (This thirst is threefold), namely, thirst for pleasure, thirst for existence, thirst for prosperity. This, O Bhikkhus, is the Noble Truth of the Cessation of suffering: (it ceases with) the complete cessation of this thirst, — a cessation which consists in the absence of every passion, — with the abandoning of this thirst, with the doing away with it, with the deliverance from it, with the destruction of desire. 3

4

The Structure of a State Religion

This, O Bhikkhus, is the Noble Truth of the Path Which leads to the cessation of suffering: that holy eightfold Path, that is to say, Right Belief, Right Aspiration, Right Speech, Right Conduct, Right Means of Livelihood, Right Endeavour, Right Memory, Right Meditation.3 The substance of this sermon has long been known as the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. The first Truth is the universality of “suffering” (dukkha). The second Truth is that suffering is caused by the craving {tanha) of ignorant men . If man can extinguish this craving, he will free himself of suffering and attain salvation. This is the third truth. The fourth Truth is that salvation is attainable by following the eightfold Path. The Buddha’s exposition of the eightfold Path leading to the extinction ofsuffering is highly exoteric and rational; it appeals to man’s reason. By first understanding the substance of the doctrine, then putting it into practice, man can attain salvation for himself. The analogy has been noted between the Four Noble Truths and the four divisions of Hindu medicine: roga, disease; rogahetu, the cause of disease; aroga,absence of disease; and bhaisajya, medicine. 4 Viewed in the light of this analogy, the practical and rational character of this radical Buddhist doctrine is apparent. Every effort is directed to solving the practical problem of bringing an end to suffering. And the means of solving the problem is not blind faith in any deity but a rationalism that finds practical guiding principles through reason. Buddhism teaches that .everything that exists in the world is formed by the collocation of various elements and is characterized by impermanence {aniccd). For this reason, man should not cling to anything, thinking of it as his own. All phenomenal existence is essentially unsubstantial {anattay. man does not have an everlasting soul. Men who live in ignorance (avijja) are unable to comprehend these ontological truths and suffering results. But if man can dispel ignorance and obtain higher insight {pannd), he can extinguish suffering and attain the state of Enlightenment {nibband). Such a- radically rationalistic doctrine seems directed more to an intellectual elite than to the masses. Indeed, as far as its basic doctrine is concerned, Theravada Buddhism is a religion for those whom Weber called virtuosi, one which offers a means of salvation that is ultimately inaccessible to the masses. Why, then, has the Theravada continued to thrive, to the point that it now has seventy million adherents in South and Southeast Asia? The first task facing the researcher into the Theravada must be to explain coherently the structure of this mass religion that rests on an elite-oriented doctrine.

The Sangha and Society

5

“GOING FORTH” AND THE SANGHA The Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path display a logic of salvation that the Chinese have long recognized as being “difficult in practice” (nan-hsing).5 The doctrinal requirement of strict disciplining of mind and body in unworldly surroundings places the ultimate soterial goal beyond the reach of those engaged in mundane occupations. The early Buddhists who resolved to pursue this goal wholeheartedly, therefore, abandoned their occupations and “went forth” from home. This is expressed in Pali by the phrase agarasma anagariyam pabbajati, to leave (pabbajati) one’s home (agara), the basis of one’s livelihood, and enter a state of homelessness (anagariya').6 The scriptures express the motive such devotees had for leaving home: “Not easy is this, that one dwelling in the house should lead the divine life entirely perfect, entirely pure as a polished shell,” and their belief in the free and unencumbered life it would bring: “Cramped is this life at home, Dusty indeed its sphere; Open the going forth?” 7 The early Buddhists are known to have wandered abroad seeking solitude far from human habitation, in mountain caves, forests, graveyards and like places, where they devoted themselves to meditation and austerity. The studies of Buddhologists indicate, however, that this form of homelessness was not practiced for long. 8 Soon monks moved closer to settlements and took up residence in monasteries built and donated by lay believers, where they lived communally with fellow monks. Such communities of Buddhist monks were called sangha.Originally a common noun meaning “assembly,” this word later developed into a proper noun for the Order of Buddhist monks.9 With the development of the cenobitic Sangha, monks no longer became literally “homeless,” but joined a monastic community, in which they led a life of group religious practice. This change in the significance of “going forth” not only altered the form of the monks’ religious practice, it exerted a decisive influence on the nature of Buddhism as a religion. Since it was after the establishment of the cenobitic Sangha that the Theravada spread to South and Southeast Asia, it is important to examine the functions of the organization that was accepted into these societies. When the Sangha communities were formed, the monks must have sought, as they had in their homelessness in the solitude of mountain caves and forests, surroundings conducive to the spiritual exercises that would lead them to their goal of self-salvation. From this point of view, the Sangha can be defined as an organization formed to provide an environment in which its members could more effectively perform their religious practices.

6

The Structure of a State Religion

Organizations established for the explicit purpose of achieving certain goals, of which the Sangha may be considered one, have been termed by sociologists “formal organizations.” 1 0 Such organizations in general possess defined goals, a set of rules that members are expected to follow, and a status structure defining relations between members. Applying the cui bono criterion, Blau and Scott distinguish four types of formal organization: mutual-benefit associations, whose prime beneficiaries are the members or rank-and-file participants (examples of which include labor unions and clubs); business concerns, which primarily benefit the owners or managers; service organizations (into which category fall schools and hospitals), whose prime beneficiaries are the clients or the “public-in-contact,” namely, people outside the organization who have regular and direct contact with it; and commonweal organizations, for example, the police and military, which benefit the public at large. 11 From what we have so far seen, the Sangha can be classified as a mutual-benefit association, in Blau and Scott’s scheme. As an organization whose aim is to raise the efficiency of religious practice, its beneficiaries are none other than the monks who constitute its membership. The set of rules the Sangha possesses as a formal organization is the Vinaya precepts. Though these were originally probably no more than simple rules laid down by the Buddha for the everyday conduct of his followers, through redaction they became more systematized and more elaborate. In the Theravada, they are typified by the 227 rules comprising the Patimokkha. In this connection, a member of the Sangha can be defined as a monk (in Thai, phra) who accepts the Patimokkha rules on ordination. Although the Sangha also includes novices (in Thai, samanen or nen), young men under twenty who keep ten precepts, they are strictly only “associate” members with different rights and duties from the monks. The precepts are transmitted through a strict procedure designed to preserve them in their original form. In Thailand, on days of the full moon and the new moon, the Sangha holds the Uposatha ceremony (called ubosot in Thai), a ceremony of reflection on one’s behavior in the light of the precepts. On these days, all of the monks (but not the novices) resident in a monastery first meet in small groups in their own quarters and confess to each other any transgression of the rules. Thence they proceed to the main sanctuary (called the bot, by abbreviation of ubosot), where a roll is taken and all monks are accounted for. The assembly then listens to the recitation of the entire 227 Patimokkha rules. A specially trained monk recites the rules rapidly from memory, and should he mistake even one word he is admonished by a monk who sits nearby

The Sangha and Society

7

checking his recitation against a written text, and required to repeat the mistaken section. As long as the Uposatha ceremony is held regularly, the Patimokkha tradition will continue to be transmitted. The status structure of the Sangha as a formal organization can be seen in the relationship that develops between a candidate for entry into the Order and the monks involved in the entry procedures, particularly his preceptor (Pali, upajjhaya:, Thai, upatcha), who is usually the abbot of the monastery or the abbot’s representative, and who will be his guide in monastic life. Until he has chosen and been accepted by a preceptor, the candidate cannot begin the initiation formalities. The novice’s ordination ceremony will be presided over by the preceptor, and his life thereafter supervised by the preceptor. Initiation into the Thai Sangha entails two ceremonies, called in Thai banphacha and upasombot.1 2 For the admission of novices, only the banphacha (Pali, pabbajja) ceremony is held, while for the ordination of monks this ceremony is followed immediately by the upasombot, the essence of which lies in the novitiate’s acceptance of the 227 precepts, without which he cannot be received formally into the Sangha. The 227 precepts are grouped by content into the following eight divisions: pardjika (Thai, parachik), sanghadisesa {sangkhathiset) , aniyata (aniyof), nissaggiya-pacittiya (nissakkhiya-pachitti) , pacittiya (pdchitti), patidesamya [patithesamya) , sekhiya (sekhiya), and adhikaranasamatha (athikaranasamatha) ,1 3 The parajika are four offenses, namely, incelibacy, theft, murder, and falsely claiming to possess superior spirituality. Transgressors are declared asamvdsa (“deprived of coresidence”) and expelled from the Order. The sanghadisesa are thirteen offenses, including masturbation, for which punishment is decided by a meeting of the Sangha. The two aniyata rules cover cases in which the penalty is determined according to circumstances. The thirty nissaggiya-pacittiya deal mainly with the possession of prohibited articles. The ninety-two pacittiya deal with a wide range of offenses, including lying, drinking alcoholic beverages, destroying life, eating outside the proper time, going to see an army, and damaging plants. The four patidensaniya rules cover the confession a monk should make when he finds he has eaten food he should not have accepted. These offenses, like the nissaggiya-pacittiya and the pacittiya, are minor transgressions expiable by confession to up to three other monks. In the case of the Thai Sangha, one monk suffices. The seventy-five sekhiya are rules of conduct which carry no penalty for transgression but merely the direction: “this is a rule to be kept”

8

The Structure of a State Religion

(sikkha karamya). They deal principally with conduct among the laity, etiquette of eating, and deportment in teaching the doctrine. Lastly, the seven adhikaranasamatha are rules for settling disputes which may arise within the Sangha, for example, by a majority decision. In Thailand, the monasteries (wat) that house the Sangha, with few exceptions, are located in the midst of or adjacent to settlements. Even the now disbanded forest-dwelling Order (Aranyawdsi) lived close enough to inhabited areas to allow the daily contact that begging required.1 4 As a community of “beggars of alms,” the Sangha must physically be located within secular society. At the same time, it must offer its members the unworldly environment necessary for the effective attainment of their spiritual goal. These mutually conflicting conditions are met by the transformation of the space occupied by the Sangha into an environment •comparable to “homelessness,” not in objective terms, for life in the wat is not outwardly very different from secular life, but through the monks’ subjective creation of an unworldly order through the conscious act of observing the precepts. “Buddhism is nothing more or less than the precepts . . . . True Buddhism is realized where monks uphold the Patimokkha faithfully.” These and other lines from the Laws of the Three Seals are understandable only in this context.1 5 Between the Sangha and the surrounding secular society is a constant tension, which can only abate when, the precepts cease to be observed. The shaven heads and eyebrows and the yellow robes of the monks signify their resolve to maintain this tension. Figure 1 is a conceptual illustration of the situation. The heavy line around the Sangha represents the incompatibility of the worlds inside and outside, in which different orders prevail. Within the monastery, Thai monks wear the yellow robe with the right shoulder exposed. But outside they go with both shoulders covered. While this is originally based on a Patimokkha rule, it is also a symbolic act reminding the monk of the difference between the Sangha’s domain and the secular world. While Figure 1 shows a static view of the Sangha, Figure 2 shows a dynamic perspective. Members of secular society, through the admission and ordination ceremonies, can enter the Sangha. Once ordained, their lives are governed by the Patimokkha precepts, which they observe in order to maintain the Sangha’s unworldly order. Transgressors are required to reflect upon their lapses; but if one of the.four major sins is involved, they become asamvasa and must be expelled from the Order. Provision is also made for the voluntary “abandoning of the precepts” (sikkha paccakkhata), that is, disrobing. It is said to have arisen when, after monk had succumbed to sexual temptation and committed the first parajika, the Buddha allowed other monks so tempted to leave the

9

The Sangha and Society

Sangha

Patimokkha Secular society

Fig. 1. The Sangha from a Static

Point of View

Sangha

Disrobing

Ordination Patimokkha Secular society

Fig. 2. The Sangha from a Dynamic Point of View

Order before violating the Vinaya. “Abandoning of the precepts” is a unilateral act by the monk concerned; it does not require permission from his preceptor or anyone else, and is established by his informing a third party of the fact. 1 6 Today’s Thai Sangha allows voluntary disrobing for whatever motive. The Sangha is thus provided with an outlet valve to secular society which a monk can open by legitimate means. The tightness of this valve is a reflection of psychological resistance to secularization, and where leaving the Order invites criticism by society the valve can be said to be tight.

10

The Structure of a State Religion

In Thailand, the valve gives readily; there is no psychological resistance whatsoever to disrobing. These mechanisms for secularization, namely, expulsion and voluntary disrobing, enhance the Sangha’s efficiency as a formal organization: they allow removal of members who have lost the ability or will to uphold the precepts, and prevent their obstructing other members’ efforts toward this end.1 7 THE SANGHA AS MAINTAINER OF THE DHAMMA From the point of view solely of its members, the Sangha was defined in the last section as a mutual-benefit association oriented to raising the efficiency of attainment of their spiritual goal. 1 8 Thus defined, the Sangha is “a collection of people oriented to a common goal, who at the same time actually perform the activities necessary for its realization.” 1 9 These activities are not performed haphazardly; they are governed by norms recognized and upheld collectively by the group members. The group norms of the Sangha are the Dhamma and Vinaya (Pali, dhamma-vinaya-, Thai, phrathammawinai), the doctrines and precepts preached by the Buddha. These have been preserved and transmitted in the Tipitaka, or “three baskets” of the canon, namely, the Sutta Pitaka, the Vinaya Pitaka, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka, the last being the result of later endeavors to systematize the teachings. Originally transmitted orally in the Indian tradition, the Tipitaka was written down in the first century B.c. in Ceylon in the reign of Vattagamani, “for the long standing of the religion” (ciratthitattham dhammassa'). 2 0 This is the “Pali Canon” that has passed down to today’s Theravadin countries. Transcribed into the various national scripts, the Pali Canon might appear to have been transmitted in a variety of forms. In content, however, the transcriptions are astonishingly homogeneous. 2 1 That the Dhamma and Vinaya have been preserved in the Pali Canon in virtually their original form for two millenia is ascribable to at least three reasons. First is the conservatism of the Sangha, which accepted the motion that “the Order should not lay down what has not been laid down, nor should it abolish what has been laid down.” This conservatism has applied as strongly to the norms of thinking, the Dhamma tenets, as it has to those of conduct, the Vinaya precepts. The Pali sdvaka, “disciple,” means literally “one who hears the teaching,” being the Pali form of the Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit sravaka, which is related to the Sanskrit verb sru, “to hear.” The classical Chinese translation of this is sheng-wen, a compound of the characters for “voice” and “hear,” which originally signified a personal disciple of the Buddha, but in later Mahayana scriptures came to mean “monks of the Hinayana tradition.” 2 2

The Sangha and Society

11

This etymology of savaka neatly captures the essential character of Theravadin monks, men devoted to upholding the Dhamma and Vinaya preached by the Buddha. Their totally passive attitude has virtually precluded any active development of the teachings they hear. The same is true of even the Theravadin scholar-monks. The greatest among them, the fifth-century Ceylonese scholar Buddhaghosa, is noted principally as a commentator on the Buddha’s teaching. Remarkably industrious, he left a voluminous commentary amounting to 137,000 lines, but which contained “no argument or debate whatsoever” and “no development of dogma.” He refrained entirely from developing and expounding new theories of his own, devoting himself to the faithful transmission of the traditional tenets.2 3 The second reason is the historical fact that the conservative Sangha, the community of “hearers,” has maintained a comparatively stable existence as transmitter of the Dhamma and Vinaya. As I have mentioned, after a series of disputes with opposing sects that continued into the twelfth century, the Mahavihara community founded in Ceylon by Mahinda finally established its authority over a united Sangha with the support ofParakramaba.hu I . From the twelfth century, the Theravada Sangha spread from the Mahavihara across continental Southeast Asia and has developed into today’s Orders in Burma, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia, which, bound by the common norms of the Pali Canon, have, despite their disparate environments, evolved comparatively homogeneous traditions. In connection with the stable development of the Sangha, it is noteworthy that whenever the Sangha tradition has seemed about to collapse, whether because of the disturbances of war, foreign rule, or other reasons, it has been revived by the introduction of a purer tradition from a neighboring country. In the late fifteenth century, for example, Dhammaceti, the ruler of Pegu in lower Burma, was distressed by the “lack of monks versed in the Canon,” and also wished to reestablish a proper sima (“boundary,” enclosing a consecrated area in which religious ceremonial is valid). He consequently sent a mission of twenty- two monks to Ceylon to be reordained at the Mahavihara, and on their return established the Kalyanisima.2 4 In Thailand, there emerged in the mid-nineteenth century the Thammayut sect ( Thammayutikanikai) which, critical ofthe laxity of the native Sangha, adopted the tradition of the Burmese Mon Sangha.2 5 And in Ceylon, pure Sangha traditions were introduced from Burma and Siam to revive the local Sangha after its decline under Portugese and Dutch rule from the sixteenth century.2 6 This exchange between the Orders of the various countries not only contributed to the flourishing of these communities but seems also to have been largely instrumental in standardizing the traditions that each maintained.

12

The Structure of a State Religion

Third, the Sangha incorporates a mechanism for restoring the tradition: the holding of councils to overcome crises involving the group norms. Thai tradition recognizes nine councils: the First and Second Councils mentioned earlier, the Third Council held at Pataliputra in India, the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Councils held in Ceylon under the kings Devanampiya Tissa, Vattagamani, Mahanama, and Parakramaba.hu respectively, and the Eighth and Ninth Councils held in Thailand, at Chiengmai in 1483 and at Bangkok in 1788. 2 7 Burmese tradition counts only six councils: one held in Ceylon as the Fourth Council, one held at Mandalay in 1781 as the Fifth, and one held at Rangoon between 1954 and 1956 as the Sixth.2 8 In Thai, the councils are sometimes referred to by the verbal phrase chamra phrathammawinai.Chamra means “to cleanse by washing” as, for example, in chamra tua, “to wash the body.” The councils thus perform the task of “cleansing” the Dhamma and Vinaya of the accretions of later ages. Sangiti, “chanting together,” the original Pali word for the councils, on the other hand, can be regarded as deriving from the procedural aspect of the councils, where, by chanting together the Dhamma and Vinaya restored to their original form, the entire Sangha recognized the restoration. Through the councils, the group norms held by the Sangha have continually been rectified by verification against the Dhamma and Vinaya at their source. One function of the Sangha, then, has been to maintain and transmit the Dhamma and Vinaya. As long as the Sangha is properly maintained, the true Dhamma and Vinaya will be maintained and transmitted without interruption.2 9 Beginning with its orthodox soteriology, we have seen that the fundamental doctrine of Theravada Buddhism is of salvation entirely through self-effort, a goal whose achievement is extremely “difficult in practice,” requiring the extraordinary step of “going forth.” Those who “went forth” lived originally as solitary peripatetics, but eventually came together to form the cenobitic community known as the Sangha. If we look at the dynamics of its formation, the Sangha can be regarded as a mutual-benefit association expected primarily to function to raise the efficiency of its members’ religious practices; at the same time, the Sangha has clearly functioned to maintain and transmit the Dhamma and Vinaya taught by the Buddha. The tenet that entry into the Sangha allows entry into the process of salvation, however “difficult in practice” that may be to achieve, ,raises two problems: it limits salvation to a small, intellectual elite; and it requires that elite to pursue salvation under material conditions imposed by the “masses” excluded from the process. In the following sections I will

The Sangha and Society

13

consider the concept of “field for merit,” one which opened new ground in Theravada Buddhism, and show how these problems can be resolved by redefining the Sangha from an entirely different point of view. THE SANGHA AS A FIELD FOR MERIT Like a paddy field that yields rice for the sower of seed, a “field for merit” is the recipient of an offering that is believed to yield “merit” for the offerer. The Thai expression is nd bun, a nd (“field”) that produces bun (“merit”). In his Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa defines “the world’s peerless field for merit” as “a place matchless for the growth of merit for the whole world.” 3 0 Since the Thai word bun means “a good deed (kamma) through which hopes of heaven may be realized,” a field for merit can be defined, at least in the Thai context, as a beneficiary of good deeds performed by people for the fulfillment of their desires for heavenly happiness. 31 Ancient Jainism considered “Bhramanas of pure birth and knowledge” to be fields for merit, while in Buddhism the term was applied first to the Buddha and later to the Sangha.3 2 In Thailand, nd bun is used for the Sangha alone.3 3 A central feature of Indian religious thought in the Buddha’s time was the belief that man could gain happiness in heaven (sagga) through almsgiving (dana) and morality (sila). Underlying this belief was the notion that the life of the gods (deva) born in heaven was full of happiness and far superior to that of men, and consequently a pleasant and desirable lot, whereas life in hell (naraka) was full of suffering, detestable, and inferior to that of men. Heaven and hell, together with the realms of beasts, hungry ghosts (pela), frightened ghosts (asura), and men, were believed to comprise the six states of existence in which resided beings locked in an unending cycle of rebirths. Since they too were locked in the cycle, men naturally wished for the happier lot of rebirth in heaven. Even this happy fate, however, was not permanent or free from suffering, since heavenly beings were also subject to rebirth. Escape from the suffering of the many-fettered, thisworldly (lokiya) cycle of rebirths to the supramundane (lokuttara) realm of freedom from suffering was the goal of the doctrines preached by the Buddha. Rather than refute the desire for heavenly happiness as something ultimately to be subjugated, it is noteworthy that the Buddha used discourses on heaven as a starting point in leading his listeners through an orderly exposition until he knew their minds were “ready, malleable, devoid of hindrances, uplifted, pleased, then he explained to them the teaching on the dhamma.” 3* The Buddha did not, of course, actively endorse the pursuit of rebirth in heaven, but' he did give discourses on

14

The Structure of a Stale Religion

almsgiving, morality and heaven as part of a “progressive exposition leading to the teaching of the Dhamma.” 3 5 And, as I will discuss later, the scriptural testimony that the Buddha did not refute heavenly happiness was an important factor in the later establishment within Buddhism, as a complement to the orthodox system of beliefs, of a separate creed based on its pursuit. The conditions under which the Sangha can be a field for merit are generally accepted to be those found in the Sanghanussatibhavand, a chant familiar to the pious laity through daily rehearsal. Well practised is the Exalted One’s Order of Disciples, practised in integrity, practised in intellectual methods, in right lines of action — to wit the four pairs, the eight groups of persons— this is the Exalted One’s Order of Disciples worthy of offerings, oblations, gifts, salutations, the world’s peerless field for merit.36 And the norms that the Order of Disciples (savakasangha) must uphold in order to be “well practised” {supatipanno) , “practised in integrity” (ujupatipanno),“practised in intellectual methods” (fiayapatipanno), and “in right lines of action” (samicipatipanno) and thus to be “worthy of offerings, oblations, gifts [and] salutations,” are none other than the Dhamma and Vinaya. When the community of monks follows the doctrines preached by the Buddha and observes the precepts correctly, the Sangha is pure, the “world’s peerless field for merit,” and can sustain itself by receiving the offerings and alms of the laity. In return, people expect the Sangha to maintain and transmit the true Dhamma and Vinaya, in other words, to create and sustain a supramundane order (lokuttaradhamma}. They expect the order that governs life in the Sangha to be insulated from the secular order in which they live, and the Sangha’s unworldliness to be maintained within that order. When this is accomplished, the Sangha is a valid field for merit, in which they may sow their offerings with the promise of reaping heavenly happiness. The incongruity of the sacred and secular orders is thus a logical requirement of the concept of field for merit, and because of this the conservatism of the Theravadin Sangha is reinforced by the laity. In this concept lies the prime reason why the nonproductive and conservative monastic Order has continued to the present day. MERIT-MAKING AND THE SANGHA The orthodox doctrines of Buddhism, those oriented to the otherworldly realm, hold little interest for the majority of Thais. Their concern is not to transcend the cycle of rebirths but to improve their position in this world.

The Sangha and Society

15

Thai Buddhists, according to the anthropologist Lucien M . Hanks, see all living beings as standing “in a hierarchy of varying ability to make actions effective and of varying degrees of freedom from suffering.” The gods, for example, who, “with a single word, can stop the course of rivers,” stand above men, who must toil even to dam a stream, while men in turn stand above animals, which must wander the earth in search of food, since men are more able to make actions effective and are thus freer from suffering. Such hierarchical relationships obtain not only between but also within the six states of this-worldly existence, including the human state. Thus the government official chauffered to work by limousine stands above the peasant tramping the muddy road to work in the paddy field.3 7 Position in this cosmic hierarchy is determined by the amount of merit (bun) a being has accumulated in former lives, one with a goodly store (mi bun mak) standing above one with a meager store (mi bun noi). One’s position, however, is not, fixed, either in the cosmological span covering successive rebirths, or during existence in a particular state. This is exemplified by King Taksin (1767-1782), founder of the Thonburi court, who fell from the position of supreme power in the kingdom and was executed. Thais tend to relate changes in position in this cosmic hierarchy to a being’s store of bun. The tragedy of Taksin, for example, is interpreted as meaning the king’s bun was exhausted (sin bun). Facing his executioners, Taksin is reported to have said: “Since my bun is exhausted, I have arrived now at my death” (tua rau ko sin bun, cha thung thiyu laew).3 8 Those with wealth, position, and power are generally said to be mi bun mak, while the poor and unfortunate are mi bun noi. People’s religious concern, therefore, centers on the accumulation of bun, which they believe will enhance their position in the cosmic hierarchy. The act of accumulating bun is called in Thai tham bun, “to make merit.” Accumulated bun is, however, countervailed by bap (“demerit;” Va)i,papa), and people thus elicit great concern over whether a particular act “is bap” (pen bap) and endeavor to avoid such acts. By actively making merit, people strive to accumulate bun and thus enhance their future position in the cosmic hierarchy. Following a field survey in a village in Northeast Thailand, Koichi Mizuno noted that: “Viewing rebirth into a high socioeconomic position as heaven, and rebirth into a lower position or as an animal as hell, the villagers accumulate “merit” in order to be reborn with the outstanding ability and resources that will provide a high position free from suffering, and in order not to repeat the same suffering.” 3 9 Despite some apparent similarities, the tham bun concept is not deter-

16

The Structure of a Slate Religion

— Past lives

Present life

Future livesConsequences of action manifested

Determinism

Consequences of action manifested Tham bun Concept

-----------------

------------------

Point of action

Fig. 3. Determinism and the Tham Bun Concept minism. Rather it is an extension of the kammalikhit doctrine of selfsalvation, a variant which posits that one can change one’s state of existence through one’s own acts. Figure 3 shows the difference between the two. In determinism, one’s present state of existence is the result of all one’s acts, good and evil, in previous existences. Acts in this life do not influence one’s present state of existence; their consequences are manifest at the start of the next existence. The tham bun concept likewise attributes one’s present state of existence to acts performed in previous lives. But unlike determinism, it locates retribution for acts in this life in all time subsequent to those acts, in the present life and future lives. The Laws of the Three Seals in particular provides documentary evidence for this view in speaking of tham bun “for the benefit of this life and future lives” (hai pen prajot nai chua ni chua nd; emphasis added) . 40 Tham bun is ultimately an act oriented toward satisfying the actor’s appetition to enhance his position in the cosmic hierarchy. However, since it is strictly a symoblic act, the actor must be confident of its efficacy. This confidence is grounded in the concept of field for merit. (Although, as mentioned earlier, this concept is premised on the pursuit of heavenly happiness, and in this sense is strictly no more than a step in the “progressive exposition leading to the teaching of the Dhamma,” it has in practice become the main pillar of popular Buddhist “doctrine,” since it reconciles the nonproductive Sangha’s requirement of a theoretical basis for its material support and the laity’s requirement of a means of achieving the goal of personal happiness.)

The Sangha and Society

17

Table 1. Ranking of Merit-making Acts, after Kaufman Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Merit-making Act Becoming a monk Contributing enough money for the construction of a wat Having a son ordained as a monk Making excursions to the Buddhist shrines throughout Thailand Contributing toward the repair of a wat Giving food daily to the monks and giving food on holy days Becoming a novice Attending the wat on all holy days and obeying the eight laws on these days Obeying the five laws at all times Giving money and clothing to the monks at the Thaud Kathin

Table 2. Ranking of Merit-making Acts, after Tambiah ■Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6

Merit-making Act Financing the entire building of a wat Becoming a monk oneself or having a son become a monk Contributing money to the repair of a wat or making gifts at a 'kathin ceremony Giving food daily to monks Observing every wanphraa at the wat Strict observance of the five precepts

For believers in the concept of field for merit, the Sangha is “the world’s peerless field for merit,” “a place matchless for the growth of merit for the whole world.” Consequently, offerings and alms given to the Sangha are believed to be the most effective means of gaining happiness, or more correctly, of enhancing one’s position in the cosmic hierarchy. Abundant records exist of kings who donated lands {thoranisong) for royal monasteries, gave “monastery slaves” (khdphrayomsong'), and constructed and repaired monasteries, while among the people a similar diversity of merit-making acts involving the Sangha remains popular. Table 1 shows the results of a questionnaire given in 1953 by Howard Kaufman to twenty-five residents (13 males and 12 females, aged 20 years or older) of a farming village on the outskirts of Bangkok, in which respondents were asked “if you wanted to gain the most merit possible, what would you have to do?” Their answers show the ranking of various acts according to the quantity of merit received. 41 Table 2 shows the results of a similar survey conducted by S. J. Tambiah among seventy-

18

The Structure of a State Religion

two household heads in a village in Northeast Thailand. 42 Further examples of merit-making acts are cited by Konrad Kingshill, who conducted a village survey in North Thailand. These include giving food and other gifts to monks, giving in general, observing the five precepts, and attending services at the wat*3 The information provided by these surveys indicates two broad categories of merit-making acts: direct contributions to the upkeep of the Sangha; and religious self-discipline. It is notable that the latter acts, the observance of the five or eight “lay precepts,” the religious ethical virtues prescribed for the laity in the orthodox doctrine, receive such a low rating as a means of acquiring merit.44 Contribution to the upkeep of the Sangha is deemed far more meritorious, and this category of acts can be dichotomized further into donations to the monastery, the physical base of the Sangha, and donations to monks. Donations to the monastery consist primarily of funds given for the construction and repair of buildings, and money and goods given on the occasion of the Kathina ceremony. Of these, the funding of a new building, especially a new sanctuary (bot), is the preeminent act of merit-making and is much esteemed. The money given at the Kathina ceremony is especially important to the small provincial monasteries, allowing them to purchase new equipment and goods not provided for by everyday running expenses. In 1967, 24, 634 monasteries were registered with the Department of Religious Affairs. Of these, only 161 were royal monasteries receiving some form of direct financial support from the government, while the remaining 24, 473 had been built and were supported entirely by private donation.4 5 Further, the monks in both royal and commoner monasteries received government assistance (nitayaphat) only under special circumstances, for example, if they occupied a post within the Sangha. Consequently, voluntary donations by the people are vital to the support of the monks’ daily lives. Important among these donations is the daily giving of food. In Bangkok and other large cities, the solidarity between the monasteries and local residents has weakened to the extent that it is impossible for monks to live by begging and the receipt of unsolicited donations.46 In rural areas, however, monks must still depend entirely on voluntary donations from their local communities. 47 Not to be overlooked in considering the relation between meritmaking and the Sangha is the fact that “going forth” is deemed a meritorious act, and, moreover, is highly ranked as such. We saw in the earlier section “‘Going Forth’ and the Sangha” that monkhood was the mode of life chosen by a religious elite seeking to transcend the realm

19

The Sangha and Society

Tham bun This-worldly \ life 7

Field for merit

[ “Going forth”

Unworldly environment Sangha

Fig. 4. Interrelationship of Tham Bun, the Sangha and “Going Forth” of rebirth. Merit-making, on the other hand, rests on the affirmation of this world, since it is believed to bring relative happiness in this world. While it is thus self-contradictory to view entry into monkhood, an act oriented to transcending this world, as a form of merit-making, as the anthropologists cited earlier indicate, people in fact do see it in this way. The new significance thus attached to “going forth” has created a channel between the elite-oriented orthodox religion and mass religiosity. While entry into the monkhood is not motivated by merit-making in all cases, this seems to be true for the majority of monks in Central Thailand, many of whom don the robe for only a short period. Without the influx of nonelites through this channel, the Sangha would be unable to survive as an autonomous organization since adherence to the orthodox doctrine would inevitably restrict its membership. Outwardly, monks who have entered the Sangha for a short period to make merit are indistinguishable from those following the orthodox doctrine. All have shaven heads, wear the yellow robe, and obey the 227 precepts. The difference between them lies in their motivations and their orientations and goals. On the one hand, they are motivated by a rejection of this-worldly existence and are seeking to transcend it; on the other, they are motivated by positive affirmation of the mundane order and are seeking relative happiness within it. Figure 4 depicts the tripartite relationship between merit-making,

20

The Structure of a State Religion

the Sangha, and “going forth.” From the orthodox point of view, the Sangha is an organization offering an unworldly environment to its members. Within it monks seek the kind of “open” surroundings that they had sought out-of-doors. On the other hand, the Sangha is seen by the laity as the field for merit par excellence. Expecting to gain merit, they earnestly make offerings and give alms. And through the laity’s meritmaking, the nonproductive Sangha has been well able to survive. “Going forth” was originally the modus vivendi of a small religious elite, one characterized as “difficult in practice.” However, people reinterpreted “going forth” in a this-worldly context and gave it new significance. This popular reinterpretation came to have enormous significance for the survival of the Sangha as an organization. It removed the constant threat posed by the limitation of membership that was a corollary of its elitist doctrine by facilitating the recruitment of a quasi-elite, which, while outwardly indistinguishable from the otherworldy-oriented religious elite, in fact remained within the mundane order. This quasi-elite, composed of those seeking to make merit by their ordination, and others, described later, who are seeking education, has become instrumental in supporting the Sangha from within. With the true elite recognizing the complimentarity of the quasi-elite and adopting a positive rather than exclusive attitude, the coexistence of these two has been a major factor in the tenacity of the Theravadin Sangha. MAGICAL BUDDHISM AND THE SANGHA The questions we, have hitherto addressed are all within the purview of Buddhist soteriology. But neither the orthodox doctrine based on the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path nor the tham bun concept of popular Buddhism, with its long-term soterial aim, answer directly the demands of people for here-and-now solutions to the variety ofindividual crises faced in their daily lives. Unable to resolve a crisis by rational means or to predict the outcome of a course of action, both primitive and modern people often resort to magic to relievetheir anxiety. As Bronislaw Malinowski has pointed out, magic continues to function to this day, not as a means of altering objective reality, but in dispelling unease and restoring confidence in the individual.4 8 Thai Buddhists are also firm believers in spirits, and in their daily lives employ a variety of magical devices, for example, to detain the spirit of life (khwari) within the body, and to prevent the intrusion of malevolent spirits (phi) into their living space. 49 Had Theravada Buddhism limited its obligations to salvation from the cycle of rebirth and evinced no concern for man’s everyday anxieties, it is doubtful whether it would have gained the wide popular support it enjoys today in Southeast Asia. But, in fact, the Theravada does embrace

The Sangha and Society

21

various structures that answer the popular demand for magic. Here I shall examine this aspect of Buddhism, adducing the most common cases of Buddhist magic in Thailand. Phra Parit

Probably the most important Buddhist magic in Thailand today is phra parit,or in contracted form jzarzV.5 0 Etymologically a derivative of the Pali paritta with the honorific prefix phra, phra parit are scriptural spells chanted to bring happiness or protection from danger and misfortune. Although originally chanted for the protection of the king, as is indicated by the titles of two traditional Thai collections of parit, Chunlaratchaparit Chet Tamnan (literally, “Seven accounts of the lesser royal parit;” usually called the “Seven Tamnan” in English) and Mahardtchaparit Chet Tamnan (Twelve accounts of the greater royal parit; the “Twelve Tamnan”), parit today have popular currency. The chanting of parit is a major duty of Thai monks; and the recitation from memory of the Seven Tamnan and the Twelve Tamnan is a formality the newly ordained monk must undertake during his second rainy-season retreat. The Seven Tamnan is employed for both celebratory occasions like housewarming {tham bun ruan) and the casting and consecration of a Buddha image {chalong phra) and for such mortuary rites as the tham bun sop service held when the deceased is lying in state and the tham bun chet wan atthi service held seven days- after the cremation. Parit from the Twelve Tamnan are recited only at special ceremonies associated with the royal household and held in the bot of Wat Sri Ratanasasadaram (Wat Phra Kaeo). In content the parit are varied: while some have from the outset embodied a magical element, being Buddhistic modifications of verses used in popular Hindu rites, others, like the Maiigalasutta,are sutta which originally had no magical connotation.5 1 The texts of the parit give little indication of the source of their magic. Indeed, for most people, including some who chant them, the parit are incomprehensible, being in Pali. Rather, I believe, the magic of the parit stems from three factors: the social recognition that parit should be chanted for certain purposes (for example, blessing); the existence of an established formula for their chanting; and the sanctity attributed to the chanter. The Thais express this sanctity as saksit, and consider the Sangha, one of the Three Gems, to be a sacred entity {sing saksit). The individual monks who make up the Sangha are its embodiment before the people and, as such, share its sanctity. Thus when the sacred Sangha recites by established formulae those sutta which are socially recognized as spells, people believe in the magical efficacy of that act.

22

The Structure of a State Religion

Nam Mon (Holy Water)

Nam mon,a compound of the Thai nam (“water”) and mon, the Thai corruption of the Sanskrit mantra (“spell”), is “holy water” prepared by use of a spell, in this case, parit.5 2 The consecration of nan? mon often forms part of parit recitation. The preparation of nam mon requires clean water, white cotton thread twisted in a special way (sai sin', literally, “water-sprinkling thread”) , and candles. First, an iron begging bowl or similar vessel is filled with clean water and placed before an image of the Buddha, then candles are set around its rim and lit. Meanwhile, the sai sin is tied at one end to the base of the Buddha image, led once around the bowl of water, then reeled out further so that all monks present can grasp it. When the parit chanting reaches the last verse of the Seven Tamnan, the senior monk present takes a candle and, rotating the bowl by its brim, drips wax into the water. This magical rite is calledyoZ thian (“dripping wax”) . When the chanting ends, he douses the candle in the water, and the consecration is complete. Following this the senior monk generally sprinkles water with a twig over the heads of those present, which is held to avert disaster and confer power. Wong Dai Sai Sin (Encircling

with Holy Thread)

Wong is “to encircle.” Dai is “cotton.” Dai sai sin means “holy cotton thread.” This rite, resembling that for nam mon,is performed to consecrate a particular place, for example, a new house; and protect it from evil.5 3 The consecrated place, it is believed, “is protected by the power of the Three Gems and the phra parit” (anuphap phraratanatrai lae phraparit khumkhrong). As in the nam mon ceremony, sai sin is fixed to an image of the Buddha, whence it is stretched clockwise (pathaksin,padakkhina) around the place to be consecrated and brought back to the Buddha image. This is carried out on the day before the consecration by two or three laymen who exercise utmost care, since it is considered inauspicious if the holy thread repeatedly breaks. During the rite proper, too, care is taken not to break the thread. Once seated in their appointed places, all monks present take up the thread and chant parit. Through this, according to Thai ethnologist Anuman Rajadhon “the sai sin immediately brings a sacred entity [sing saksit] to all places [that it encloses] . . . . In its power and swiftness, it is just like a wire carrying electricity.” 5 4 Phra Khruang

Phra khruang,or more properly, phra khruang rang,is a small image of the Buddha worn as an amulet. Most popular is a mass-produced molded

The Sangha and Society

Buddhism

23

Sacred entity

Magic

Fig. 5. The Sangha

Parit, Phra khruang, etc. Daily life/

as a Sanctifying Force

clay image called phra phim. Others are made of gold, the most valuable being those made by monks believed to possess superhuman power. These are said to confer invulnerability on the wearer, and fetch prices up to a hundred thousand baht. 5 5 Handbooks have even been published for appraising the authenticity of such phra khruang.5 6 During the making of phra khruang, whether of metal or clay, the Sangha is invited to perform a consecration rite called phutthaphisek (buddhabhisheka). While this rite is conducted entirely within the context of Buddhism, its location at the point of contact of Buddhism with magic is indicated by the desirability of one of the participating monks being advanced in meditative technique or versed in the various Brahmanic rites called saiyasat.5 7 This consecration instills “sanctity” into the phra khruang, transforming it into a “sacred entity.” In each of the four cases just described, it is belief in the sanctity of the Sangha that is the source of belief in the efficacy of the magic. The force that sanctifies phra parit, nam mon, sai sin, and phra khruang is the sanctity of the Sangha as a “sacred entity.” As Figure 5 shows, the various spells and amulets— phra parit, phra khruang,and so on — have a Janus-like quality in, on the one hand, falling within the sphere of magic and, on the other, deriving their supernaturalness, which is a constituent element of magic, from the sanctity of the Sangha, and thus falling within the sphere of Buddhism. The existence of

24

The Structure of a State Religion

Buddhist magic allows people to satisfy their desires for magic, which is incompatible with the principles of Buddhism, while remaining within the framework of Buddhism. SECULAR FUNCTIONS OF THE SANGHA Though often overlooked in religiosociological considerations of Buddhism, the Sangha’s secular functions have contributed significantly to Buddhism’s survival as a religion. The “role” referred to in discussions of the declining social role of Buddhism with the advance of modernization is in many cases just such nonreligious functions as I will describe. The secular functions ofBuddhism can broadly be dichotomized into the creation and preservation of culture and the transmission of culture, that is, educational functions. Creation and Preservation

of Cultural Values

In traditional Thai society, the Buddhist Sangha played as great a part as the court in creating and preserving cultural values. In the field of literature, for example, the monasteries produced a substantial corpus of Buddhist writings. P. Schweisguth, a scholar of Thai literature, cites three major factors in the development of Thai literature: the court, Sanskrit literature, and Buddhism.5 8 Celebrated works of Buddhist literatue include the Traiphumikatha, a “Discourse on the Three Worlds” said to have been written by the Sukhothai king Lithai in 1345 when he was crown prince; Pathomsomphot, a Thai version of the life of the Buddha; and Mahachat Kham Luang, which is based on the Pali Vessantara Jataka.5 9 While Traiphumikatha was the work of a layman, the Sangha nevertheless played a large part in its preservation and transmission. This literary depiction of the cosmic hierarchy described earlier inspired the artists of many of the murals adorning monasteries across the country and had a significant impact on the formation of popular Buddhist ideas. Mahachat Kham Luang has become a household word through the annual festivities of Thet Mahachat.6 0 And the Jataka stories form the core of Thai Buddhist literature, of which two collections are known: Pannyasa Jataka (“Fifty Jataka”'), which was compiled by a Cliengmai monk; and Nibat Chadok,an anonymous compilation of 550 Jataka.6 1 Typical of the several known types of historical works written by monks are the Jinakalamali of the sixteenth-century Chiengmai elder Ratanapannya, and the Ayutthayan chronicle of Somdet Phra Wannarat, the head monk of Wat Po during the reign of Rama I.6 2 In earlier times, when, except in the vicinity of the royal palace in the captial, the majority of houses in Thailand were simple wooden

The Sangha and Society

25

structures, the monasteries, and particularly their sanctuaries (bot), were virtually the sole arena of artistic creativity and transmission of the associated traditional skills. The walls of the bot,for example, provided an excellent surface for painting, and many murals were produced. Fine works of carving, lacquering and inlay remain as decorations on the doors, ceilings, pillars, window shutters, and other parts of the bot. The building of a bot provided an opportunity for artistic creation, through which many traditional Thai styles are thought to have developed. And statuary, the major field in Buddhist art history, evolved a unique style in Thailand under the influence of various neighboring regions. Anthropologist Phya Anuman Rajadhon sums up the comprehensive role the monasteries played in providing opportunities for artistic creativity and in the preservation of the necessary skills: “Architects, carpenters, founders, potters, painters, plasterers, tilers, . . . all were to be found in the monastery.” 6 3 The monasteries were also the hospitals of traditional society. That medical knowledge was transmitted through the monasteries is reflected in the fact that the headquarters of Samakhom Rongrien Phaet Phaen Boran, an association for traditional Thai medicine, is located in Wat Po in Bangkok. Astrology (horasat) and the associated mathematical skills were also preserved in the monasteries, as was literal and grammatical knowledge, to judge from the fact that former monks who took up government service were appointed to the Department of the Royal Astronomers, the Department of the Royal Physicians, the Department of the Royal Scribes, and other departments dealing with religious and legal affairs. 6 4 The Sangha, then, was a small intellectual elite in traditional society which contributed to the creation and preservation of cultural values. And in transmitting traditional culture, the monks naturally played a major role as educators and the monasteries as the educational forum. Educational

Functions

For several centuries, until the Primary Education Act that had been promulgated in 1921 was enforced nationwide in 1935, education in Thailand was in the hands of monks residing in the monasteries. Traditionally, from around seven to ten years of age, a boy might be sent to a monastery as a “temple boy” (dek wat), where he became the pupil (luksitphra) of a particular monk. Whether resident in the monastery or at home, he performed chores for a respected monk called dchan, receiving in return a rudimentary education, mainly in the reading and writing of Thai.6 5 Alternatively, if his parents wished him to learn a special skill, a boy

26

The Structure of a State Religion

might be apprenticed to a suitable artisan-monk. To judge from the works they have left, some of these monks were masters of their trade. In return for his training, the apprentice (luksit) performed services for the monk.6 6 Between eleven and thirteen, at about the age he shaved his forelock (chuk), a boy might be ordained as a novice. At this stage he would learn the sutta he was not taught as a dek wat and have opportunity to study other subjects, like astronomy, mathematics, Pali, and versification. If by the age of about twenty he was still at the monastery, he would be ordained as a monk and undertake to observe the 227 precepts. Entry into the monkhood was traditionally considered part of a man’s education, as is evidenced by the existence of the idiom buat rian,“to ‘go forth’ in order to study.” 6 7 Those who failed to become monks earned the appellation khon dip, “immature,” or “raw.” Monks and former monks were the intellectual elite of traditional society; those without monastic experience were uncultured. The custom of buat rian was also significant to the Sangha’s survival. Like “going forth” to make merit, it came to constitute a major channel of recruitment into the Sangha from the general populace. In today’s monasteries, dek wat can still be found. Although their formal education has been taken over by the government, their parents expect the monks to give them an informal moral education. In Bangkok, monasteries are now widely used as dormitories by students from the provinces attending school in the capital. They come under the Sangha’s supervision as dek wat, being placed in the service of a particular monk. Education after ordination is directed to raising the monk’s knowledge of Buddhism, to which end Thailand has a long tradition of ecclesiastical examinations.6 8 When, after a period of months, years or decades, a monk leaves the robe he is not looked upon as a drop-out but is respected by society, since the Sangha has traditionally been seen as an educational institution. The Sangha provides the opportunity for an education unobtainable elsewhere, and Thai society values that education. Phra Maha Prayut Payutto Bhikkhu enumerates eleven functions of the Buddhist monastery in traditional society. It was a school, a welfare institution for the poor, a hospital, a travelers’ lodge, a social center, a recreational center (for festivals, etc.), a summary court, an arena for the creation and preservation of artworks, a store for jointly owned property, an ancillary institution of the administrative system, and a forum for ceremony.6 9 While the welfare, lodging, social, recreational, storage, and administrative functions amount to no more than the secular use of the monastery’s facilities, the educational, medical, judiciary, and artistic

27

The Sangha and Society

Sangha

Intellectual elite

Creation and transmission of cultural values

Fig. 6. The Sangha as an Intellectual

Elite

functions can be regarded as evidence that monks were society’s intellectual elite. In secular matters as well as religious they were more knowledgeable than laymen. I t is in just these “elitist” areas that society’s progress in modern times has eroded the Sangha’s former roles. The development of state education has deprived monks of their educational role; modern hospitals have taken over the administration of medical treatment; people now appeal to the courts to settle their disputes; and the arts have been liberated from the bounds of the palace and the monasteries to a freer creative arena in society in the large. But despite these changes, it is important to note the history of the Sangha as an intellectual elite which contributed to the creation and transmission of secular cultural values, thus enhancing its prestige and the prosperity of Buddhism, and the fact that even today it has not completely lost these functions7 0 (see Figure 6) . SOCIAL STRUCTURE

OF THERAVADA BUDDHISM

My objective in this chapter has been to construct, from the raw material of Thai Buddhism, a model with which to elucidate the social structure of Theravada Buddhism. I have shown, as illustrated in Figure 7, that the Theravada comprises a single system made up of four subsystems, each linked to a central organization called the Sangha. The first subsystem is that form of Buddism to emerge as a logical conclusion of the orthodox doctrine, corresponding to what anthropolo-

This-worldly

Tham bun

Unworldly environment

“Going forth”

-C

C d c/2

bD

Fig. 7. Social

JUOUI JOI ppij

Structure

' Creation and ' transmission of .cultural values;

Intellectual elite

Magic

- Su khwan etc '

of Theravada Buddhism

Daily life

Parit, phra khruang,

XX

28 The Structure of a State Religion

The Sangha and Society

29 71

gist Melford E . Spiro has termed “nibbannic Buddhism.” In E . R . Leach’s dichotomy of religions, it is a “philosophical religion.” 72 The functions of the Sangha in this subsystem are, firstly,, that of a mutualbenefit association which offers an unworldly environment for religious practice. Secondly, as a body of monks who keep the precepts, the Sangha functions dynamically to preserve the identity of Buddhism by acting as maintainer and transmitter of the Dhamma and Vinaya. The Sangha membership in this subsystem is limited to a small religious elite seeking to transcend the this-worldly order and attain the supreme bliss of the Other World, and with just the functions of this subsystem the Sangha would have difficulty in surviving as an autonomous organization. The second subsystem is Spiro’s “kammatic Buddhism,” a “practical religion,” and one of the principle forms in which Buddhism has been popularly accepted.7 3 I t arises through the combination of people’s desire to enhance their position in the hierarchy of this-worldly beings and the concept of field for merit. Through merit-making activities centered on the Sangha, people aspire to greater happiness in this world. The translation of the supramundane (lokuttara) act of “going forth” to the supreme this-worldly {lokiya) act of merit-making is of major significance to the Theravada as a social entity, since it creates a channel between the thisworldly and other-worldly orders. Through this channel a large quasielite with no aspiration to transcend the mundane order can enter the Sangha and thus ensure its survival. The third subsystem is what Spiro termed “apotropaic Buddhism.” 74 Since this term refers only to the aversion of evil and excludes the positive aspect of asking for blessing, I prefer to call it “magical Buddhism,” in line with the form in which it is manifested. This subsystem belongs to both Buddhism and magic, occupying the area of contact of these two systems. If we define magic as ‘‘man’s attempt to control the environment and bring about various phenomena by invoking the aid of supernatural entities (gods, spirits, etc.) for some purpose,” 7 5 then it is the identity of the supernatural entity whose aid is sought that sets magical Buddhism apart from other forms of magic. In Buddhist magic, the source of magic is the Sangha, which is considered a “sacred entity” {sing saksit). The fourth subsystem emerges as the consequence of the historical fact that the-Sangha contained the intellectual elite of traditional society, and is characterized by the various secular functions of the Sangha. The educational function in particular was important, along with meritmaking, as a channel for recruitment to the Sangha from society in general. Complementing the other three subsystems, these secular functions enhanced the Sangha’s prestige and contributed greatly to

30

The Structure of a State Religion

Buddhism’s prosperity; but with the advance of modernization they are being taken over by secular bodies. It is noteworthy, however, that in recent years in meeting members’ demands for secular education within the Order, the Sangha has occasioned a revival of the buat rian tradition. This model of the social structure of Theravada Buddhism, constructed from the raw material of Thai Buddhism, can only be proved valid by testing it against the realities in Burma, Cambodia, and other Theravadin countries. For the present, it must remain no more than a working hypothesis.

NOTES 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Suchip Punyanuphap, Khunnalaksana phiset haeng phraphutthasdtsana (Special features of Buddhism) (Bangkok: Samnakphin Bannakhan, 1957), p. 19. Dhammapada 160. Translated into English by S. Radhakrishnan, The Dhammapada (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950), pp. 112-113. Mahanagga I , 6: 19—22. Translated in F. Max Muller, ed., The Sacred Books of the East (hereafter cited as S.B.E.), vol. 13, Vinaya Texts, part 1, trans. T. W. Rhys Davids and Hermann Oldenberg (1881; reprint ed., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1965), pp. 95-96. Sir Charles Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism (1921; reprint ed., London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954), vol. 1, p. 201. Kyosho Hayashima, Shoki Bukkyo to shakai seikatsu (Early Buddhism and social life) (Tokyo: Iwanamishoten, 1964), pp. 541 f. R. C. Childers, A Dictionary of the Pali Language (1875; reprinted., Kyoto: Rinsen, 1975), p. 305, renders the phrase agarasma anagariyarripabbajati: “leaving home and house to go forth into the houseless state.” Samyutta-Nikaya16: 11. Translated into English by Mrs. Rhys Davids, The Book of the Kindred Sayings, part 2 (1922; reprint ed., London: Luzac & Co., 1952), p. 148. SuttaNipata 406. Translated into English in S.B.B. vol. 15, Woven Cadences of Early Buddhists, trans. E. M. Hare (London: Oxford University Press, 1945), p. 61. See, for example, Dukumar Dutt, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1962), p. 57. Hajime Nakamura, Genshi Bukkyo no seiritsu (The establishment of primitive Buddhism) (Tokyo: Shunshusha, 1969), p. 241. Peter M. Blau and W. Richard Scott, Formal Organizations: A Comparative Approach (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966). Ibid., pp. 42-43. Wachirawororot, Somdet Phramahamakutrasamanchao Kromphraya, Upasombotwithi (The ordination procedure) (Bangkok: Mahamakutratchwitthayalai, 1956). Nanamoli Thera, trans., The- Patimokkha (Bangkok: Science Association Press of Thailand, 1966). Tri Amatayakun, Namthiaw muang sukhothai (A guide to Sukhothai) (Bangkok: Runruangthamma, 1954), pp. 83 f. “Kot phrasong 2” (Sangha law 2), Kotmai tra sam duang (Laws of the three seals) (hereafter cited as K.T.S.D.) vol. 4 (Bangkok: Ongkankha khong khurusapha, 1962), p. 170. The same idea is expressed in Buddhaghosa’s Vinaya commentary: “The Vinaya is the very life of the Dispensation of the Enlightened One: so long as the

The Sangha and Society

16. 17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

24. 25. 26. 27. 28.

29. 30. 31.

32.

31

Vinaya endures, the Dispensation endures.” See S.B.B. vol 21, The Inception of Discipline and the Vinaya Nidana, trans, and ed. N. A. Jayawickrama (London: Luzac & Co., 1962), p. 11. Akira Hirakawa, Ritsuzo no kenkyu (A study of the Vinaya Pitakd) (Tokyo: Sankibobusshorin, 1960), p. 313. Yoneo Ishii, Kairitsu no sukui: Shojo Bukkyo (Salvation through'the precepts: Hinayana Buddhism) (Kyoto: Tankosha, 1969), pp. 99-101. The Sangha as a mutual-benefit organization is discussed in Hans-Dieter Evers “The Buddhist Sangha in Ceylon and Thailand: A Comparative Study of Formal Organizations in Two Non-Industrial Societies,” Sociologus 18, no. 1 (1968): 25-35. Morimitsu Shimizu, Shudan no ippan riron (A general theory of groups) (Tokyo: Iwanamishoten, 1972), p. 271. Dipavamsa 20: 21. Translated in Bimala Churn Law, ed., “The Dipavamsa,” The Ceylon Historical Journal 7, nos. 1-4 (July 1957-April 1958): 249. Since Pali is a dead language, differences in pronunciation exist among speakers of the various native languages. The situation is comparable to that of Latin in Europe. Yutaka Iwamoto, Nichijo Bukkyogo, pp. 146-147. Egaku Maeda, Genshi Bukkyo Kyoten no seiritsushiteki kenkyu (An historical study of the establishment of primitive Buddhist scriptures) (Tokyo: Sankibobusshorin, 1966), pp. 791-805. Niharranjan Ray, An Introduction to the Study of Theravada Buddhism in Burma (Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1946), pp. 182-192. Robert Lingat, “La vie religieuse du roi Mongkut,” Journal of the Siam Society (hereafter cited as J.5.5.) 20, part 2 (1927): 129-148. Hayashima, Shoki Bukkyo, pp. 120-123. Somdet Phrawannarat Wat Prachetuphon, Sankhitiyawong ( Sanghityavamsa) (History of the councils), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1923). Shuki Hoshimura, ed., Bukkyo kyddan no kenkyu (Astudy of the Buddhist order) (Kyoto: Hyakkaen, 1968), pp. 513-517. For information on the Burmese tradition, I am indebted to Mr. Toru Ono of Osaka University of Foreign Languages. Kogen Mizuno, Bukkyoyogo no kiso chishiki (Basic knowledge ofBuddhist terminology) (Tokyo: Shunshusha, 1972), pp. 108-109. Pe Maung Tin, trans., The Path of Purity (London: Luzac & Co., 1971), p. 255. Bun is defined in Phrae Phitthaya, Photchanankrom thai chabap khong borisat“phrae phittaya” wang burapha (A Thai dictionary, “Phrae Phittaya” edition) (Bangkok: Phrae Phittaya, 1961), p. 753. Uttaradhyana, lecture 12, verse 13 states: All the world knows that we are (as it were) the field on which gifts sown grow up as merit; Brahamanas of pure birth and knowledge are the blessed fields.

33. 34. 35. 36.

S.B.E. vol. 45, Jaina Sutras, part 2, trans. Hermann Jacobi (1895; reprint ed., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1968), p. 52. On Buddhism, see Hayashima, Shoki Bukkyo, pp. 702-703. Other terms used are nua nd bun and bun'yakhet, a derivative of the Pali punnakhetta. Mahavagga I, 8: 2. The English translation is from S.B.B. vol. 14, The Book of the Discipline, part 4, trans. I. B. Horner (London: Luzac & Co., 1951), p. 26. Hayashima, Shoki Bukkyo, pp. 690, 697. In Thailand this is called Sanghabhithuti (Panegyric to the Sangha) . The English translation is from The Book of the Kindred Sayings,part I , trans. Mrs. Rhys Davids (London: Luzac & Co., 1950), p. 280. The Thai chant is followed by the couplet tamaham

32

37. 38.

39.

40. 41. 42. 43. 44.

45. 46.

47. 48.

49. 50.

51. 52. 53.

The Structure of a State Religion abhipujaydmi; tamaham sahgham sirasa namami (“Humbly we make our oblations; with bowed heads we offer our salutations to the Sangha”). L. M. Hanks, “Merit and Power in the Thai Social Order,” American Anthropologist 64 (1962): 1247-1248. Thailand, Krom Sinlapakon (Fine Arts Department), PhrarBtchaphongsdwadan chabap phrardtchahatthalekha,(The Royal Chronicle, Royal Autograph Version), 2 vols. (Bangkok: Odeon Store, 1962), 2: 438. All references herein are to this two-volume edition, hereafter cited as P.P.H.L. On the various versions of the Ayutthayan chronicles, see Yoneo Ishii, “Taigo bunken ni tsuite (2) ” (On Thai Literature (2) ), Tonan Ajia Kenkyu (Southeast Asian Studies) (hereafter cited as S.E.A.S. ) 2, no. 1 (1964): 13-24. Koichi Mizuno, “Shukyo girei no kirio taikei: Taikoku tohokubu no ichiburaku Don Dengu” (A functional system of religious ritual: Don Daeng, a village in northeast Thailand), S.E.A.S. 3, no. 3 (1965): 7. “Phraratcha kamnot mai 14” (New royal decree 14), K.T.S.D. 5: 245-251. Howard Keva Kaufman, Bangkhaud: A Community Study in Thailand (New York: J. J. Augustin, 1960), pp. 183-184. S. J. Tambiah, Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in North-East Thailand (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), p. 147. Konrad Kingshill, Kudaeng— The Red Tomb: A Village Study in Northern Thailand (Chiengmai: The Prince Royal’s College, 1960), pp. 145-149. The religious significance for the Thais of the lay precepts lies less in their being ethical virtues to be practiced than in the act of “receiving the precepts” (rap sin) in the bot. This point is discussed in a recent study by B. J. Terwiel, “The Five Precepts and Ritual in Rural Thailand,” J.S.S. 60, part 1 (1972): 333-343. Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs, Ministry of Education, Annual Report of Religion Activities for 1967 (Bangkok, 1967), p. 59 (in Thai). I confirmed this fact during my stay as a monk at Wat Bowonniewet in Bangkok from April to June 1957, when I went begging every morning. Like other monasteries nearby, this one also had contracted with a local caterer to have meals brought to the monks’ quarters twice daily. The 170 baht monthly needed to pay for this was normally appropriated from the “alms” given by laymen who had asked monks to chant sutta for them. Information on the situation in the Northeastern village of Don Daeng was provided by Koichi Mizuno. Bronislaw Malinowski, Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays (New York: Doubleday & Co., Anchor Books, 1954), pp. 17-92; Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory (New York: The Free Press, 1964), p. 203; George C. Homans, The HumanGroup (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1950), pp. 321-330. Tsuneo Ayabe, Taizoku: Sono shakai to bunka (The Tai: Their society and culture) (Tokyo: Kobundo, 1971), pp. 273-323. This discussion of parit largely follows Kyogo Sasaki, “Nanden Bukkyo no ichi yoso: Shiamu Bukkyo ni okeru shoju” (One aspect of southern Buddhism: Parit chants in Siamese Buddhism), Otani Gakuho (Otani bulletin) 26, no. 2 (Kyoto: Otani University, 1949); and idem, “Tai Bukkyo ni okeru goju kyoten ni tsuite” (On parit in Thai Buddhism), Bukkyo Kenkyu (Buddhist studies), inaugural issue (1970). YasuakiNara, “Paritta ju no kozo to kino” (The structure and function of the paritta), Shukyo Kenkyu (Journal of religious studies) 46, series 2, no. 213 (1973): 45-46. This discussion of nam mon is based on Sasaki, “Nanden Bukkyo,” pp. 56-57. This section is based on Anuman Rajadhon, Phraya (Sathiankoset), “Tham bun suat mon liang phra” (Merit-making, chanting and giving food to monks), in Ruang kiaw

The Sangha and Society

54. 55. 56.

57. 58. 59.

60. 6 1.

63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75.

33

kapphraphene thai (The story ofThai customs), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1961), pp. 335-340. Ibid., p. 338. Because one should not in principle “buy” (khai) or “sell” (su) a Buddha image, people instead use the verbs “borrow” (chao) and “lend” (hai chao). For example, Phrom Suthat na Ayutthaya, Phra phim lae phra khrilang khong Thai (Sacred imprints and Buddha image amulets of Thailand) (Bangkok: Phrae Phitthaya, 1969). Ibid., pp. 4-42. P. Schweisguth, Etude sur la literature Siamoise (Paris: Adien Maisonneuve, 1951), pp. 11-15. For texts and commentaries on these works, see: Traiphum phraruang khong phraya lithai (The three worlds of Phraya Lithai) (Bangkok: Ongkankha khong khurusapha, 1963); Georges Coedes, The Traiphumikatha: Buddhist Cosmology and Treatise on Ethics,” East and West 7 (1957): 349-352; Somdet Phramahasamanachao Kromphra Paramanuchitchinorot, Pathomsomphotkatha (First omniscience, or the life of the Buddha) (Bangkok: Mahachulalongkonratchawitthayalai, 1960); and Thailand, Fine Arts Department, Mahachat kham luang chabap krom sinlapakon (The Fine Arts Department edition of Mahachat Kham Luang) (Bangkok: Mahamakutratchawitthayalai, 1953). Anuman Rajadhon, Phya, Essays on Thai Folklorre (Bangkok: The Social Science Association Press of Thailand, 1968), pp. 164-167. Pluang na Nakhon, Prawat wannakhadi thai samrap nak suksa (History ofThai literature for students) (Bangkok: Thai Watthana Phanit, 1960), p. 58. 62. For texts of these works, see: A. P. Buddhatta Mahathera, ed., Jinakalamalipakaranam (London: Luzac & Co., 1962); N. A. Jayawickrama, trans., The Sheaf of Garlands of the Epochs of the Conqueror, being a translation of the Jinakalamalipakaranam,(London: Luzac & Co., 1968); and Thailand, Krom Sinlapakon, Phraratchaphongsawadan krung si ayutthaya chabap Somdet Phra Phannarat Wat Phra Chetuphon (Royal chronicle of Ayutthaya, Somdet Phra Phannarat of Wat Chetuphon version) (Bangkok: Khlang Witthaya, 1962). Anuman Rajadhon, Phraya (Sathiankoset), Chiwit chao thai samai kbn (Old Thai life) (Bangkok: Ratchabanditsathan, 1967), p. 164. David K. Wyatt, “The Buddhist Monkhood as an Avenue of Social Mobility in Traditional Thai Society,” Sinlapakon10, no. 1 (1966): 49—52. Anuman, Chiwit Chao Thai, pp. 149-163. Ibid., pp. 144-146. Ibid., pp. 131-134. See chapter 5 herein. Prayut, Phra Maha (Payutto Bhikkhu), “Botbat khong phrasong nai sangkhom thai patchuban” (The role of the Thai Sangha in modern Thai society), in Phutthasatsana kap sangkhom that patchuban (Buddhism and modern Thai society), ed. The Siam Society (Bangkok: Sayamsamakhom, 1967), p. 16. See chapter 7 herein. Melford E. Spiro, Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and Its Burmese Vicissitudes ( New York: Harper and Row 1970), pp. 31—65. E. R. Leach, Dialectic in Practical Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), p. 1. Spiro, Buddhism and Society, pp. 66—139. Ibid., pp. 140-161. Teigo Yoshida, Jujutsu (Magic) (Tokyo: Kodansha, 1970), p. 13.

2 The Sangha

and the State

In its social structure, we have defined Theravada Buddhism as a coherent faith consisting of four subsystems each centered on the Sangha. Abstracted from this analysis, however, in an attempt to bring the social functions of the Sangha into sharper relief by considering the faith only at the personal level, is the fact that the Sangha is located within the political framework of a particular state. At no time in its history has the Sangha merely subsisted in one form or another within the state; when it has flourished it has done so by entering into a positive relationship with the state. Witness, for example, the history of the Ceylonese Abhayagirivihara, which rose under state protection and declined when that protection was lost; or compare the Thai Sangha, which has consistently enjoyed royal protection since the thirteenth century, with its counterpart in Ceylon, which was oppressed by European Christian powers and eventually lost the king’s protection. The relationship between the state and Buddhism or between the state and the Sangha must be correctly interpreted in analyzing the factors that allowed the establishment of Theravada Buddhism, if we are to complete our task of building a generally applicable structural model of Theravada Buddhism. Thailand has somehow managed throughout its history to maintain its independence and its monarchy. Since, as I shall discuss presently, Thai Buddhism has been closely linked to the state, especially the monarchy, the form in which it has appeared has approximated, to greater and lesser degrees, to one of the “ideal types” of Theravada Buddhism. In this chapter I shall analyze the political forms of Theravada Buddhism, seeking concrete examples in the Thai tradition. I take as my point of departure the treatment Buddhism is accorded in the current constitutions of Theravadin nations. 34

The Sangha and the State

CONSTITUTIONS

35

AND BUDDHISM

The cradle ofTheravada Buddhism, Ceylon was from 1505 oppressed by a series of European colonial powers, beginning with the Portugese. With the fall of the Kandyan kingdom in 1815, the Sangha lost the royal protection it had traditionally enjoyed and thus progressively declined. Nevertheless, Buddhist beliefs, though becoming increasingly intermixed with folk beliefs, seem to have remained deeply rooted among the Sinhalese peasantry. In 1880, Colonel Olcott of the American Theosophical Society arrived in Ceylon and sparked off a Buddhist revival, and with the Sinhalese Buddhist leaders joining the movement, Buddhism gradually recovered its former strength. The Sangha, too, was revived, and by 1966 the number of monks and novices was estimated at between 15,000 and 18, 000. 1 Under the strongly Christian-influenced United National Party that governed Ceylon from 1947 for the first nine years of its independence, Buddhism remained in the background of political discussion. The situation was transformed, however, by the overwhelming victory in the 1956 general election of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, whose campaign promise to restore Buddhism had won him support among the Sinhalese Buddhists who made up more than 64 percent of the island’s population. This catapulted onto the political agenda the question of declaring Buddhism the state religion. 2 In the general election of 1970, Mrs. Bandaranaike, who had entered politics as prime minister a decade earlier following the untimely death of her husband, swept to victory. On assuming the prime ministership for the second time she immediately set about drafting the Republican Constitution. On May 22, 1972, the Constituent Assembly adopted and enacted the Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka. This new constitution comprises 134 sections in 16 chapters, of which chapter II, entitled “Buddhism,” sets forth Buddhism’s position and its relationship to the statejn terms that accord it the privileges of a state religion. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster Buddhism while assuring to all religions the rights granted by section 18 (1) (d).3 In Burma, on the other hand, successive governments have evinced complex changes in attitude toward Buddhism since independence. The Constitution of the Union ofBurma promulgated on September 24, 1947, states in Section 21 (1): “the state recognizes the special position of Buddhism as the faith professed by the great majority of the citizens of the Union.” 4 During the drafting and deliberation stages, Buddhist pressure groups lobbied strongly for Buddhism’s adoption as the state religion.

36

The Structure of a State Religion

That their demands were rejected and the constitution recognized only “the special position of Buddhism” is attributed to Prime Minister Aung San’s concern about the reaction of the non-Buddhist ethnic minorities who comprised 15 percent of the Union’s population. Following Aung San’s assassination, his successor, U Nu, adopted a policy ofstate patronage ofBuddhism. Beginning in 1950, his government enacted a series of laws—The Buddha Sasana Council Act of 1950, The Ecclesiastical Courts Act of 1951, and the Pali Education Board Act of 1952 —which were intended to rebuild the Sangha’s organization after the long and debilitating period of foreign rule. And from May 1954 to May 1956, the government intensified its efforts to revitalize the Buddhist ethos of the Burmese, by sponsoring the Sixth Great Buddhist Council. The culmination of this state patronage policy came in August 1961, when, acceding to the long-standing demand of the various Buddhist groups, U Nu established Buddhism as the state religion through the enforcement of the third amendment to the constitution. Section 21 (1) was amended to read: “Buddhism being the religion professed by the great majority of the citizens of the Union shall be the state religion [naingandaw batha].” At the same time, U Nu promulgated a State Religion Promotion Act through which he intended to substantiate his policy. 5 While satisfying the Burmese Buddhists, of course, the establishment of Buddhism as state religion heightened the discontent of the nonBuddhist ethnic minorities, and within a month a fourth amendment was passed granting freedom of education and equal protection to all religions. This move to appease the non-Buddhists, however, infuriated Buddhist leaders, who regarded it as an outrage tantamount to divesting of all significance Buddhism’s hard-gained position as the state religion. The political unrest arising from the confrontation between Buddhists and non-Buddhists over the state religion issue and from the demands of minority races for greater autonomy was aggravated by internecine strife that split the ruling party. As a result, on March.2, 1962, Ne Win seized power by military coup d’etat.6 Advocate of a secular state, Ne Win adopted a neutral stance toward Buddhism, based on his belief in the separation of religion and politics, and repealed all of the measures U Nu had taken to promote Buddhism. The 1947 constitution, though not legally abrogated, was “shelved” and the state religion amendment of section 21 (1) became a dead letter. Ne Win then set about establishing a new constitution, and in a popular referendum conducted between December 15 and December 31, 1973, the draft was adopted. The new Constitution of the Socialist Republic of the Union ofBurma contains, of course, no provision for a state religion. Section 156 (1) guarantees freedom of faith, while section 156

The Sangha and the State

37

(3) stipulates that religious faith should be a private matter, and forbids the abuse of religion for political purposes. 7 Constitutional treatment of Buddhism in the three kingdoms of Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand shows subtle differences. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia promulgated on May 6, 1947, makes Buddhism the state religion. Section 8. Freedom of conscience is absolute. Freedom of faith is likewise absolute. Save those restrictions necessary to prevent the disruption of public order, no restrictions whatsoever shall be placed on these freedoms. Buddhism shall be the State religion. 8 Following the removal of Sihanouk as head of state on March 18, 1970 and the establishment of the Lon Nol government, Cambodia’s monarchy was abolished and a republic was declared on October 9, 1970. Drafting of the republican constitution had begun as early as April of that year, but disagreement between the government and the national assembly delayed its enforcement for two years, until May 12, 1972, after adoption of the draft by popular referendum on April 30. The new Constitution of the Khmer Republic comprised a total of 121 sections in eleven chapters, plus a final clause. Section 2 of the first chapter, “Basic Provisions,” followed the old constitution in making Buddhism “la religion del’Etat.” 9 Like these Cambodian constitutions, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Laos, promulgated on May 11, 1947, established Buddhism as the state religion, though in tone it was slightly different. The relevant passage is section 7: “Buddhism is the State religion [satsana khong pathet],and the King is its supreme defender [akkhasasanupatham].” 1 0 The terminology used satsana., “the religion,” khong pathet, “of the state,” corresponds literally with the French “la religion de I’Etat” used in both the Cambodian constitutions.11 The same is true of the Burmese term naingandaw, “state,” batha, “religion.” If we accept the definition of state religion as “a religion established by law as the only official religion of a state,” then “de I’Etat,”“khong pathet, ” and “naingandaw” are clearly expressions of the state’s agency in establishment of the state religion in Cambodia, Laos, and Burma.1 2 I make this point here since this distinguishes the Thai constitutional provisions on Buddhism, which I shall discuss shortly, from those of the other Southeast Asian countries. To return to the Laotian constitution, the phrase just rendered “the King is its supreme defender, ” phramahakasat song pen akkhasasanupatham,in fact allows of two translations: “the King is Buddhism’s supreme de-

38

The Structure of a State Religion

fender,” and “the King is religion’s supreme defender,” depending on whether satsana, the second element of akkhasasanupatham— a coinage from the Pali aggasasanupatthambha (“supreme-religion-support”) — is restricted to Buddhism or taken to mean religion in general. My adoption here of the former interpretation is based on the official French text of the constitution, which reads: “le roi en est le Haut Protecteur.” With the sole exception of the new Burmese constitution, then, the constitutions of these Theravadin nations expressly designate Buddhism as the state religion, or, in the case of Sri Lanka, accord it “the foremost place.” I t is astonishing, therefore, that Thailand, with its uninterrupted history of monarchic protection of Buddhism, its well-organized Sangha, and its reputation at home and abroad as the country where Theravada Buddhism has most prospered, has no such constitutional provision for Buddhism. Of course) Thai constitutional history, which begins with the Constitutional Revolution of 1932, has witnessed a bewildering succession of amendments and abrogations. Nevertheless, provisions for Buddhism have remained virtually unaltered, in contrast with the changes in the treatment of Buddhism that accompanied constitutional changes in Sri Lanka and Burma. A search of the Thai constitutions for provisions on Buddhism uncovers only the following: “the King shall profess the Buddhist faith (phramahaksat tong song pen phutthamamaka) and is the Supreme Defender of religion (lae song pen akkharasasanupathamphok) Since 1932, Thailand has had six constitutions (ratthathammanun) , those of 1932, 1946, 1947, 1949, 1952, and 1968, as well as three interim constitutions (thammanunkanpokkhrong) , promulgated in 1932, 1959, and 1972. Though absent in the interim constitutions, the cited clause on Buddhism does appear in all six constitutions, either in exactly the form cited (1932, 1946, and 1952), or without the word tong, “shall” (1947, 1949, and 1968), stating merely “The king professes the Buddhist faith.” 13 Since Thai legal scholars make no reference to this difference in their constitutional commentaries, however, they apparently regard these clauses as virtually identical.1 4 Why should the king profess the Buddhist faith? On this point, Thai commentators concur in arguing that because Thailand is a “Buddhist State” (muang phutthasatsana] and the majority of Thais are Buddhists, and because Buddhism has from antiquity been “the religion of the (Thai) nation” (satsana pracham chat), the King, as head of state of Thailand, should be a Buddhist.15 Our translation of the phrase satsana pracham chat, “the religion of the nation,” can be amplified in accordance with the meaning of the word pracham to: “the religion inherent in the concept of the Thai nation.” That

The Sangha and the State

39

is to say, the Thais believe themselves to be born Buddhists, that the words Thai and Buddhist are synonymous. Consequently, it would be considered a violation of ancient custom for the king, the head of the Thai nation, not to be a Buddhist; his profession of Buddhism is prescribed by tradition. The phrase akkhara sasanupathamphok, a hybrid of the Sanskrit agra and the Pali sasana upatthambhaka,can be considered equivalent to the Lao akkhasasanupatham and similarly open to alternative translations, “the protector of Buddhism” or ’’the protector of religion,” depending on the interpretation placed upon sasana (satsana). The earliest documentary use of this phrase seems to have been in the Sangha regulation of 1 782 (Kot Phrasong 7), which appears in the Laws of the Three Seals. 1 6 In this case, of course, satsana was synonymous with Buddhism. It was probably not until late 1932, during the drafting of Siam’s first permanent constitution, that the need arose to extend the meaning of satsana to religion in general. Commenting on the draft in November of that year, Prince Wanwaithayakon commended the addition of the note that “the King grants protection to all religions professed by the Siamese people,” but pointed out that the English translation “Defender of the Faith” inserted in the text was inapt since it restricted satsana to phraphutthasatsana, “Buddhism,” and that the generalized expression “Upholder of Religion” would be preferable. 1 7 That the Thai king is a Buddhist like the vast majority of his subjects, and that as the supreme defender of Buddhism he constantly strives for its prosperity, is fundamental to' traditional Thai values. And the constitutional provision cited earlier is no more than the legal expression of these traditional views of the kingship and Buddhism. In this light, the semantic expansion of satsana is probably best understood as an accommodation of the traditional values to the context of Western, European democracy.1 8 As we have seen, Buddhism is the state religion in Laos and Cambodia, and was so in Burma, for a period after World War I I . That these countries, on gaining independence after the war, should write into their constitutions provisions making Buddhism the state religion can be considered an attempt to provide a basis for confirmation of national identity by reaffirming traditional values. 1 9 Thailand, on the other hand, unlike those Southeast Asian nations whose traditional values were threatened with destruction by the colonial powers, has not experienced a break with its cultural past.2 0 As many as 94 percent of Thai citizens are Buddhists, while the non-Buddhists are either, like the Muslims of the South, localized in the provinces'and have little direct influence on the central political process, or, like the culturally

40

The Structure of a State Religion

inferior hill tribes, of limited numbers.2 1 That the Thai constitutions lack provisions expressly making Buddhism the state religion is probably because, no such need has ever been felt. Buddhism is already so “inherent” in Thai nationality that it probably never occurs to the average Thai that he could be anything but Buddhist. It is because Thai Buddhism has just such a history and nature that I have chosen it as raw material for this analysis of the structure of a “state religion.” Thai Buddhism represents the true form of “state religion,” the essence of which should be elucided by analysis of Thai Buddhism. THE SANGHA, THE KING, AND THE DHAMMA Legend tells that Buddhist monastic life began when Sudatta, a wealthy citizen of Savatthi, the capital of Kosala, purchased a garden from Prince Jeta, built a monastery there, and donated it to the Buddha and his followers.22 As we saw in the last chapter, the early Buddhist monks left home to lead eremitic lives in mountain caves, in forests or under trees, and in time some built rough hermitages that sufficed to keep out the elements. Later, however, when it was argued that religious training did not necessitate enduring such inconveniences, monks gradually took up residence in settlements. Once corporate religious life had reached a certain stage of development, the donation of a monastery to the Sangha came to be acknowledged as the ultimate act of almsgiving. The scriptures describe how wealthy laymen like Sudatta willingly made such donations. And with these monasteries as its basis, the Buddhist Order expanded.2 3 The transition from homelessness to monastic residence was undoubtedly important in the development ofBuddhism. Ultimately, however, monks were still “homeless.” Inasmuch as there was no change in the essence of “going forth,” the abandoning of economic activity and the maintenance of a lifestyle of dependence on others, cenobitism can be regarded as having heightened the Sangha’s dependence on the secular powers. And the expansion of the Sangha must have raised its dependence even further. Unlike in ancient India, the most powerful supporter of the Sangha in the industrially and commercially under-developed countries of Southeast Asia and Ceylon was the king. The Sinhalese king Devanampiya Tissa, on receiving Mahinda’s mission from King Asoka, built the Tissarama monastery in the Mahamegha garden and donated it to the elder as a base for his activities.2 4 When the Mahavihara school of Theravada Buddhism that grew from this origin under royal protection was propagated to the various countries of continental Southeast Asia almost a millennium later, it prospered there too by winning royal support.

The Sangha and the State

41

The kings of Southeast Asia afforded Buddhism various forms of support. Some, like Devanampiya Tissa, built and donated monasteries. In Thailand the oldest such example is probably that of the Sukhothai king Rama Khamhaeng, who built the Arannika monastery in a garden beyond the Sukhothai city wall for a prominent elder whom he had invited from Nakhon Si Thammarat. 2 5 Other celebrated examples are, in the Ayutthaya period, the building of Wat Phrasiratanamahathat by Boromaracha I,2 6 and in the Bangkok period, the energetic construction and restoration of monasteries under Rama I I I .2 7 Although the monasteries the kings built are called wat luang (royal monasteries), not all royal monasteries were built on the king’s personal orders. In Rama Ill’s reign, more than thirty monasteries were designated wat luang, but most of them were built or restored by princes or powerful nobles and then donated to the king (wat chao lae wat khunnang sang thawai pen wat luang).2 8 The king then normally granted them subventions.29 Not only did Thai kings build and donate monasteries to the Sangha as a basis for its activities, they also gave land and a workforce of cultivators to produce the monks’ food. According to the seventeenthcentury “Phatthalung Documents,” paddy land and upland was donated from the royal demesne and became monastery land (thorantsong) , and the monastery servants (khaphra yomsong) who cultivated it were exempted from all official obligations and served the monks exclusively.3 0 In this instance, the land and servants were employed not for the benefit of a single monastery but for several monasteries belonging to a particular sect, the Pa Keo sect, and lying within a particular area, Phatthalung and its dependencies. Besides the construction of monasteries and the endowment of lands and servants guaranteeing the monks a basic livelihood, every year on the occasion of the Kathina ceremonies {that kathin) at the end of the rainy season, Thai kings made ceremonial presentations to the Sangha of Kathina robes together with other goods and money. This custom, still practiced, appears to have been well established in thirteenth-century Sukhothai, since the oldest of Thai inscriptions, the Rama Khamhaeng inscription, describes it in detail.3 1 Nor did royal patronage of Buddhism end with such direct endowments as those just described. Because of the nature of the Theravada, the king’s religious acts had a wide and powerful influence on the populace beyond the palace walls. Exemplary acts of reverence by the king encouraged the people to do their part in support of the Sangha, and thus helped to broaden its base of support. Unlike those forms of Buddhism that served the state on a level divorced from the masses, such as Japanese Buddhism of the Ritsuryo

The Structure of a State Religion

42

King

Sangha Defender of Buddhism

Fig. 8. Kingship and the Sangha

in Thailand

period (mid-seventh to tenth centuries) , whose rituals were expected to contribute to the peace and security of the state, or Khmer Buddhism in the reign of Jayavarman VII, which was used as a means to subdue the masses by presenting an ideology of the king as a bodhisatta, an incipient Buddha, Theravada Buddhism was characterized by the common religious practices performed by the king and his subjects. I t was a “democratic religion, which appealed directly to the people, without the intervention of an elaborate, expensive and burdensome hierarchy of priests and deities.” 3 2 The act of reverence par excellence by the king, and one equally open to the people, was to become a monk. Sukhothai stone-pillar inscriptions record just such an act by Mahathammaracha I . According to his epigraphy, the king, having made a great offering of gifts (mahadana] to the monkhood at the end of the rainy-season retreat of 136 1, was ordained first as a novice, then as a monk. 3 3 I n 1956, the present Thai king, Rama IX, spent two weeks as a monk at Wat Bowonniwet. During this time he wore the yellow robe of his fellow monks and in the mornings went begging. This was a religious act in accordance with ancient custom, a custom likewise observed by ordinary Thais and not merely a royal prerogative. I n the previous section, I pointed out that, although in the context of the constitutions, the word akkharasasanupathamphok should be translated as “the supreme defender of religion,” it traditionally meant simply that the king was the supreme defender of Buddhism. The first element of this word derives from the Sanskrit aggra, a prefix meaning “supreme, highest, foremos't or preeminent.” Interpreted in the light of its etymology, akkhrasasanupathamphok can thus be said to subsume the Thai concept of the king as one who holds supreme rank among layman, who is the foremost lay believer, setting an example of reverence and prayer for the prosperity of Buddhism, and who is the preeminent protector of Buddhism. This relationship between the kingship and the Sangha is depicted in Figure 8, in which the arrow represents the giving of support. While hitherto we have used the words “Buddhism” and “the Sangha” often without distinction, they are not synonymous, since the

43

The Sangha and the State

Dhamma

Sangha

King Defender of Buddhism

Fig. 9. Kingship, the Sangha, and the Dhamma latter is but one component of the former. Buddhism’s constitution is expressed in the creed of the Three Gems: the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. The Buddha is Gotama Siddhattha, the founder of Buddhism. The Dhamma is the body of the his teachings. And the Sangha is the body of monks who follow those teachings. As objects of faith, the Three Gems ideally stand on a par; socially, however, they do not. More than two and a half millenia have passed since the historical Buddha left this world. Believers can only envisage him through Buddha images, and these take a diversity of forms. The Dhamma survives, passed down as the Pali Tipitaka (Thai, Traipidok) , but it has been the Sangha alone that has maintained this transmission. Our examination in the previous chapter of the Sangha’s function as maintainer of the Dhamma showed that should the Sangha decline, the Dhamma will also be lost. We saw that when the Ceylonese Sangha, considered the source of the Buddha’s teachings since the time of Mahinda, was disrupted by the foreign powers that invaded Ceylon, a pure Sangha tradition was reintroduced from Siam and other countries with the aim of restoring the Dhamma. Thus Theravada Buddhism can be defined as a religion realized and transmitted by the Sangha. And in considering Buddhism as a social fact, the Sangha assumes primary importance. Figure 9 is an amendment of Figure 8 in the light of this point, representing the following tripartite relationship between the king, the

44

The Structure of a State Religion

Sangha, and the Dhamma, The Dhamma taught by the Buddha does not exist independently but is maintained and transmitted by the Sangha. In turn, the Sangha, being a group of homeless monks, can only exist with outside support. By supporting the Sangha, the king as the “defender of Buddhism” thus contributes indirectly to the maintenance of the Dhamma. In the following section we shall see more clearly the relationship between the king and the Dhamma, by examining the concept of Dhammaraja. PHRA THAMMASAT AND DHAMMARAJA Ancient Siamese law has long been considered to belong to the Hindu system of law, a view which is supported by the obvious derivation of the title of the most fundamental of ancient Siamese codes, the Phra Thammasat,from “dharmashastra.” Much was done to substantiate this view by Masao Tokichi, an adviser to the Siamese Ministry of Justice. In a study published in 1905, he demonstrated a correspondence between ancient Siamese law and the Laws of Manu by comparing provisions in five areas, including laws on slavery, which provide for seven classes of slaves, and laws on debts, which prohibit interest from exceding capital.3 4 However, with progress in the comparative study of the ancient laws of continental Southeast Asian Theravadin countries and more critical examination of the texts of the ancient Siamese codes compiled in the Laws of the Three Seals, numerous discrepancies in detail were discovered between the Laws of the Three Seals and the dharmashastras. In particular, the abundance ofBuddhist expressions in the Phra Thammasat that are absent in the dharmashastras led scholars to search for a third legal code intervening between them. In 1937, the French historian of jurisprudence Robert Lingat adduced arguments that the immediate origin of the Phra Thammasat was not the dharmashastras but the Dhammasattham, a compilation of Buddhistic revisions of these laws made by the Mons of Lower Burma.3 5 Today this eminent French scholar’s view is widely accepted in academic circles. The existing Thai-language Phra Thammasat prefaces the Laws of the Three Seals, which is said to have been compiled in 1805 by edict of Rama I (1782-1809).3 6 Its introduction notes that the Dhammasattham code formerly expounded by the hermit Phra Manosan Rusi in the Magada language (Pali) had been accepted into the Mon state of Raman in the Mon tongue, but since this was not widely understood in Siam it had been translated into Thai. 37 The Phra Thammasat is arranged in two parts, the first (chapters 1-4 in Lingat’s edition) dealing with the myth of world creation, the second (chapters 5-11) with matters pertaining to the courts, for example,

The Sangha and the State

45

“Qualities ofJudges” and “Causes of Litigation.” In particular, the first part is strongly influenced by Buddhist scripture. After paying homage to the Three Gems, it goes on to describe the genesis of the world in a manner reminiscent of the Agganna Suttanta of the Dlgha Nikaya, then relates the story of Phrachao Maha Sommutirat (Pali, Mahasammata), possessor of the seven treasures and ruler of the four quarters, and of his minister Manosan. In later years, Manbsan foresook the world and, having acquired superhuman powers through the practice of spiritual exercises, journeyed to Mount Ghakrawan at the edge of the world where, inscribed on the hillside in mammoth script, he found the Phra Thammasat laws. These he committed to memory and on returning wrote them down for the king, Maha Sommutirat.3 8 The Phra Thammasat enjoins the king to follow the ratchatham (Pali, rajadhamma) , the “ten rules of kingship,” and to observe the five precepts constantly and the eight precepts on Buddhist holy days. In addition he should abide by the “four laws” requiring him: to have mercy for all living things; never to neglect his study of the Phra Thammasat', to judge the right or wrong of service or disservice to the king and encourage those who act correctly; and to enrich the royal house and strive for its prosperity by just means.3 9 The ten rules of kingship are virtues a king should ideally practice. Kings who followed this code are frequently referred to in the Jdtaka as having “ruled in righteousness” (dhammena rajjan kareti), that is, in accordance with the Dhamma (dhammena).40 And “when a king is righteous, those who surround him are righteous also.” 41 The ten virtues are cited in the Nandiyamiga Jdtaka as alms-giving (dana), morality (sila), liberality (pariccaga), straightness (ajjava), gentleness (maddava), selfrestriction (tapo), non-anger (akkodha), non-hurtfulness (avihimsa), forbearance (khanti), and non-opposition (avirodhana) 4 2 The epithet “Ruler by the Dhamma” has frequently been applied to Thai monarchs. The Sukhothai inscriptions, for example, contain such instances as Thammarat and Thammaracha (dhammaraja),and Maha Thammarat and Maha Thammaracha (mahadhammaraja),all of which mean “Ruler by the Dhamma” or “Righteous King.” 4 3 The Cakkavatti Sihanada Suttanta of the Dlgha Nikaya, which discusses the chakravartin (Pali, cakkavattin) , or universal monarch, the Buddhist ideal of kingship, is thought to have influenced greatly the authors of the Dhammasattham and the Phra Thammasat 44 Particularly important is the following passage, the reply to a king’s question about the duty of the chakravartin. This, dear son, that thou, leaning on the Norm [the Law of truth and righteousness], honouring, respecting and revering it,

46

The Structure of a State Religion

doing homage to it, hallowing it, being thyself a Norm-banner, a Norm-signal, having the Norm as thy master, shouldst provide the right watch, ward and protection for thine own folk. 4 5 A king who maintains this standard of conduct is an ideal king, a dhammaraja or Righteous Monarch, and this legitimates his sovereignty. 46 Conversely, the king who contravenes Dhamma, who commits athamma (Pali, adhamma), “injustice” or “unrighteousness,” forfeits his legitimacy and justifies the rejection of his sovereignty. Mentally disturbed in his later years, King Taksin is portrayed as having committed such athamma as punishing his subjects without cause. The Royal Chronicle justifies the actions of those who wished to punish the “unrighteous king” in the following terms. What shall you do when the king commits such dishonesty and injustice (asat athamma)? The ministers responded thus to the question. By the very fact that he has acted against the Dhamma, (though he is King) he is the enemy of the kingdom, and this will not be allowed to go unheeded. I t is thus meet that he should be punished.47 This one paragraph is noteworthy as concrete evidence that the legitimacy of rule in Thailand traditionally is derived from the Buddhist “Law,” the Dhamma. We saw in the last section that, by protecting the Sangha, the king contributes to the maintenance of the Dhamma. This section has shown that the Dhamma is the legitimating principle of kingship. By introducing this thesis into Figure 9, we obtain Figure 10, which depicts the relationship between the king, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, and which shows conceptually the basic structure of the traditional polity and religion in a “Buddhist State.” Legitimated by the Dhamma, the king secures the following of the people. The Dhamma, on the other hand, must be transmitted by a pure Sangha; the Dhamma’s survival is guaranteed by the purity of the Sangha. And the purity of the Sangha is manifested in the correct observance of the precepts by its members. Laity then voluntarily fulfills its duty to support this Vinaya-observing community. Historically, the support lent by the king, the “supreme defender of Buddhism,” liberated the monks from the burdens of daily subsistence and allowed them to sustain an unworldly lifestyle in accordance with the precepts. The “Buddhist State,” defined as a state structured such that the king supports the Sangha, the Sangha transmits the Dhamma, and the Dhamma legitimates the monarchy, can be considered to be typified by Thailand.

47

The Sangha and the State

Dhamma

Sangha

King Defender of-Buddhism

Fig. 10. Basic Structure of the Traditional Polity and Religion in a “Buddhist State” THE BUDDHIST ECCLESIA AND ITS STRUCTURE The distinction between church and sect set up by Troeltsch in his classic study of Christianity is well known.4 8 Although these concepts were formulated to dichotomize the religious organizations of sixteenthcentury Europe on the basis of their empirical characteristics, they have nevertheless' remained fundamental to the typologies of religious organizations in general that were subsequently developed, beginning in the 1920s, mainly by American sociologists and theologians. Since Troeltsch, the church-sect dichotomy has evolved in two broad directions, namely, typological elaboration, as attempted by H. Richard Niebuhr, Howard Becker, J. Milton Yinger, Werner Stark, and Roland Robertson, and the testing of the applicability of the typologies developed for Christianity to the organizations of other religions. 49 Following these precedents, we shall employ the concept of ecclesia found in these typologies in an attempt to gain further insight into the social structure of Thai Buddhism, which displays many of the features of an ecclesia.5 0 Becker’s concept of the ecclesia is one of a predominantly conservative body, not in open conflict with the secular aspects ofsocial life, and professedly universal in its aims. . . . Members are born into the ecclesia; they do not have to join it. It is

48

The Structure of a State Religion

therefore a social structure somewhat, although remotely, akin to the nation or the state, and is in no sense elective. Membership in an ecclesia is a necessary consequence of birth into a family, folk, or similar structure. The ecclesia naturally attaches a high importance to the means of grace which it administers, to the system of doctrine which it has formulated, and to the official administration of sacraments and teaching by official clergy. It is in a very real sense an educational institution which, when functioning properly, trains its youthful members to conformity in thought and practice. 5 1 In all but a few areas of Thailand, people are, both empirically and statistically speaking, “born into” Buddhism.5 2 On average, the kingdom contains one monastery per 4.6 square kilometers. Every village has a monastery, which has religious and secular roles intimately connected with the villagers’ lives. In Thailand, in particular, Buddhism plays a vital part in socialization, the basic process by which the individual internalizes the principal values and symbols of his society and masters how to express these values according to certain standards, thus becoming integrated into that society.5 3 Ip rural Thai society, at home, at school, and in the monastery, children become familiar from an early age with the Buddhist doctrine of karmic retribution, that “good deeds bear good fruit, bad deeds bear bad fruit;” they are taught that merit-making is a means of securing relative happiness in the cosmic hierarchy; and they learn the Buddhist ethics of compassion for all living things. They also learn how to perform such Buddhist actions as reciting sutta, joining hands in prayer and kneeling in worship, and how to manipulate Buddhist symbols, for example, how to behave toward and speak to monks. This learning is not sequestered as Buddhist, but forms an undifferentiated part of the general process of socialization. Buddhist values and symbols are not learned as a special category set apart from Thai values and symbols, and people normally never realize the distinction between the two. This is why Buddhism is said to be “inherent” in Thai nationality, and why Thai and Buddhist are often regarded as synonymous. Despite the introduction of the modern notion of freedom of faith, the denial of being Buddhist involves for the Thai considerable selfconsciousness and psychological strain. Just as, at the state level, the king must profess the Buddhist faith, so are his subjects bound by the norm of being Buddhist (Fig. 11). Buddhism, as we saw in the last chapter, embraces two clearly demarcated groups: the Sangha, or order of monks, and the “order” of laymen who support the Sangha. These two “orders,” however, are not

The Sangha and the State

49

King = Buddhist Thai = Buddhist

Normality of being Buddhist

Fig. 11. Unitary

Norm of Being Buddhist in Thailand

comparable in importance or character. First, it is primarily in the Sangha that Buddhist values are embodied; the lay “order” is merely the supporter (upatthambhaka) of the Sangha. Second, it is the Sangha that administers the “means ofgrace”; laity is the beneficiary. 5 4 Third, the lay “order” in most countries lacks the clear-cut organization implicit in the term “order.” In Thailand, the lay order is the collectivity of Buddhist laymen resident in more than twenty thousand circumscribed areas, each of which is centered on a monastery. It has no organization, being merely “a plurality of people who have a sense of solidarity deriving from commonly held values, and who have therefore acquired a sense of moral obligation to fulfill expected roles.” 5 5 For this reason, the relationship between the Sangha and laity is not an organizational link between the lay “order” and the monastic order, but the aggregate of the relationships between individual laymen and the Sangha. The salvation to which the vast majority of Thai Buddhists aspire is, as we saw in the last chapter, decidedly this-worldly: the salvation of relative happiness in this life and in future lives through merit-making with the Sangha as the field for merit; and salvation here and now through the magic performed by the Sangha as a sacred entity.5 6 Both of these forms of salvation require the Sangha’s mediation and , moreover, the Sangha must be pure, for only then is it a valid field for merit and an effective sacred entity. The Sangha’s purity is a matter not of the inner purity of its members but of external, formal unworldliness. The piety of the individual monk is not questioned; it is his formal display of unworldliness, as by observing the precepts, residing in a monastery, shaving his head, using Pali, and wearing the yellow robe, that is afforded primary importance. Having become a full member of the Sangha through the upasombot ordination, the monk is considered to share its qualities as a field for merit and a sacred entity. The validity of religious acts conducted by the

50

The Structure of a State Religion

Sangha derives, therefore, not ex opere operands but ex opere operato: it depends not on the worthiness of the individual monk but on the qualities which are recognized in the Sangha as an objective entity and which the monk is believed to share. In this respect, the collectivity of Thai Buddhists can be said to resemble the ecclesia typified by the Catholic Church. As in the Catholic Church “access to grace is completely rationalized and institutionalized.” 5 7 Held to be born with original sin, man can receive grace only through the sacraments that God established in the Church through Christ. And before he can enjoy grace through the other sacraments he must be baptised; 5 8 baptism is the “door to the sacraments” (sacramentorum ianua).5 9 Although Buddhism lacks baptismal rites, it does have a rite that performs a similar function. The Buddhist seeker of this-worldly salvation, either through meritmaking or magic, must hold three convictions: of the purity of the Sangha, whose relation to salvation we have already discussed; of the validity of the means of salvation open to him; and of the fact that he himself is a Buddhist. This third conviction is not a question of the substance of his faith, but is akin, for example, to the conviction the Catholic holds that he already “has been made a child of God and the Catholic Church.” In Catholicism, this conviction is probably supported by the “indelible characters” of the rites of baptism and confirmation, which are performed only once. In Buddhism, this conviction is maintained by the repeated ritual of “receiving the lay precepts” (arathand sin). The lay precepts are five or, in special cases, eight precepts which were originally laid down as behavioral norms for lay believers, and which in principle remain so to this day.6 0 At the Buddhist services they attend, in the monastery and in their homes, people always ask the monks for the “Three Refuges and the Five Precepts,” and this they receive by reciting the prescribed formula after the monks. This rite is repeated innumerable times during the layman’s religious life. Although, because the rite is conducted entirely in Pali and is therefore incomprehensible to most Thais, the receiving of the lay precepts is unlikely to prompt the layman to reflect on his own conduct, and, moreover, as the results of the village surveys cited earlier (Tables 1 and 2) indicate, the keeping of the precepts is not of prime concern as a religious act in Thailand, the fact is that people do recognize the chain of sounds beginning with “pdndtipdtd veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami” and ending with “ surdmerayamajjapamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami” as the lay precepts, and they know these are the behavioral norms for a good Buddhist. Through the Sangha’s giving of the lay precepts (hai sin) and

The Sangha and the State

51

Sangha laws

Unitary Sangha

“Extra ecclesiam nulla salus”

Fig. 12. Establishment

of the Thai zBuddhist Ecclesia

the layman’s receiving of them (rap sin) at every Buddhist service, the layman repeatedly confirms his membership in the “Buddhist ecclesia” and renews his conviction of salvation. For this reason, aside from their cultural contents, and the fact that baptism (and confirmation) leaves an “indelible character” while “asking for the lay precepts” is recommended to be repeated, these two rites can be regarded as functionally analogous. Since the Sukhothai era in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the Sangha has been strongly influenced by the monarchy. This is not so much because of the king’s special interest in the Sangha as a source of legitimacy, but rather because the Sangha itself requested the intervention of secular authority.6 1 Obliged to maintain its unworldliness, the Sangha actively sought the patronage of secular authority in the hope that it would thereby prosper. This attitude remains characteristic of today’s Thai Sangha. In earlier times, when secular authority held sway over a limited sphere, its intervention in the Sangha’s affairs was no more than partial. The king’s influence almost certainly extended no further than the monasteries in the capital and its vicinity. But early in the twentieth century this situation was transformed by the restructuring of the domestic administration and the establishment of a territorial state. The catalyst of the transformation was the Sangha Act of 1902, which had as its purpose the integration of all monasteries across the kingdom within a single administrative organization. For the monk, the enforcement of this law meant that, however high his rank might be, he could only be recognized as a monk if he submitted to the control of the united Sangha organization. For the layman, the consolidation of the Sangha meant it became impossible to seek salvation outside this organization: extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Herein is further importance evidence that the Thai Buddhist collectivity came to constitute an ecclesia (Fig. 12).

52

The Structure of a State Religion

Using the raw materials of Thai Buddhism, we have hitherto considered the Sangha’s relationships with society and the state, and attempted to elucidate the structure of Theravada Buddhism. In Part II we shall consider a variety of events in Thai history within the framework we have built in Part I .

NOTES 1.

Heinz Bechert, Buddhismus,Slaal und Gesellschaft in den Landern des Theravada-Buddhismus, vol. 1, Allgemeines und Ceylon (Frankfurt am Main u. Berlin: Alfred Metsner Verlag, 1966), p. 221. 2. Donald E. Smith, “The Sinhalese Buddhist Revolution,” in South Asian Politics and Religion,ed. Donald E. Smith (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1966), pp. 453-488. 3. Section 18 (1) (d) reads as follows: Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and the freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

4. 5. 6.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12. 13.

Sri Lanka, The Constitution of Sri Lanka (Ceylon) (Colombo: Government Publication Bureau, 1972). I am grateful to Yoshinori Imagawa of the Ministry ofForeign Affairs, Southwest Asia Division, for providing this text. Quoted in Donald E. Smith, Religion and Politics in Burma (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965), p. 231. For a fuller discussion of the state religion issue, see ibid., pp. 230-280. Zenno Ikuno, “U Nu to Bukkyoshakaishugi no seiritsu” (U Nu and the establishment of Buddhist socialism), in Tonan Ajia no nashonarizumu to Bukkyo (Southeast Asian nationalism and Buddhism), ed. Tamotsu Takahashi (Tokyo: Ajia Keizaikenkyusho. 1973), pp. 100-101. Smith, Religion and Politics in Burma, pp. 230—280. I am grateful to Hirayoshi Sakuma of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Second Southeast Asia Division, for information on the drafting of the new constitution. Based on the Japanese translation in Takahashi, ed., Tonan Ajia no nashonarizumu, pp. 252-253. Cambodia, Projet de Constitution soumis au referendum le 30 Avril 1972par le Gouvemement du Marechai Lon Plol (n.p., [1972]). The Lao text of the constitution and its official French translation were kindly provided by Yutaka Hirata of the Ministry ofForeign Affairs, First Southeast Asia Division. The official French text of the Laotion constitution similarly uses “Za religion de I’Etat.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary,s.v. “state religion.” Constitution of the Kingdom of Siam, B.E. 2475 (promulgated December 10, 1932), Section 4; Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, B.E. 2489 (promulgated May 9, 1946), Section 7; Constitution of the Kingdom of Siam (Provisional), B.E. 2490 (promulgated November 9, 1947), Section 4; Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, B.E. 2492 (promulgated March 3, 1949), Section 7; Constitution of the Kingdom ofThailand, B.E. 2475; Amended B.E. 2495 (promulgated March 8, 1952),

The Sangha and the State

14.

15. 16. 1 7. 18.

19. 20.

21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

27.

28. 29. 30.

31. 32. 33.

53

Section 5; and Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, B.E. 2511 (promulgated October 12, 1968, Section 6. For example, Duan Bunnag and Phairot Chaiyanam, Khamathibai kotmai ratthathammanun (Commentary on the constitutions), part 2 (Bangkok: Rongphim Nitisan, 1934), pj3. 47—48; Michai Ritchuphan, Khamathibai rattathammanun haeng ralchaandchak thai phuttasakkarat 2511 phrom dual tuabot khrop thuk matra (Commentary on the constitution of the kingdom of Thailand, B.E. 2511, together with the complete text) (Bangkok: Kasembannakit, 1968), pp. 20-21 Duan and Phairot, Khamathibai kotmai ratthathammamun, pp. 47-48; Michai, Kamathibai ratthathammamun, pp. 20—21. “Kot phrasong 1” [Sangha Law 1] , K. T.S.D. 4: 164. Wanwaithayakon Worawan, Momchao, Aphiprai rang ratthammanun (Deliberations on the draft constitution) (Bangkok: Bamrungnukunkit, 1932), pp. 28-29. In his commentary on the 1968 constitution, Michai notes that “not all Tais are Buddhists. If the king, who is a Buddhist, did not consider other religions he would be ignoring the minorities, and the minorities who profess a faith other than Buddhism would be unable to receive due assistance. In addition, the constitution (section 26) guarantees people freedom of faith. Thus the constitution provides that the king is also the defender of other religions.” Michai, Khamathibai ralthathammanun’ p. 21. Sri Lanka’s giving Buddhism “the foremost place” in 1972 was also of political significance. James N. Mosel, “Thai Administrative Behavior,” in Toward the Comparative Study of Public Administration,ed. William J. Siffin (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press), p. 278. On the relationship between the minority peoples and Buddhism, see chapter 6 herein. Nakamura, Genshi Bukkyo, p. 341; Hajime Nakamura, Gotama Budda (Gotama the Buddha) (Kyoto: Hozokan, 1959), pp. 155-159. Nakamura, Genshi Bukkyo, p. 341; idem, Gotama Budda, pp. 155—159. Dipavamsa13: 18—36. Inscription 1/II/27—33. Phraratchaphongsawadan chabap luang prasert (The royal chronicle, Luang Prasert version), Prachum phongsawadan (Collected chronicles), pt. 1 (Bangkok: Ongkankha khong khurusapha, 1963) p. 131. Thipphakorawong, Chaophraya, Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 3 (Royal chronicle of the third reign of the Bangkok dynasty), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1938), pp. 353-355; hereafter cited as P.P.R. 3. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid. The “Phatthalung Documents” are an important primary source from the midAyutthaya period, discovered at Wat Khien in the village of Kaeo Khuaeng, Phatthalung, in 1912 by Prince Damrong. The complete text, together with a translation into modern Thai, is available in Khanakammakan chat phim ekasan thang prawatisat, watthanatham lae borannakhadi, samnak nayokratthamontri (Commission for the Publication of Historical, Cultural and Archeological Documents, Office of the Prime Minister), Prachum phratamra boromarachuthit phua kanlapana samai ayutthaya phak 1 (Collected royal decrees establishing religious foundations in the Ayutthaya period, part 1) (Bangkok, 1967); hereafter cited as P.P.B.K. See Inscription 1/II/12-23. Lawrence P. Briggs, The Ancient Khmer Empire (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The .American Philosophical Society, 1951), p. 259. A. B. Griswold and Prasert na Nagara, “The Epigraphy of Mahadharamaraja I of

54

34. 35. 36. 37.

38. 39. 40.

41.. 42.

43.

44. 45. 46. 47. 48.

49.

50. 51. 52. 53. 54.

The Structure of a State Religion Sukhodaya: Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 11, Part I,” J.S.S. 61, pt. 1 (1973): 122-123. Tokichi Masao, “Researches into Indigenous Law of Siam as a Study of Comparative Jurisprudence,” J.S.S. 2 (1950): 14-18. Robert Lingat, L’influence indoue dans I’ancien droit siamois, Etudes de Sociologie et d’Ethnologie Juridiques, vol. 25 (Paris: Editions Domat-Montchrestien, 1937). On the Laws of the Three Seals, see Yoneo Ishii, “San’in hoten ni tsuite” (On the laws, of the Three Seals), S.E.A.S. 6, no. 4 (1969): 155-178. Phra Thammasat,in Robert Lingat, ed., Pramuan kotmdi ratchakan thz 1 chunlasakkarat 1166 phim tdm'chabap luang tra sam duang (Collected laws of the first reign, C.S. 1166 ( .I>. 1804-05), based on the royal edition of the Three Seals), vol. 1 (Bangkok, 1939), pp. 7-8. Ibid., pp. 8-14. Ibid., p. 14. See, for example, Jataka nos. 50 and 151.1 have referred to the Siam version. English translations are available in E. B. Cowell, ed., The Jataka or Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, 6 vols. (London: Luzac & Co., 1957). Jataka no. 468. The translation is from ibid., vol. 4, trans. W. H. D. Rouse, p. 109. Jatakattakhathdya pancamo bhago (Jataka commentary, part five) (Bangkok: Mahamakutarajavidyalaya, 1922), pp. 61-62. The English translations are from T.W. Rhys Davids and William Stede, eds., The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary (London: Luzac & Co., 1966). Yoneo Ishii, Osamu Akagi, and Noriko Endo, “A Glossarial Index of the Sukhothai Inscriptions,” S.W.A.S. Discussion Paper No. 53 (Kyoto: The Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, 1972). Dhani Nivat, Prince, “The Old Siamese Conception of the Monarchy,” J.S.S. 36, pt. 2 (1947): 91-106. Digha Jlikdya 26: 5. Translated into English in S.B.B. vol. 4, Dialogues of the Buddha, pt. 3, trans. T.W. and C.A.F. Rhys Davids, p. 62. Dhani, “Old Siamese Conception,” p. 95. P.P.H.L., pp. 437-438. Ernst Troeltsch, Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Gruppen (1923; reprint ed., Tubingen: Scientia Verlag Aalen, 1965), p. 967; idem, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, vol. 2, trans. Olive Wyon (New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1960), p. 993. H. Richard Niebuhr, The Social Sources of Denominalism,(1922; reprint ed., New York: World Publishing Co., 1957); Howard Becker, Systematic Sociology on the Basis of the Beziehungslehre and Gebildelehre of Leopold von Wiese (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1932); John Milton Yinger, Religion and the Struggle for Power, (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1946); Werner Stark, The Sociology of Religion, vols. 1-3 (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966-67); and Roland Robertson, The Sociological Interpretation of Religion (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1970). First used by Becker in his typology, the term “ecclesia” has been adopted to avoid the polysemy of Troeltsch’s “church.” See Becker, Systematic Sociology, p. 624. Becker, Systematic Sociology, pp. 624-625. The expression “born into” is used by Troeltsch; cf. “hineingeboren” in Troeltsch, Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen, p. 371. The main exceptions are Chinese residential areas in the cities, areas of Muslim concentration, and the hill tribe areas. George A. Theodorson and Achilles G. Theodorson, A Modem Dictionary of Sociology (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968), p. 194. , Although originally a “mutual-benefit association” formed for the benefit of its

The Sangha and the State

55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

55

members, the Sangha, in constituting a field for merit and a sacred entity, can be regarded also as a “service organization” in the scheme of Blau and Scott (Peter M. Blau and W. Richard Scott, Formal Organizations: A Comparative Approach (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966), pp. 51-54). Hiroaki Iwai, Shakai'gaku genron (Principles of sociology) (Tokyo: Kobundo, 1972), p. 72. A third form of salvation, pursued by a tiny minority, is , of course, the transcendence of the cycle of rebirths. Yozo Horigome, Seito to itan (Orthodoxy and heterodoxy) (Tokyo: Chuokoronsha, 1962), p. 42. Ibid. Codex Juris Canonic Canon 737 (1). Khantipalo Bhikkhu, What Is Buddhism (Bangkok: Social Science Association Press of Thailand, 1965), pp. 77-82. Evidence of this is provided by the Sukhothai inscriptions, as discussed in chapter 3 herein.

PART II A State Religion

in History

3 Buddhism

in Premodern

Siam

The early Buddhists were forbidden by precept to approach the king lest the contact should invite the interference of secular authority in the Order. Likening the king to a snake, the Buddha taught his followers to protect themselves by not incurring his anger, and this attitude they extended to state authority. But if interference could not be averted, submission was to be preferred to needless conflict with the king. This principle apparently reflected the Buddha’s idea of the monk’s way as an individual’s pursuit of perfection of character, unencumbered by mundane problems. 1 As with the Theravada Buddhism taken to Ceylon by Mahinda and thereafter propagated across Southeast Asia, however, it was through the conversion of the king and the following of his example by the masses that Buddhism came to be embraced by entire societies. Once Buddhism had become, in this sense, a “state religion,” then conflict with the king or the state threatened the very survival of the monastic order, since it was totally dependent on the material support ofthe laity. In most cases, the Sangha chose to hold to its formal unworldliness and submit to the king. This form of Buddhism, which I shall call “state Buddhism,” has two salient features. The first is the control of the monastic order by the king or the state, of which instances may be found as far back as Asoka, who had monks and nuns expelled from the Sangha when their internecine squabbling destroyed its harmony.2 The second is the aid and protection of the Sangha that naturally accompanies such monarchical control. In the support of the king, or the “Great Upasaka,” Buddhist monks found the firmest foundation for the sustenance and expansion of the Sangha. In Siam, “state Buddhism” can be said to have fully emerged only 59

60

A State Religion in History

after the establishment, early this century, of a state bureaucracy that was sophisticated enough to allow effective control of the Sangha and its members. The idea of “state Buddhism,” however, was not new, but had existed in rudimentary form for several centuries. In this chapter, I shall consider the premodern relationship between the monarchy and the Sangha as it appears in the inscriptions, chronicles, and other written sources of the Sukhothai, Ayutthaya, Thonburi, and early Ratanakosin periods. According to Burmese tradition, in 1180 Samanera Ghapata accompanied Mahathera Uttarajiva to Ceylon and was ordained at the Mahavihara. After ten years of study there, he returned to Pagan, where he founded an order called the Sihalasangha. Accompanying Chapata from the Mahavihara were four monks, including one Ananda, whose pupil Sariputta was subsequently sent to his native country in Lower Burma, where he settled and passed on the Mahavihara tradition to the Mons. Whether the Theravada Buddhism of the Mahavihara, known in Thai as Lankawong, spread quickly from the Mons to their Thai neighbors is uncertain. The earliest inscriptional evidence tells of the introduction of the “Arannika” or “Lankawong” into Sukhothai not from Lower Burma in the west, but from Nakhon Si Thammarat in the south. According to the celebrated inscription of King Rama Khamhaeng, dated 1291, the king built a monastery as a gift to the Mahathera Sangkharat, the sage who has studied the scriptures from beginning to end, who is wiser than any other monk in the kingdom, and who has come from Nakhon Si Thammarat. (1/II/28-32).3 Not until seventy years later is there clear evidence for contact with Lower Burma. Inscriptions 4 and 5, erected by King Lithai, a grandson of Rama Khamhaeng, tell how the king invited the Mahasami Sangkharacha to come to Sukhothai from Nakhon Phan (Martaban) and built for him residential huts (kuti) and a preaching hall (vihard). More concrete information on the royal support of the unproductive Sangha is provided by Inscription 93 of 1399, which records the founding of the Asokarama by a daughter of King Lithai. Having enshrined in a stupa two tiny Buddha relics that had come from Ceylon, she helped by placing fifty families of people, assigning them all as monastery servants, with Nai Chiang Si as overseer. She also gave land [worth] two hundred million [cowries] as an endowment . . . twenty-five cartloads of rice at the beginning of each year; she bought garden land of all sorts for five million [cowries] to provide curry as estimated for fifty almsbowls daily (93/1/16—21) .4

) Buddhism

in Premodem

Siam

61

Such royal support of the Sangha, of course, is just part of the larger relationship between the Buddha’s domain (phutthachak), which centers on the Sangha, and the royal domain (rdtcha-dndchak'). Although the Sangha is subsumed by the polity, its constant assertion of its moral superiority, that is, of the purity indexed by observance of the precepts, finds a counterforce in the laity’s reverence of its unworldliness. This interaction sustains a tension between the two domains. When the king formally acknowledges the superiority of the Buddha’s domain over his own, he demonstrates to his subjects the ideal relationship between the two domains. Numerous references to royal acts of piety are to be found in the inscriptions. For example: On the day of the new moon and the day of the full moon, when the white elephant named Ruchasi has been decked out with howdah and tassled head cloth, and always with gold on both tusks, King Rama Khamhaeng mounts him, rides away to the Arannika to pay homage to the Sangkharacha, and then returns (1/III/ 19—22) . 5 The act of recognition par excellence of the royal domain’s formal subordinacy to the Buddha’s domain is the king’s entry into the monkhood. One of the Sukhothai kings known from inscriptional evidence to have been ordained was Mahathammaracha I. Inscription 5 reads as follows: After the end of the retreat . . . on Wednesday . . . towards evening, one thousand nine hundred and five years . . . after our Lord the Buddha entered Nirvana, [the King] was ordained . . . Phraya Si Suriyawong Rama Mahathammarachathirat . . . made the resolve to observe the Ten Precepts as an ascetic . . . in the presence of the golden statue of the Buddha which was installed in the Royal Palace (5/III/22—33).6 Thereafter, presumably on the next day, the king proceeded on foot to the Mango Grove, where he was ordained as a Monk.7 Besides being the model layman, the Buddhist king is expected to rule in conformity with the Buddhist ideal of kingship, as expressed by the “ten rules” which we discussed in the preceding chapter. King Lithai’s title of Mahathammaracha, “Righteous Monarch,” signifies the basis of his rule in Buddhist ideology, and his practice of the Ten Kingly Virtues is expressly mentioned in his inscriptions (3/II/26 and 5/1/15). On the other side of the coin to such material and spiritual support, the king’s role of “defender of Buddhism” involves control of the Sangha. While it is difficult from the fragmentary inscriptional sources to draw a full picture of the development in Sukhothai of the hierarchical system

62

A State Religion in History

found in the Ayutthayan Sangha, nevertheless we can obtain a glimpse of the Sangha’s control by and subordination to secular authority. One indication of the monarchy’s regulation of the Sangha’s domain is the existence of samanasak, the titles of ecclesiastical rank conferred by the king, so called by analogy with the titles of court rank (bandasak). It appears that the authority of the monks in charge of the Sangha was confirmed by the king, as a sign of which he conferred on them titles and honorific names. Inscription 9 of 1406, for example, refers to the post of sangkhaparindyok, “complete master of the monkhood,” and identifies the incumbent by his ecclesiastical title and, probably, his conferred name: Phra Boromakhru Tilokatilok Tiratanasllakhantha WanawasI Thammakitti Sangkharacha Mahasawami Chao (9/III/27— 28) . The same inscription leaves no doubt that the monarchy controlled the appointment of monks to such posts. It records retrospectively how, in 1361, Mahathammaracha I put its author, the Sangkharacha Mahasawami, in charge of the ArannavasI in the province of Si Satchanalai and in 1406, Mahathammaracha III appointed him to the post of sangkhaparinayok (9/1/28-33 and III/24-32). Apart from such monk-officials, the monarchy also appointed secular officials to positions relating to the Sangha, as is clear from Inscription 49. The secular officials, called sangkhakdrl,and their chief, nai sangkhakari, were “charged with looking after relations between the Grown and the Sangha.” 8 Recording to the inscription (1/1—14), when, in 1412, a certain Nai In Sorasak of Sukhothai requested the king’s permission to donate some of his own land to the Sangha for a monastery to be built on it, the king ordered the nai sangkharkari to deal with the matter. The Laws of the Three Seals, compiled in 1805, contains a reference to the ancient custom by which, should it be reported to His Majesty the King that there are so many wicked monks that it is beyond [the Sangha’s] power to admonish them, . . . His Majesty, as defender of the realm, [shall] lend assistance to those Mahatheras who are obliged to defend the Buddhist faith.9 Evidence that such a relationship between the monarchy and the Sangha developed in Sukhothai after Lankawong had acquired the requisites of “state Buddhism” is provided by the previously mentioned Inscription 9, which records how the Sangharacha Mahasawami enlisted the king’s support in settling a dispute within the Sangha over an appointment he had made. In Sakarat 750 [a.d. 1388], in the ninth month, upon the death of Pathumuttaramahathera, I appointed Tanhamkaramahathera

Buddhism

in Premodem

Siam

63

with full privileges. Upon the death of Tanhamkaramahathera, I appointed Wessaphumahathera with full privileges. Then Saributmahathera and Phutthawongsamahathera made a complaint and brought a major law-suit (III/l— 7). Thereupon, the king, Mahathammaracha III, together with his mother, royal counsellors, and representatives of the three divisions of the monkhood “met together in the uposatha hall on Lake Chan, and quashed the suit brought by the two monks” (III/22— 23). Thereafter, a royal edict was issued appointing the Sangkharacha Mahasawami as sangkhaparinayok, and he “and all the monks, together with Mahathammarachathirat and Si Rachamata and the King’s great uncle, [confirmed] Mongkhonwilasamahathera (as Abbot) of the Kalyana Forest Monastery with full privileges and exclusive authority of every sort” (III/32-35).1 0 From Sukhothai, the center of Siamese political power shifted southward over the centuries, to Ayutthaya and thence to Thonburi and Bangkok. The rulers of these kingdoms, like their predecessors in Sukhothai, were expected to act as the “defender of religion” (akkhamahdsassanupathamphok) , or, more specifically, the defender of Buddhism, since “religion” (sdsana) traditionally meant none other than Buddhism (phutthasasana). The chronicles of the Ayutthayan and later dynasties contain abundant records of the well-established relationship between the monarchy and the Sangha. Kings built numerous royal monasteries in their capitals and in the provinces, to which they annually offered Kathina gifts. King Ramathibodi II (1491-1529), according to the Luang Prasert version of the Ayutthaya chronicle, ordered the casting of the Phra Si Sanphet, a gilt image of the Buddha standing 16 meters high, which was covered with gold of good quality weighing 286 catties. Eighteen years later, “in 880, the year of the tiger [a.d. 1518], the King dedicated the Buddha Statue of Phra SI Sanphet to commemorate his reign.” 11 Earlier, in 1465, King Boromatrailokanat, the father of Ramathibodi II, had followed the precedent of King Lithai of Sukhothai by entering the Sangha as a monk. The pious king was ordained and spent eight months of monastic life at Wat Ghulamani, which he had built in the northern capital of Phitsanulok. Prince Damrong believes that it was this warrior-administrator king who inaugurated the celebrated custom of sending royal children to monasteries for their education, a custom which has undoubtedly furthered the Buddhist socialization of royal children.1 2 One of the highlights of the monarchical promotion of Buddhism took place toward the end of the Ayutthaya period, when King

64

A Slate Religion in History

Boromakot dispatched a chapter of Buddhist monks to Sri Lanka at the request of the Sinhalese king Kirti Sri Rajasimha (1747-82). The Ayutthayan Buddhist mission, consisting of twenty-five monks headed by Upali Thera, proceeded to Kandy where they performed their first upasampada ceremony at a newly consecrated sima at Malvattu Vihara on the full-moon day of Asala 1753. 13 The fall of Ayutthaya in 1767 and the subsequent transfer of the Siamese capital southward, first to Thonburi and then to Bangkok, in no way affected the basic structure of the “Buddhist State.” Royal protection continued to be extended to the Sangha, and so was royal control. In 1788, six years after the foundation of the new dynasty, King Rama I (1782—1809) sponsored the ninth Buddhist Council. The king believed the Tipitaka to be the very root of the teachings of Buddha and, therefore, that the texts corrupted by two decades of wars and turmoil should be purified. Upon the completion of the five-month long revisional exercise, which culminated in the production of the well-known Golden Edition of the Tipitaka, the king lavishly disbursed royal funds to reward the participating scholars, both ecclesiastical and lay.1 4 King Rama I held that “Buddhism is nothing more or less than the precepts, . . . [and that] true Buddhism is realized where monks uphold the Pdtimokkha faithfully.” 1 5 He saw the Sangha as “the peerless field wherein the sowing of the seeds of faith and the giving of alms will yield abundant fruits [of merit].” 1 6 And in order that it should remain pure, the king would “contribute to the Sangha large amounts of the four necessities of life.” 1 7 In the Vinaya precepts the Sangha, of course, possessed the means autonomously to sustain its purity. Nevertheless, Rama I considered it his duty to give “instruction that in all provinces, both in and outside the capital, the Sangha should observe the precepts correctly.” 1 8 He found it necessary to remind the Sangha that “should a monk be seen to break the precepts, his fellow monks should admonish him, discipline him, and punish him according to the precepts.” 19 Such “instruction” and admonition from the king were on one level an expression of his wish for a pure Sangha. On another level, given the immense political authority behind the throne, they amounted to powerful coercion that carried the threat, on occasion carried out, of open intervention in the Sangha’s affairs. I t would be no exaggeration to say that all ten of Rama I’s Sangha Laws contained in the Laws of the Three Seals are taken up with the king’s lamentations and condemnation of the Sangha’s moral laxity and with admonitions and sanctions against delinquent monks. This monarchical interference, which, as a corollary, heightened monarchical con-

Buddhism

in Premodem

Siam

65

trol over the Sangha, was nevertheless seen by the king as an act of protection, the execution of his duty by the “defender of religion,” a “purification” (chamra) of the Sangha in order that it might be a valid field for merit for the people. As a concrete measure to tighten the supervision of monks, Rama I ordered every abbot to prepare a register of the monks and novices under his jurisdiction {banchi hangwao phikkhusamanen) 2 0 He also decreed that every monk should carry a certificate of identification showing his name, his monastery of residence, and his preceptor’s name, and bearing the official seals of the local phrarachakhana official and his abbot, and that no monk arriving from another district should be admitted to a monastery until his documents had been examined.2 1 The coercive side of monarchical protection of Buddhism is revealed perhaps most clearly in the case of the unfrocking of delinquent monks as a warning to others, which is described in Law 10, the last of Rama I’s Sangha Laws, promulgated on June 9, 1801. Having detailed the degenerate state of the Sangha, the decree continues: Therefore, one hundred and twenty-eight monks shall be expelled from the monkhood and, lest posterity should follow their example, all of the unfrocked monks shall have their arms tatooed as royal commoners [phrai luang\ and shall serve the government at heavy labor. 2 2 After the last Burmese invasion was successfully repelled in 18 1 0, two successive kings of Siam enjoyed relative peace and stability, being freed from endemic threat of the enemy on the western frontier, who began to be bothered by the encroaching British. During the reigns of Rama I I and III, a number of important monasteries were constructed in and around the capital and others were repaired. The material prosperity of the Sangha did not, however, always lead Siamese monks along the path to spiritual perfection. The Chronicles of the Second and the Third Reigns critically record three scandals that occurred in 1816, 1820, and 1842. 2 3 In the last instance, as many as five hundred corrupt monks, including some phrarachakhana, were unfrocked, accused of parajika or other offences. The entry into Siam of the Christian missionaries in the late 1820s seems to have generated no structural change in the Sangha-monarchy relationship, although it might have affected such members of the religious elite as Prince Mongkut, who, as will be discussed later, started the Sangha reform by establishing the Thammayut movement. I n the fifty years after his accession to the throne in 1851 as Rama IV, Siam underwent drastic changes in its administrative setting and eventually emerged

66

A Slate Religion in History

as a modern state in the family of nations. In the following chapters, we shall follow the process by which the traditional concept of “state Buddhism” was substantiated and, as a result, a national ecclesia emerged.

NOTES 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Hajime Nakamura, Shukyo to shakairinri (Religion and social ethics) (Tokyo: Iwanamishoten, 1959), pp. 123-128. Ibid., p. 243. The English translation is based on A. B. Griswold and Prasert na Nagara, “The Inscription of King Rama Gamhen ofSukhodaya (1292 a.d.): Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 9,” J.S.S. 59, pt. 2 (1971): 212. The English translation is based on idem, “The Asokarama Inscription of 1399 a.d.: Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 2,” J.S.S. 57, pt. 1 (1969): 45-46. The English translation is based on idem, “The Inscription of King Rama Gamhen,” pp. 214-215. The English translation is based on idem, “The Epigraphy of Mahadharmaraja I of Sukhodaya: Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 11 Part I,” J.S.S. 61, pt. 1 (1973): 159. Ibid., pp. 122-123. Idem, “A Declaration of Independence and Its Consequences: Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 1,” J.S.S. 56, pt. 2 (1968): 236, n. 57. “Kot Phrasong 8” [Sangha Law 8], K. T.S.D. 4: 207. The English translation is based on A. B. Griswold and Prasert na Nagara, “Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. 12: Inscription 9,” J.S.S. 62, pt. 2 (1974): 109-1 13. O. Frankfurter, “Events in Ayutthaya from Chulasakaraj 686—966,” J.S.S. 6, pt. 3 (1909): 8. P.P.H.L. 1:434. Kitsiri Malalgoda, Buddhism in Sinhalese Society,1750-1900 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, California : University of California Press, 1976), pp. 62—63. Thippakorawong, Chaophraya, ed., “Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 1” (Royal chronicle of the first reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty) (hereafter cited as P.P.R. 7), in Phraratchaphongsawadan hosamut haeng chat: ratchakan th: 1-2 (Royal Chronicles of the Bangkok Dynasty: First and Second Reigns) (Bangkok: Khlang Witthaya, 1962), pp. 168-170. “Kot phrasong 2,” K.T.S.D. 4: 170. Ibid. p. 171. Ibid. Ibid. “Kot phrasong 8,” K. T.S.D. 4: 207. “Kot phrasong 4,” K. T.S.D. 4: 185. “Kot phrasong 3,” K.T.S.D. 4: 179-181. “Kot phrasong 10,” K. T.S.D. 4:226. Robert Lingat, “Le double crise de 1’eglise bouddhique au Siam (1767-1851),” Cahiers d’Hisloire Mondiale 4no. 2 (1958): 417; Damrong Rachanuphap, Kromphraya, “Phraratchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin ratchakan thi 2” (Royal chronicle of the second reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty) (hereafter cited as P.P.R. 2), in Phraratchaphongsawadan chabap hosamut haeng chat: ratchakanthll—2, pp. 540-41; P.P.R. 3, pp. 266-267.

4 Establishment of the Buddhist Ecclesia in Thailand A British official in Burma in the late nineteenth century commented as follows on Buddhism there: The Burman cannot conceive of a religion without a Defender of the Faith— a king who appoints and rules the Buddhist hierarchy. The extinction of the monarchy left the nation, according to the people’s notions, without a religion. 1 These words grasp fairly accurately the essence of the Theravada Buddhism that spread through the kingdoms of continental Southeast Asia. In view of the fact that Burmese Buddhism survived sixty years of colonialism, it was an exaggeration to state that it had expired with the monarchy. But it is not hard to imagine that, deprived by the colonial power of the defender of the Faith under whose liberal patronage it had flourished, the religion would have been forced to undergo a major transformation. Herein lay one reason for the politicization of Burmese Buddhist monks, who, properly speaking, should have been pursuing an unworldly life.2 Like Burma, the Theravadin countries of Laos and Cambodia experienced half a century of colonial rule under France. During this difficult period for Southeast Asian Buddhism, only Thailand managed to preserve its political independence; only the Thai king’s authority as “defender of religion” remained intact; and only Thai Buddhism has come to the present without severance from its traditions. Nevertheless, Thai Buddhism has not remained unaltered. The modernization of Thailand that began in the latter half of the nineteenth century is seen by Riggs as a process by which the nominally “absolute” monarchy strengthened itself and, by acquiring the capacity to excercise its authority effectively, became more truly “absolute.” 3 In 67 J

68

A State Religion in History

fact, in a little more than the two decades spanning the turn of the century, Thailand succeeded in establishing a system of government that extended to every corner of the land.4 Essentially, this political reformation belonged to the secular domain (anachak) and did not concern the Sangha, which belonged strictly to the Buddha’s domain (phutthachak). Nevertheless, in the thousands of Buddhist monasteries spread across the kingdom, the tens of thousands of monks supported by the unitary principle of the Theravada were deeply involved in the lives of the people both materially and spiritually. Once secular authority had perceived the enormous'potentialities of this fact, it became the Sangha’s lot', whether or not it was agreeable, to be incorporated into the secular order. The process of incorporation was accelerated when Prince Wachirayan (Krommamun Wachirayanawarbrot), who was a younger half-brother of King Ghulalongkon, the instigator of the reformation, and who at the time was distinguishing himself in the monkhood, assumed the office of supreme patriarch (somdet phramahasamana) with full powers over the Sangha.5 On his return from a European tour at the end of 1897, King Ghulalongkon was for a second time struck by the urgent need for educational reform, and expressed his concern with renewed vigor. The effete Ministry of Public Instruction, however, was unable to meet the king’s expectations and raise the sluggish pace at which modern education was being extended across the nation. “As a last resort,” therefore, the king decided to place provincial education in the hands of the Sangha.6 Charged with this task by the king, Prince Wachirayan secured the - cooperation of his younger half-brother Prince Damrong, the Minister of the Interior, and together they decided first to reorganize the Sangha such that it could discharge its appointed secular responsibilities. Their plans were given legal status by the Act on the Administration of the. Sangha, R.S. 121 (Phraratchaban-yat laksana pokkhrbng khana song ratanakosinsok 121}, which was enacted in June 1902. 7 This law was seen as having “primarily an educational significance.” 8 Indeed, such was indicated in the preamble of a decree stipulating the regions to which the law would apply.9 But even though the law was prompted by the secular aim ofspreading education, it had profound consequences far outreaching the intentions of its drafters. The consequences of the 1902 Sangha Act were the development of a national Buddhist ecclesia in Thailand and the further use ofBuddhism to bolster the polity. 1 0 It resulted in a Sangha that was stable, orderly, and uniform; but it also robbed Thai Buddhism of much of its vitality. Even though, in 1941 and 1962, the law was twice revised, in essence it has

Establishment

of the Buddhist

Ecclesia in Thailand

69

remained unchanged; neither amendment was more than a modus vivendi set up to accommodate the original act to altered circumstances.1 1 I t is only by first understanding the nature of the Thai Sangha as the core of the national ecclesia that an insight can be gained into the problems surrounding today’s Sangha. In this chapter, we shall look at the formation of the Buddhist ecclesia in Thailand by examining the Sangha Act of 1902 and related legislative measures.

THE SANGHA ACT OF 1902 King Chulalongkon’s Sangha Act, enacted on June 16, 1902 and announced publicly in the government gazette ofjune 29, may be called the first modern law pertaining to the Sangha to be promulgated in Thailand. The Kot Phrasong discussed in the preceding chapter were, in fact, no more than a collection of ten decrees relating to the Sangha, which were announced as occasions arose between 1782 and 1801. The Sangha Act comprised a preamble and forty-five articles in eight chapters, which dealt with broadly the following: Chapter 1, the name and enforcement of the act (Articles 1—2); Chapter 2, the major administrative divisions of the Sangha (3—4); Chapter 3, monasteries (5—9); Chapter 4, abbots (10—19); Chapter 5, district divisions (20—29); Chapter 6, provincial divisions (30-34); provincial groupings (35—39); and Chapter 8, the authority of parties concerned (40-45). Article 4 divided the religious administration of the kingdom into four major divisions {khana yai). Three of these were territorial, those of the north (khana nua), the south {khana tai), and the center {khana klang), while the fourth, the khana thammayutika, encompassed nationwide the ■members and establishments of the Thammayut sect, which had formally been recognized as a separate sect-(m’Aai) in 1894. To each division, the king appointed two monks of mahathera rank. One was to act as patriarch or governor general {chao khana yai ) and the other his deputy {chao khana rong), with jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affairs over all monasteries and monks in the division. Together, the eight leaders of the four khana yai formed the Council of Elders {mahatherasamakhom), the highest body of the Thai Sangha under the Sangha Act. Article 5 provided for monasteries, of which it recognized three categories: royal monasteries {phra aram luang), built by the king himself or so designated by royal decree; commoner monasteries {aram rat), founded by private individuals; and monastic residences {samnak song), also founded by private individuals, but lacking a consecrated sima. A survey of the strength of the Sangha conducted in 1900 reported a total of 7,026 monasteries in the whole of Thailand, apart from the former vassal states of the north. 1 2 Of these, only 117 were royal monasteries, of which

A State Religion in History

70

76 were located in Bangkok and 41 in the provinces, while the remainder of more than 6,900 were commoner monasteries or monastic residences.1 3 Ultimate responsibility for each monastery was placed in the hands of an abbot (chao awat), who was assisted by a deputy abbot (rang chao awat). It was the abbot’s duty to remain abreast of developments in his monastery and to report in detail to a higher ecclesiastical authority (Article 13), while his powers included those to mediate in disputes in his monastery, to grant or refuse residence, and to punish offenders (Article 17)

‘

Article 15, which stipulated that every monk and novice must be enlisted in a monastery, is one of the most remarkable provisions contained in the act. On it is based the Ministry of Public Instruction’s communication of August 29, 1911, ordering that vagrant monks (phra chorachat) should be arrested and forced to disrobe.1 4 It meant that, after the promulgation of the act, those without monastic affiliation could no longer be recognized as monks. Complementing Article 15, and reinforcing monastic supervision of ecclesiastics, Article 13 required monks and novices wishing to transfer to another monastery or to journey away from their own monastery to carry a certificate of identity (nangsu sutthi) issued by their abbot. Equally as notable as Article 15 is Article 16, which explicitly denied monks exemption from the application of state law. In a decree issued to clarify the Sangha Act, Prince Wachirayan stated: Although monks are already subject to the law contained in the Vinaya, they must also subject themselves to the authority which derives from the specific and general law of the State. In addition, they should also follow local customs which are not contrary to these other two sets of laws. In sum, monks must obey three types of laws: the law of the land, the Vinaya, and custom.1 5 These words are highly significant, since by indicating that monks should be subject to the rule of state law, they assert the supremacy of the state over the Sangha. Between the- central Council of Elders and the individual monasteries was established a regional organization that, as shown in Figure 13, grouped the monasteries of each khanayai into khana monthon at the level of the monthon, or group of provinces, into khana muang at the provincial level, and khana khwaeng at the district level. The king appointed monks of mahathera rank as ecclesiastical governors of the khana monthon,and placed monks bearing the title mahathera or phrakhru, depending on the importance of the territory, at the head of the khana muang, whose territories approximated to the later provinces (changwat),and the khana khwaeng, which corresponded to the administrative districts {amphoe).

Establishment

of the Buddhist

71

Ecclesia in Thailand

Mahatherasamakhom (Council of Elders) [Thammayut Sect] khana thammayutika 1 1 khana monthon khana muang khana khwaeng 11 monastery monk

1 khana nua 11 khana monthon I 1 khana muang

[Mahanikai Sect] 1 khana tai khana klang 11 khana monthon khana monthon I 1 khana muang khana muang

khana khwaeng

khana khwaeng

monastery 1 1 monk

monastery

khana khwaeng 11 monastery

monk

monk

Fig. 13. The Sangha Organization Based on the Sangha Act of 1902 In this way the foundation was laid for an ecclesiastical administrative structure linking Bangkok with the approximately 80,000 monks scattered throughout the kingdom.1 6 Article 45 of the Sangha Act placed the Sangha organization in the jurisdiction of the Minister of Public Instruction (senabodi krasuang thammakan), whose duty it was, together with local authorities, to assist the Sangha governors at each level in the execution of their duties under the act. Through a proclamation in the government gazette ofJuly 19, 1902, the Sangha Act was brought into force in fourteen of Thailand’s seventeen monthon, the three excluded being outlying regions, and at the same time the appointments of the fourteen ecclesiastical monthon. governors were announced.1 7 THE MONARCHY AND THE SANGHA The notion of monarchical control of the Sangha did not begin with the Sangha Act of 1902. Indeed, as we have seen in the previous chapters, evidence of such control survives from the Sukhothai, Ayutthaya, and early Ratanakosin periods. And in 1859 King Mongkut promulgated a decree which presaged the 1902 act, laying down in eleven articles operational rules for the Sangha covering the unfrocking of delinquent monks, the obligation to register all monastic residents, and age limits for novices.1 8 Closer inspection of the evidence reveals, however, that only royal monasteries were concerned.1 9 It was also only in the royal monasteries that the king appointed monks to ecclesiastical office.2 0 Monarchical

72

A State Religion in History

control was thus apparently limited to a handful of privileged establishments. The royal monasteries, moreover, were all but two located in the inner provinces, the area around the capital stretching from Chainat to Phetburi.2 1 Far more numerous, and extending over the whole kingdom, the commoner monasteries remained completely unorganized, surviving independently through the support of the provincial notables and people. 2 2 The significance of the 1902 Sangha Act lies in its laying of foundations for a structure in which the authority of the king as “defender of religion” extended nationwide, and in which, through the ecclesiastical hierarchy, all monasteries, from the largest in the capital to the smallest in the outlying regions, and all monks and novices, were brought under the sway of that authority. The notion of placing all monasteries and monks in the kingdom under uniform monarchical control first found official expression in the Decree on the Organization qfi Prpvincial Education of 1898, which stated that the king would ‘‘extend his patronage to all monks.” 2 3 This decree set forth a plan for employing the Sangha organization to. introduce a uniform curriculum of primary education throughout the kingdom, and was the precursor of the Sangha Act promulgated four years later. The king’s promise to “extend his patronage to all monks” was couched in terms intended to signify to the Sangha that the assistance hitherto reserved for the handful of royal monasteries would be extended to every monastery.24 But it also held the implication that the monarchical control that was the other side of the coin would be similarly extended. Two months before the decree was promulgated, Prince Wachirayan had anticipated an adverse reaction from the Sangha when he warned: “Don’t let people think that the Sangha is under the control of the Ecclesiastical Department. This is very important.” 2 5 Regardless of the Sangha’s wishes in the matter, however, its organization proceeded steadily, driven by the pressing needs of the secular domain. THE STRUCTURE

OF MONARCHICAL CONTROL

Paralleling the extension of the provincial administrative system, a succession of internal regulations on Sangha administration was formulated, comprising laws and ordinances based on the 1902 Sangha Act, and the detailed regulations for their application, which, by the mid-1920s, produced a degree of centralization unprecendented' in the Thai Sangha. Here we shall examine three aspects of the Sangha administration thus established: the tightening of controls on admission to the Sangha; the organization of the Sangha bureaucracy; and the establishment of an “orthodox” doctrine.

Establishment

of the Buddhist

Ecclesia in Thailand

73

Control of Admission The objective of the monarchical protection of Buddhism is to maintain the Sangha’s purity or unworldliness. But for the king, his protection was a double-edged sword: for his subjects, a pure Sangha was an attractive sanctuary from the reach of his authority. Members of the Sangha were exempt, for example, from corvee obligations, and without controlling entry the king might have lost access to the human resources that supported his authority. Among the constant attempts made by Siamese kings to impose such controls are those of Mongkut, who banned all men between the ages of twenty-four and seventy from entering the monkhood, and forced novices who reached the age of twenty-four to choose between the higher ordination and return to secular life.2 6 A similar state measure postdating the Sangha Act is the provision made in 1913 prohibiting entry into the monkhood to certain categories of people, including “those who neglect the duties imposed by the government.” 2 7 Besides imposing these qualificational restrictions on aspirants to the monkhood, the monarchy also regulated admission by controlling the officiants of the ordination ceremony and the establishment of sima, the consecrated areas within which the ordination ceremony is legally valid. A candidate for the monkhood must first, according to the Vinaya, find a preceptor (upatcha),a monk empowered to ordain him.2 8 Since only monks so empowered can give ordination, the formulation of qualifications for ordainers provides an effective means of controlling admission to the Sangha. The Pali Vinaya sets forth a total of eighty-eight conditions a preceptor must meet, including ten years’ standing in the monkhood.2 9 In Thailand, the qualifications for preceptors have not always been clearly defined, but in 1913 a Decree on the Appointment of Preceptors was promulgated and detailed regulations for its application were laid down.3 0 According to this legislation, candidates for preceptor should be chosen from among “monks of ten years’ standing who are of good conduct and trusted by both monks and laymen, who possess sufficient knowledge to instruct monks, and who are also cognizant with the ordination procedure.” 31 Then, in the capital, candidates’ qualifications would be examined by the Minister of Public Instruction, and in the provinces by the provincial governor, and appointments as preceptor would be made at the discretion of these officials.3 2 For monks found to have given ordination without being formally qualified, punishments were laid down that included confinement and transfer. 33 A famous instance of the application of this regulation concerns Phra Siwichai (Khruba Siwichai), a monk of Li district in Lam-

74

A State Religion in History

phun province who is remembered as the builder of the long approach road to Wat Doi Suthep on the outskirts of Chiang Mai. In around 1915, he was held in confinement for about two months at monasteries in Lamphun and Chiang Mai, accused of having, among other things, performed ordinations without being qualified to do so.3 4 Phra Siwichai belonged to the so-called Yuan sect of North Thailand, which deviated somewhat from the central Siamese tradition. Since the Yuan sect was not recognized as having independent status within the national Sangha structure, his behavior was clearly in violation of the Sangha Act. This incident is notable in indicating that the development* of the Thai national ecclesia had reached a point where regional sectarianism could no longer be tolerated. Sima, a contraction of wisungkhamasima (yisungamasimd) , means literally “boundary,” though, as mentioned earlier, it is used in a much narrower context to mean the consecrated area within which ordination is valid.3 5 It also corresponds to the limits of the bot. Because the ordination ceremony is only recognized as valid when performed within the sima,control of the establishment ofszhza also provides an effective means of regulating admission to the Sangha. Under Article 9 of the 1902 Sangha Act, a commoner wishing to found a monastery first had to receive royal permission to build a monastic residence, an establishment without a sima,which consequently lacked the capacity to generate new monks. To raise its status to that of a commoner monastery with a sima, royal permission again had to be sought, either through the provincial governor or, in Bangkok, the Minister of Public Instruction. Obtaining permission to establish a sima, however, entailed meeting a number of strict conditions; simple application would not, Prince Wachirayan warned, secure permission by return of post. 3 6 Organization

of the Sangha Bureaucracy

A modern bureaucracy performs its duties on the basis of learnable general rules, and to this the newly organized national Sangha was no exception. It was provided with groups of regulations deriving from and supplementing the basic law of Sangha administration, the 1902 Sangha Act, which took the form of acts (phraratchabanyat)— for example, the Act concerning Punishment for the First Major Offence3 7 —decrees (prakat), ministerial orders (kot senabodi) , notifications (chaeng khwam) and other instruments enacted by the government , as well as patriarchal orders (phramahasamananat) , Sangha regulations (khb dnat khong khana song), and other more detailed provisions laid down by the Sangha itself. The officials who administered the Sangha through these laws and

Establishment

of the Buddhist

Ecclesia in Thailand

75

Table 3. Administrative Offices in the Sangha, under the Amendment of 1912 (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

Sakonsangkhaparinayok (President of the Council of Elders) Chaokhana yai (Governor of khanayai) Chaokhana rong (Deputy governor of khanayai) Chaokhana monthon (Governor of khana monthon) Rongchaokhana monthon (Deputy governor of khana monthon) Chaokhana muang (Governor of khana muang) Rongchaokhana muang (Deputy governor of khana muang) Chaokhana khwaeng (Governor of khana khwaeng) Rongchaokhana khwaeng (Deputy governor of khana khwaeng) Chao awat (Abbot) Rongchao awat (Deputy abbot)

Table 4. Educational Offices in the Sangha, under the Amendment of 1912 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Khanachan ek (Professor, first class) Khanachan tho (Professor, second class) Khanachan tri (Professor, third class) Achan yai (Instructor) Achan rong (Assistant instructor)

regulations were qualified monks proposed for office by a superior and appointed by the king. Their offices famnaeng) were arranged in a hierarchy of eleven grades, from president of the Council of Elders down to deputy abbot, and together they constituted the administrative section of the Sangha bureaucracy (Table 3). In addition, there was a hierarchy of educational offices for monks engaged solely in the training of monks and novices (Table 4).3 8 Corresponding to the bandasak titles given to secular officials, samanasak titles were bestowed on monk-officials. These Prince Wachirayan retermed tdnandon (“ranks”).3 9 All titular ranks were given by the king, and were broadly divided into four levels, somdet phramahasamana, somdet phrardchakhana, phrarachakhana, and phrakhru, which were further divided into a total of twenty-one grades. Each grade had as an insignia a fan (phatyot samanasak), which was carried on formal occasions.40 Every month, monk-officials were “offered” (thawai) an allowance called nitayaphat (literally, “food given regularly as alms”) in accordance with their office and rank. The Table of Nitayaphat rates introduced in 1913 set forth monthly allowances for ecclesiastical monthon governors of twenty-three to twenty-eight baht, and for provincial governors of between six and ten baht.41

76

A State Religion in History

Ecclesiastical office and rank in earlier times were closely interrelated: a monk of somdet phrarachdkhana rank, for example, would simultaneously have been a governor. But Prince Wachirayan effected a separation of offices from ranks, as a result of which the latter became merely indices of status. Appointments to office came to be made on the basis of the candidate’s ability, it became possible for competent monks (phra phu sdmdt) to rise to high office.42 This move was a landmark in the development of the Sangha bureaucracy in Thailand. Establishment

of the Orthodox

Doctrine

For the Catholic, . . . the Church extricates [from the sacred texts] the official interpretation, so that only editions of the Bible annotated and approved by the hierarchy are by right accessible to the faithful. For the Catholic, the reliable document is not the Bible, a text often obscure and open to interpretation in very different ways, but the Catechism, which is a concise and didactic summary of the Tradition.43 For the Thai Buddhist, as the national ecclesia developed, there emerged a situation similar to that pertaining in the Catholic Church. Early this century, as today, many Thai monks were not conversant with Pali, and for them the canonical scriptures were little more than incomprehensible spells to be chanted at ceremonies. Even the traditional “doctrinal study” (rian pariyattham) was in fact no more than Pali language study.44 It would be no exaggeration, therefore, to say that a systematic understanding of Buddhist doctrine was virtually inaccessible to the average monk. The lack of effective means for the orthodox doctrine to be taught and studied in Thailand meant that, even though it may have been preserved in monastery archives, in effect it was no longer alive. In an attempt to redress this grave situation, Prince Wachirayan wrote a doctrinal textbook entitled Nawakowat, which was aimed principally at those who by custom donned the robe for only a short period. King Chulalongkon, while admitting the brevity of the book, praised it as “beneficial not only for newly ordained bhikkhus, since it covers essential [doctrinal] points to be remembered and teachers will be able to teach these points easily, but also for those whose studies are behind them, as a reminder and a reference.” 4 5 Within a short time, Prince Wachirayan’s Nawakowat came to occupy a position comparable to that of the catechism of the Catholic Church. When, in 1911, a system of doctrinal examinations (sop nak tharri) in the Thai language was introduced as a move to raise the standards of doctrinal learning among monks and novices, Nawakowat was set as the

Establishment of the Buddhist Ecclesia in Thailand

77

first and most important textbook to be studied for these examinations.4 6 Likewise, it became the basic textbook for the doctrinal examination for laymen (sop thamma suksa) that was introduced in 1929. Today it remains the most concise and authoritative doctrinal textbook, and still serves as the primer in the ecclesiastical examination curriculum, even though the examination system has been revised somewhat. In addition to Nawakowat, Prince Wachirayan, wrote Phuttasasana Suphasit (Selected Buddhist proverbs), Phutthaprawat (The life of the Buddha), Winayamuk (The entrance to the Vinaya), and other textbooks designated for use in the doctrinal examinations. In fact, with few exceptions, all such textbooks were written by the prince. In 1922, by which time the doctrinal examinations had been.organized into three grades, an important innovation was introduced that secured the examinations’ place in Thai Buddhism. Success in these exams was made an essential qualification for candidacy for the traditional Pali examinations. A pass at elementary level (nak tham t n ) , intermediate level (nak tham tho), and advanced level (nak tham ek) respectively was requisite for sitting the Pali examination at grades 3, 4, and 7. And success in the Pali exams earned a monk the appellation of parian, a nitayaphat allowance from the king, and the respect of society, and opened the way to advancement within the Sangha. Once the prestige of the doctrinal examinations was established, those who remained for any length of time in the robe came to aspire at least to pass these exams. For the majority of monks, preparation for the doctrinal examinations became virtually the only incentive for studying the Dhamma..47 The examiners required candidates to reproduce accurately the content of the designated textbooks, and allowed no leeway in doctrinal interpretation. Monks with energies to spare would have aimed at a higher grade in the doctrinal examination or a Pali qualification rather than study unauthorized doctrinal works. I n this way, through the agency of the doctrinal examinations, Prince Wachirayan’s “theology” became established as the orthodox doctrine of Thai Buddhism.

LAITY AND THE SANGHA When Phra Siwichai proposed building the approach road to Wat Doi Suthep, thousands of ordinary people came forward with offers of money and labor, and he was able to complete the project without the slightest difficulty in procuring funds and materials.4 8 His success was almost certainly due to his personal charisma. I t was this charisma, rather than his lack of official preceptor’s qualifications, the pretext for his oppression, that posed the major threat to the unity of the national ecclesia. Charismatic monks of Phra Siwichai’s ilk are, however, rare. Had

78

A State Religion in History

the survival of popular faith depended on the fortuitous emergence of charismatic individuals, Thai Buddhism would undoubtedly be extinct. Rather, the continuing prosperity of popular faith is grounded in something more enduring: the charismatic qualities of the Sangha itself, which derive from the legitimacy of the Sangha’s succession to the Buddha, and are sustained by the correct observance of the precepts by its members. For this reason, monks who are properly ordained and who lead a moral life acquire a kind of ex officio charisma. The Sangha Act of 1902 denied personal charisma and created a situation in which only the “ex officio charisma” of monks could sustain popular belief. As a result, salvation became inaccessible to people except through the national ecclesia: extra ecclesia nulla salus. NOTES 1.

2. 3. 4.

5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

D. Smeaton, The Loyal Karens of Burma (London, 1877), quoted in Fred R. von der Mehden, Religion and Nationalism in Southeast Asia (Milwaukee, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968), p. 124. Heinz Bechert, Buddhismus,Staat und Gesellschaft in den Ldndern des Theravada-Buddhismus, vol. 2 (Wiesbanden: Otto Harrassowits, 1957), pp. 96-99. Fred W. Riggs, Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity (Honolulu, Hawaii: East-West Center Press, 1966), p. 96. This process is well documented with liberal use of primary sources by Tej Bunnag, “The Provincial Administration of Siam from 1892-1915: A Study of the Creation, the Growth, the Achievement, and the Implications for Modern Siam of the Ministry of the Interior under Prince Damrong Rachanuphap,” (Ph.D. diss., Oxford University, 1968). Prince Wachirayan (1859-1921) was the forty-seventh child and twenty-fifth son of King Mongkut, Rama IV. The romanization of the prince’s name varies, and often it appears in its Pali form, Vajirananavorarasa. In Thai he is called Wachirayan, by abbreviation of Wachirayanawarorot. A primary source for the study of his Sangha reforms is Pramuan Phraniphon somdet phramahasamanachao kromphrayd wachirayanawarorot (Collected works of Prince Wachirayan), 14 vols. (Bangkok: Mahamakutratchawitthayalai, 1971), which was compiled by the Mahamakut Buddhist University as part of the work commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the prince’s death. Hereafter cited as P.P.S.K., with the title of the (unnumbered) volume concerned. David K. Wyatt, The Politics of Reform in Thailand (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1969), p. 234. An English translation is available in Acts on the Administration of the Buddhist Order of Sangha (Bangkok: The Mahamakuta Educational Council, 1963), pp. 1-20 According to a leader in the Bangkok Timer,July 25, 1902, referred to in Wyatt, Politics of Reform, p. 305, n. 11. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong (Sangha affairs), p. 42 On the concept of ecclesia, see chapter 2 herein. See chapter 7 herein. David K. Wyatt, “The Beginnings of Modern Education in Thailand, 1868—1910” (Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1966), p. 653.

Establishment of the Buddhist Ecclesia in Thailand

79

13. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, pp. 384—390. 14. Ibid., p. 60. 15. Ibid., pp. 40-41. Translated into English in Charles F. Keyes, “Buddhism and National Integration in Thailand,” J.A.S. 30, no. 3 (1971): 555—556. 16. The survey just mentioned placed the total number of monks and novices in 1900 at, 79,656, the former accounting for 60,849 and the latter 18,807. Wyatt, “Beginnings of Modern Education,” p. 653. 17. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, pp. 42-45. The fourteen monthon were: Krungthep, Krung Kao, Phitsanulok, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Nakhon Ratchasima, Ratburi, Prachin, Nakhon Sawan, Nakhon Chaisi, Chumphon, Phuket, Chanthaburi, Isan, and Burapha. 18. Prachum prakdt ratchakan thi 4, pho. so. 2401-2404 (Collected decrees of the Fourth Reign, b.e. 2401-2404 (1858-1861), (Bangkok: Ongkankha khong khurusapha, 1961), pp. 149—172; hereafter cited as P.P.R.S. 19 Ibid., for example, also mentions wat khun, which were probably dependent monasteries of the royal monasteries. 20. H. G. Quartich Wales, Ancient Siamese Government and Administration (1934; reprint ed., New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp., 1965), p. 243. 21. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, pp. 384-390, records the names of royal monasteries as of 1915. The two not located in the inner provinces were the large monasteries in the “vanguard cities” of the north and south, Phitsanulok and Nakhon Si Thammarat. 22. Wyatt, “Beginnings of Modern Education,” p. 327, n. 49. 23. Prachum KotmaiPracham Sok (Annual collections of laws) (Bangkok: Nitiwet, 1935-) 16: 141-417, hereafter cited as P.K.P.S.)-, Wyatt, “Beginnings of Modern Education,” p. 638, emphasis added. 24. Wyatt, “Beginnings of Modern Education,” p. 310. 25. Ibid., pp. 306-317. 26. P.K.P.S. 5: 36-38, 44-45. 27. P.K.P.S. 26: 172—176; and Rabiap borihdn khanasong doi anumat khong mahatherasamakhom pho. so. 2477 (Regulations on administration of the Sangha in accordance with decisions made by the Council of Elders, B.E. 2477 (a.d. 1934) (Bangkok, 1934), pp. 160-163. 28. Mitsuo Sato, Genshi Bukkyo kyodan no kenkyu (A study on the early Buddhist order) (Tokyo: Sankibobusshorin, 1963), pp. 206—209. 29. Ibid., pp. 258-259. 30. P.K.P.S. 26: 172—176; Rabiap borihdn khanasong, pp. 160-163. 31. Preceptors’ qualifications are given in Rabiap borihdn khanasong, p. 160 32. “Decree on Appointment of Preceptors,” Articles 2 and 4, in P.K.P.S. 26: 173. 33. “Decree on Appointment of Preceptors,” Articles 12 and 15, in P.K.P.S. 26: 174-175. 34. Keyes, “Buddhism and National Integration,” pp. 557-558; Sanguan Chotisukharak, Prawat Khrubd Siwichai: Nakbun haeng lannd thai (Biography of Khruba Siwichai: A man of merit in the north) (Chiang Mai, n.d.), pp. 19—20. 35. The dimensions of sima cannot normally exceed 80 by 120 meters. Rabiap borihdn khanasong, p. 234. 36. Ibid. 37. P.K.P.S. 33: 12-14 38. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, pp. 327—338 39. Ibid., pp. 327-338. 40. Ibid., pp. 339-446. 41. Ibid., pp. 350-361.

80

A State Religion in History

42. Ibid., pp. 331-332. 43. Jean-Baptiste Duroselle and Jean-Marie Mayeur, Histone du Catholicisme, 4th ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1964), p. 7. 44. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, p. 123 45. P.P.S.K., Phraratchahatthalekhd-laiphrahat (Correspondence between King Chulalongkon and Prince Wachirayan), p. 74. 46. The doctrinal examinations are discussed in detail in the next chapter. 47. An anthropological survey has shown that this situation persists. Jane Bunnag, Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman (Cambridge: The University Press, ,1973), p. 26. 48. Sanguan, Prawat Khruba Siwichai, pp. 22-27.

5 The Establishment of the Ecclesiastical System

and Significance Examination

It is a common custom in Theravadin countries to raise the social standing of monks by conferring on them academic qualifications or ecclesiastical titles that are based on their performance in state examinations on Buddhist doctrine or on Pali, the scriptural language. Burma, for example, had a system of state examinations called patamabyan, which originated far back in the monarchic era. Though temporarily abandoned when the country came under British rule, the examinations were revived in 1895 and have been retained to the present. 1 While confined in subject matter to the Buddhist doctrine and precepts, the Pali language, and other areas of the religious domain, such examinations afford the successful monk or novice qualifications which will continue to enhance his prestige when he resumes secular life. They are, therefore, an important factor in the Sangha’s relationships with secular authority and with society in general. For the Sangha, doctrinal examinations represent a means to promote its development by raising the level of understanding of Buddhist doctrine among its members. But as the Thai Sangha came to need highly trained monks to operate its new administrative machinery, its members tended to view the ecclesiastical examinations as a means of obtaining official rank. Moreover, because the marking of examinations required the standardization of answers the examinations became ultimately the most effective mechanism by which the Sangha’s orthodox doctrine was propagated. We saw in the last chapter that the introduction of the ecclesiastical examination system by Prince Wachirayan accelerated the transformation of the Thai Sangha and the establishment of the national ecclesia. 81

82

A State Religion in History

In this chapter, we shall consider the history and significance of the Thai Sangha’s ecclesiastical examination system. ECCLESIASTICAL EXAMINATIONS The Prehistory

of the Wachirayan

IN HISTORY Reformation

Probably the earliest Thai source to suggest the institutionalization of the idea of attaching social status to knowledge of the Pali scriptures is the Laws of the Military and Provincial Hierarchies ( Phra ayakan tamnaeng nd thahan huamuang) promulgated by King Boromatrailokanat in 1466. 2 These laid down a system of sakdina grades for the entire population apart from the king, by which social dignity was expressed numerically by the area of riceland (na) theoretically tenable. Sakdina grades, which survived until 1932, ranged from the 100,000 rai (one rai equals 1,600 square meters) of the Uparat or “Vice-king” down to 5 rai for slaves, beggars, and street musicians. Four hundred rai marked the boundary between the masses and the privileged classes; those with a sakdina grade of 400 rai or more had the right to send a proxy to the law court in cases in which they were defendants. The sakdina grades of Buddhist monks are set down in Section 27 of Lingat’s edition of the Laws of the Military and Provincial Hierarchies, as follows: Samanera knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 300 (rai) equally; samanera not knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 200 (rai) equally; bhikku knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 600 (rai) equally; bhikkhu not knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 400 (rai) equally; phrakhru knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 2,400 (rai) equally; phrakhru not knowledgeable of the Dhamma, 1,000 (rai).3 These hierarchy laws thus specified a higher sakdina grade for novices, monks, and phrakhru (“teacher-monks”) who were familiar with the Dhamma than their counterparts who were not. Knowledge of the Dhamma, belonging strictly to the religious sphere, was translated into dignity in the secular dimension. And though the hierarchy laws themselves provided no objective standards against which knowledge of the Dhamma could be assessed, the provisions just cited do imply the existence in mid-fifteenth-century Thailand of some form of system for evaluating the doctrinal knowlege of monks. The earliest record of a kind of state examination which might be called a precursor of the later sop phrapariyattham examinations is that made by French visitors to Ayutthaya in the late seventeenth century. After describing the importance of Pali studies, Nicolas Gervaise continues:

The Establishment

and Significance of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

83

The Bali language is greatly respected in this kingdom and absolutely essential to the talapoin. They must at least know how to read and expound it before they can be ordained badlouang. This rule had been so neglected for several years that the greater part of the priests did not know even the letters of the language.4 Four years ago the king remedied this slackness. He had need of many men to do work for him outside, and so he commanded that all who could not read a certain Bali book, which he had sent to all the pagodas in his dominions, should be thrown out. This command was promptly executed and a few days later there were to be seen thousands of men still wearing the robes of the priesthood but working on the land, in the brickyards, and bearing the trouble brought upon them through their ignorance.5 A member of Louis XI V’s mission who visited Ayutthaya from the autumn of 1687 to early 1688, Simon de la Loubere mentions the examinations that King Narai instituted for monks, who were “exempted from the six months service.” To diminish the number of these privileged Persons, he causes ' them to be from time to time examined as to their Knowledge, which respects the Balie Language and its Books: and when we arrived in this Country, he had just reduc’d several Thousands to the Secular condition, because they had not been found learned enough. Their Examiner was Oc Louang Souracac, a young man of about Twenty eight or Thirty years old, the son of that Oc Pro, Pipitcharatcha, who . . . commands the Elephants; but the Talapoins of the Woods had refused to submit to the Examination of a Secular, and consented to be examined only by one of their Superiors.6 These ecclesiastical examinations had for the Sangha a negative import, the prevention of its becoming a sanctuary from the reach of secular authority. Prince Damrong, on the other hand, has pointed out the existence in the Ayutthaya period of ecclesiastical examinations with a positive significance, based on the results of which barian degrees were conferred as a mark of social respect on monks displaying exceptional knowledge of Pali. According to Damrong, the barian degree was awarded in three classes, ek (first), tho (second) and tn (third).7 The mention of parian (i.e., barian) ek and parian thb in the entry for c.s. 1144, Year of the Tiger (a.d. 1781), in Chaophraya Thipakorawong’s Royal Chronicle of the First Reign of the Ratanakosin Dynasty indicates that the three-tier system of state examinations in Pali was already established by the late Ayutthaya period or, at the latest, the Thonburi period (1787-1782). The First Reign of the Ratanakosin dynasty was a period of revival of Ayutthayan institutions after the upheaval of the Thonburi era. In 1788, the new court sponsored the Ninth Great Buddhist Council to restore the canon. 8 And in the time of the second supreme patriarch,

84

A State Religion in History

Somdet Phra Sangkharat (Suk) (1793-1816), the Pali examinations of the Ayutthaya period were revived. 9 The traditional Pali examinations involved the translation from Pali into Thai of passages selected by an examination committee from, for the third-class degree, the Sutta Pitaka, and for the second-class degree, the Sutta and Vinaya Pitaka,and for the first-class degree, the Sutta,Vinaya,and Abhidhamma Pitaka. Answers were always given orally, and because of their content, the examinations were popularly known asplae bali (Pali translation) or plae phrapariyattham (Dhamma translation) . During the Second Reign, the third supreme patriarch, Somdet Phra Sangkharat (Mi) (1818-1819), revised the examination system, instituting the nine grades in operation today. The examination curricula for these grades were as follows.1 0 (a) Prayok 1-3 (Grades 1—3). Grades 1 and 2 were recognized not as independent grades but as preliminary stages to grade 3; only when a candidate had passed all three grades did he earn the appellation of parian. He would also be addressed with the honorific “Maha” before his name. In the examination, the candidate was presented with a 30—line portion of the Dhammapadatthakata, a commentary on the Dhammapada, inscribed on both sides of palm leaves (three leaves with five lines on each side), which he was expected to translate orally into Thai in front of the examiners. This same procedure was also used in the examinations for the higher grades. (b) Prayok 4. The text examined was twenty lines on two leaves taken from the first half of the Manggalatthadipani,said to have been complied by the Chiang Mai monk Sirimongkhon. (c) Prayok 5. Again, twenty lines on two leaves of text had to be translated. The text was Palimuttaka though for a time it was replaced by SaratthasangahaA1 (d) Prayok 6. The set translation was twenty lines on two leaves from the latter half of Manggalatthadipani, the first half of which was used for prayok 4. (e) Prayok 7. Twenty lines on two leaves were set from Samantapasadika, Buddhaghosa’s commentary on the Vinaya. (f) Prayok 8. Twenty lines on two leaves were taken from Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa’s “Path of Purity.” (g) Prayok 9 The set passage was ten lines on one leaf from Saratthadipani,a subcommentary (tika) by the Sinhalese monk Sariputta on Visuddhimagga. 1 2 The passages for the parian examination were chosen by the supreme

The Establishment and Significance of the Ecclesiastical Examination System

85

patriarch or high-ranking monks appointed by him. Candidates were tested, as mentioned, by oral examination (kansop pakplao) , in accordance with the strict Ayutthayan tradition by which they were permitted to give only one answer and could not correct themselves. However, since a successful candidate at a particular grade could immediately try for the next grade, there were rare individuals, like the later Somdet Phra Sangkharat (Sa Putsathewa) who, while still a novice, passed all grades from 3 to 9 at one sitting.13 Holders of prayok 4 and higher received a nitayaphat allowance from the king and were’called parian nitayaphatf 4. As I have mentioned, prayok grades 1 to 3 were regarded as one unit, and candidates were not recognized as parian until they had passed grade 3. During the Third Reign, however, the Uparat sponsored the instruction of those who had failed prayok 3, in order to encourage Pali studies among young novices. Although this system was not officially recognized, the beneficiaries of this sponsorship were popularly called parian wang na, after the Front Palace in which the Uparat resided. 1 5 For a variety of reasons, very few monks attained a high prayok grade, especially prayok 9. Under the traditional system, monks generally first studied the basics of Pali through such classical grammars as Mulapakon (Mulapakaranam), then worked through the oral translation of such works as Dhammapadatthakata, Manggalatthadlpani,and Saratthasangaha. The difficulty of learning Pali through the classical grammars, however, caused many to abandon their studies unfinished, while many of those who had formally completed a course of study were also of dubious proficiency in Pali. Second, because the examination was given orally, a large number of candidates could not be tested at one time without expanding the number of examination centers, and consequently one round of examinations usually took as long as three months to complete. Until 1898, examinations were held only once every three years, and an unsuccessful candidate would have to wait three years, or, if the examination was not held for some reason, six years, for his next chance. 16 Moreover, monks elevated to the phrarachakhana rank, on appointment, for example, to the abbotship of a large temple, automatically became ineligible to take the examination. Initiatives

Toward

Examination

Reform

The traditional system of Pali examinations saw no further major change until the reign of 'Ghulalongkon, the fifth of his dynasty, who is renowned for having laid the foundations for Thai modernization through the introduction of various Western institutions. I t was in his reign, too, that reforms of the Sangha were carried through, although because the Sangha is in principle self-governing, these had to be seen to

86

A State Religion in History

come from the Sangha’s own initiatives, with secular authority playing a limited role, The resolve of King Chulalongkon’s younger half-brother Prince Wachirayan to make a career of the monkhood, therefore, was decisive for the accomplishment of reform in the Thai Sangha. Prince Wachirayan was born in 1859, the forty-seventh child ofKing Mongkut, and at the age of fourteen he spent seventy-eight days in the robe as a novice, in accordance with ancient custom.1 7 On resuming secular life, he entered the English School in the palace, where he studied English under the Englishman Francis G. Patterson. Among his fellow students were Prince Thiwaong and Prince Damrong. During the reign of their elder brother Chulalongkon, both contributed to the modernization of Thailand, the former as Minister of Foreign Affairs, the latter as Minister of Public Instruction and later Minister of the Interior. Prince Wachirayan’s enlightened ideas undoubtedly owed much to this environment during his youth. When he was twenty, Prince Wachirayan was again ordained. King Chulalongkon apparently placed great hopes in his entry into the monkhood, for he promised to confer on the prince a krorn rank should he stay three years in the robe. At age twenty-three, the prince took the Pali examination and advanced to prayok 5 at a stroke. That year, he was raised to krom rank as promised and was also appointed deputy patriarch of the Thammayut sect (chaokhana rang khana thammayuttika). With the death in 1982 ofPrince Pawaret, abbot of Wat Bowonniwet and the first patriarch of the Thammayut sect, Prince Wachirayan succeeded him to the abbotship that same year and to the patriarchate the following year. Thereafter, his influence within the Sangha grew, and following the death of the ninth supreme patriarch in 1900 Prince Wachirayan became the central figure in the Sangha reformation and played a decisive role in the promulgation of the Sangha Act of 1902. Although, as we have seen, state ecclesiastical examinations had long been held in Thailand, only a tiny proportion of monks became parian, able to comprehend the Pali scriptures. In the provinces, in particular, the average monk knew little of the Buddhist teachings, and what he knew was derived from such popular Buddhist literature as Traiphumikatha and Phra Malai. On a tour of the Ghantaburi region in 1887, King Chulalongkon was amazed at the nonsense he heard preached at the monasteries where he stopped, and sent a letter to Prince Wachirayan stressing the need for reform of ecclesiastical education.1 8 Within the Sangha, however, no moves were afoot to remedy this situation. True, Pali studies were flourishing at Wat Bowonniwet, the birthplace and stronghold of the Thammayut sect, which had grown out of the Thammayut movement inspired by Prince Mongkut in the 1830s,

The Establishment and Significance of the Ecclesiastical Examination System

87

and whose banner was the return to the Pali canon. But this was an elitist movement whose influence was limited to a handful of royal monasteries centered in Bangkok. Just as the modernization of Thailand is said to have been a “reform from above” propelled by King Chulalongkon and his brothers, so was the reform of the Sangha instigated in the same quarter. The inauguration of October 1, 1893 of the Mahamakut Academy (Mahamakut Ratchawitthayalai) on the grounds of Wat Bbwbnniwet was a symbolic event that announced to the inert Sangha the start of the reform. From his base at the Academy, Prince Wachirayan launched a series of trials in doctrinal education, Pali education, and ecclesiastical examinations. In his forty-two years in the monkhood, the prince was a prolific writer of textbooks, among which his plainly written Pali study book in six volumes, Bali Waiyakon, is worthy of mention. The appearance of this book is said to have greatly alleviated the difficulties of learning Pali. One of Prince Wachirayan’s reform experiments was a new form of Pali examination, which constituted part of what became known as the Mahamakut system (baep mahamakut). Most notable of the reforms it contained was the introduction of the written mode of examination, which allowed candidates to be tested more accurately and in a shorter time. Though intended for members of the Thammayut sect, this examination was formally recognized by the Sangha in 1895, and successful candidates, like those in the traditional examinations, thereafter received parian degrees. The first examinations under the Mahamakut system were held in February, 1894 for three grades of candidate. The elementary class, called “third graders,” were tested on Pali grammar; the intermediate “second graders” were examined on the first half of Dhammapadatthakata', and the advanced first graders were examined on the second half of the same work. The pass rates were fifteen of twenty-nine third graders (51 percent), six of ten second graders (60 percent), and one of four “first graders” (25 percent). Each class completed its examination in one day. In the following year, an independent doctrinal examination was introduced. Again a three-level system was adopted, with Manggalatthadipam as the set text for third grade; Mahdvibhanga and Bhikkhunimbhanga from Suttavibhanga in the Vinaya Pitaka, together with part of the Sutta Pitaka for the second grade; and Mahavagga and Chulavagga of the Khandhaka, together with part of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, for the first grade. Examinations were held under the Mahamakut system every year for eight years before they were abolished. The stated reason for the abolition was that the written examinations were unpopular among candidates because of their difficulty. The true reason was probably that

A State Religion in Hisloiy

88

Prince Wachirayan had not yet fully established his influence within the Sangha. Once he had become supreme patriarch in 1910, he was able to carry through reforms of the examination system, including the adoption of the written mode, entirely at his own discretion. Moreover, the traditional system was partially reformed by a decree promulgated on February 1, 1898,1 9 whereafter examinations were held annually.2 0 The Military Examinations

Service

Act and the Ecclesiastical

Before looking in detail at the full-scale examination reforms introduced by Prince Wachirayan, we shall examine how their introduction was triggered by the promulgation on August 29, 1905 of Thailand’s first Military Service Act. This act provided the opportunity for incorporation into the state administrative structure of the ecclesiastical examinations that hitherto had been the internal concern of the Sangha.2 1 Among those “exempt from military service for a certain period” under Article 13 of the act were “monks and novices knowledgeable of the Dhamma.” 22 With about one man in forty in the robe at that time, it must have been vital to the government for the smooth operation of the act to give legal definition to “knowledge of the Dhamma.” The Ministry of Defense, which had overall responsibility for the operation of the law, entrusted the solution of this problem to the Ministry of Public Instruction, which administered the affairs of the Sangha. In view of the grave bearing this had on the Sangha’s interests, the Ministry of Public Instruction, in turn, devolved the task of conducting a substantive inquiry upon the Sangha. From published sources it is difficult to reconstruct the course of exchanges on this question between the Ministry of Public Instruction and the Sangha. We know, however, that a full six years passed between the Ministry’s approaching the Sangha and the first meeting of the Council of Elders to look into the matter. This lengthy delay was undoubtedly related to the decade-long vacancy of the supreme patriarchate following the death of the incumbent in January 1900. On June 12, 1911, more than six months after Prince Wachirayan’s appointment as the new supreme patriarch, the Council of Elders held its first meeting to consider a legal definition of “novices knowledgeable of the Dhamma.” 2 3 Its conclusions, which were conveyed to the Ministry of Defense and accepted in toto, were threefold. 2 4 First, in the provinces, “novices knowledgeable of the Dhamma” would be those deemed of value to Buddhism under the situation prevalent in the particular region. Second, in Bangkok, a standard of Pali learning established by an examination committee would serve as crite-

The Establishment

and Significance of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

89

rion. And third, novices deemed of no benefit to Buddhism were defined, for example, as lazy youths whose departure from the Order would be no loss. When such novices received enlistment orders, they would be forced to disrobe and enter military service. In October 1911, the first Examination to Determine the Qualification of Novices Knowledgeable of the Dhamma was held at three monasteries in Bangkok, and in mode and content revealed a departure from tradition. The written mode, earlier abandoned because of its supposed unpopularity, was revived (and has ever since remained in use by the Thai Sangha); and the three-part curriculum, in addition to the traditional Dhammapadatthakata, contained Nawakowat and Phutthasdtsanasuphasit. Nawakowat,as mentioned in the last chapter, was written by Prince Wachirayan for the instruction of newly ordained monks, and has today attained the status of the “catechism” of Thai Buddhism.2 5 The work was inspired by the letter from King Chulalongkon expressing concern about the paucity of doctrinal knowledge among Siamese monks, which the king attributed to a lack ofsuitable doctrinal textbooks.2 6 Wachirayan, in fact, was well aware of the situation.2 7 The emphasis of the traditional examinations, nominally “doctrinal” (Jjariyattham) though actually linguistic, had produced a preoccupation with Pali translation, or rather the mechanical replacement of Pali with Thai words, and a neglect of doctrinal study which left even the intellectual elite of the monkhood ignorant of much of the doctrine, and the majority of ecclesiastics, who could not read Pali, without even a basic understanding. Nawakowat comprises three sections: Winai Banyat,a translation into Thai of the 227 Pdtimokkha rules; Thammawiphak,an arrangement of Thai translations of important passages of the Tipitaka which present the basic doctrines in enumerative categories as an aid to memorization; and Khihipatibat, an exposition of the right way to live, also presented in enumerative categories. Phutthasdtsanasuphasit, the third element of the curriculum, is, in effect, an amplification of Thammawiphak,containing a selection of important passages from the Pali scriptures with a Thai translation alongside the original text. The adoption of these two works into the curriculum revolutionized the state ecclesiastical examinations in Thailand. It provided ecclesiastics with the means and opportunity to understand the Buddhist doctrine in their own language,and to express in Thai their understanding of the Dhamma. Of the 189 novices who entered the first sitting of the examination, 139 passed. The successful candidates were graded as first, second, or third class depending on whether they had passed all, two, or only one of the three parts of the curriculum; their numbers were respectively 48 (25.4 percent of all candidates), 44 (23.3 percent), and 47 (24.9 percent).

A State Religion in History

90

As “novices knowledgeable of the Dhamma, first grade” (samanen ru thamma prayok 1), the first-class students would presumably have been .exempt from military service. The first-class students were recognized as having an ability equivalent to prayok 1 in the traditional system, from which grade they would be exempted if they sat the traditional examinations. In the traditional examinations held the following year, thirty-one of the “new prayok 1” novices entered; seventeen of them (54 percent) passed prayok 2, and ten also passed prayok 3, winning the parian degree. These results gave War chirayan confidence. 2 8 On March 4, 1912, the Council of Elders formally adopted a new curriculum for doctrinal study presented by Prince Wachirayan, which was to be implemented in b.e. 2455 (1912—1913). It was linked to doctrinal examinations (sop khwamru thamma) at two levels,, ordinary (samari) and advanced (wisaman), both of which were open to monks as well as to novices. This move further advanced the reformation triggered by the Military Service Act, by extending the opportunity for doctrinal study to monks. It is also interesting that both courses required candidates to write an exposition of the doctrine in Thai. The examination on the ordinary course, which did not involve Pali study, was divided into two grades, at each of which two subjects were set. For the lower grade 1, candidates were examined on the second section of Nawakowat and required to give an exposition of the doctrine; for the higher grade 2, they were tested on Phutthaprawat (The life of the Buddha) and again required to write a doctrinal exposition. Monks successful at grade 2 and who had also passed an examination on the fundamentals of the precepts based on section one of Nawakowat were entitled to receive a diploma; novices, however, had to wait until they had undertaken the full complement of precepts on higher ordination before they could attempt the second examination and qualify for the diploma. In a move to propagate the ordinary course from. Bangkok into the provinces, all successful candidates at grade 2 were granted exemption from military service. In the advanced course, Pali language study was mandatory. The examination was similarly divided into two grades: grade 1, involving translation of a passage from Dhammapadatthakatha-, and grade 2, a test on Bali Waiyakon and an exercise in parsing (sanpan) a given Pali text. Grade 2 was recognized as equivalent to the traditional prayok 3. 2 9 Organization

of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

Wachirayan’s approach to reformation was highly realistic; his gradualism was reminiscent of his brother Ghulalongkon’s abolition of

The Establishment

and Significance of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

91

the slavery systems, for example, which had been more than thirty years between announcement and completion. In the spring of 1913, the first examinations based on the new curriculum were held in Bangkok in parallel with the traditional examinations. Two examination centers were set up, one at Wat Benchamabophit, where written examinations were conducted under the new system, the other at Wat Phra Knaew, where oral examinations were held under the old system. In June the same year, an ordinary-level examination on the new curriculum was held for existing parian, the results of which clearly exposed the deficiencies of the old system: only sixteen (42 percent) of thirty-eight entrants passed. The prince-patriarch next turned his attention to the parian nitayaphat, the holders of prayok 4 and higher who by tradition received a nitayaphat allowance from the king. As a move to reduce the number of successful candidates in the traditional “doctrinal” examinations who had little knowledge of the Dhamma, he introduced the rule that anyone thereafter wishing to qualify for nitayaphat had first to take the course and pass the examination for the new ordinary-level grade 1. With the introduction of the written mode for the traditional prayok 3 examination the following year, the reform was advanced further. Wachirayan also noted that instruction in the new curriculum had finally begun to permeate to provincial monasteries and that examination results showed an improvement over the preceding year’s. In 1915, the two grades of the ordinary course were combined into nak tham grade 3, marking the beginning of today’s nak tham system, and candidates for prayok 3 were required to have passed nak tham 3. In this year, too, the written mode was used experimentally for theprayok 5 exam, parallel to the conventional oral mode. The new curriculum enjoyed wider use in the provinces, notably Monthon Krung Kao (Ayutthaya, Angthong, and Singburl provinces), Monthon Krungthep (Nonthaburi, Pathumthani, Nakhon Khuankhan, Thanyaburi, Samut Prakan), Monthon Nakhon Sawan (Nakhon Sawan, Utaithanl), Monthon Ratburi (Samut Songkhram) and Monthon Phayap, while in Ayutthaya, Ratburi, Samut Songkhram, and other places, the local Sangha held its own nak tham examinations. To further propagate the new curriculum, Wachirayan sent qualified monks to various regions to give instruction in methods of teaching, while in Bangkok the number of teaching establishments was increased and examinations on the new curriculum were held at eleven monasteries. In 1917, new curricula were instituted for all levels of the traditional examination right up to prayok 9, thus making the oral examination

92

A State Religion

in History

defunct. Nak than grade 2 was also introduced, and was made a requirement of candidates for prayok 4. Prince Wachirayan died in August 1921 at the age of sixty-two. He had already finished writing the textbooks for nak thorn grade 1, however, and in the year after his death the nak tham 1 course was instituted. This brought into full operation at all levels of nak tham and parian the ecclesiastical examination system he had conceived. 3 0 In later years, the prince’s brainchild was developed in two directions. In one direction, thamma suksa examinations were introduced for laymen, which, apart from the course on the precepts, employed the nak tham curricula. The first thamma suksa grade 3 examination was held in 1929, followed respectively in 1930 and 1935 by grade 2 and grade I.3 1 The second direction was the establishment of centers for the Pali language examination in the provinces. Not until after the constitutional coup d’etat was this goal realized, when, in 1936, the prayok 3 examination was held in all of the kingdom’s seventy-one provinces.3 2 Prayok 4 became sittable in all provinces from 1929, and prayok 5 from 1942. 3 3 In 1938, all nawaka, or monks of less than five years’ standing, became legally obliged to sit the nak tham 3 examination; the spread of doctrinal learning that Wachirayan had striven for saw a further advance.3 4 THE PRESENT STATE OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL EXAMINATIONS The ecclesiastical examinations continue to exert a considerable influence on the lives of Thailand’s monks and novices. In the Thai Sangha’s hierarchy of status, the parian and nak tham qualifications play a role similar to that of academic qualifications in secular society. They are a matter of concern for all monks and novices. Until the Sangha Assembly was abolished under the new Sangha Act of 1963, its members had to be parian first-class (parian ek, i.e., holders of prayok 7 or higher). Even today, a nak tham 1 qualification is requisite for preceptors. lit secular society, too, the ecclesiastical examinations are significant. Under the old school system, holders of nak tham 1 or prayok 3 or 4 were eligible to take the final examination for matthayom 6, the sixth grade of secondary school, while prayok 5 conferred eligiblity for the matthayom 8 exam. Holders of prayok 9 who leave the Order for government employment are treated as university graduates, if they apply for posts of Pali Specialist or Assistant Instructor in Religion, and are appointed as grade 3 officials. In private schools, holders of nak tham 3 or higher can teach morality, civics, and Thai language at the elementary level, while parian can teach the same subjects at secondary level. Such collateral benefits

The Establishment,

and Significance of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

93

of success undoubtedly constitute for monks and novices a motive for candidacy in the ecclesiastical examinations. An anthropologist who observed the lives of monks and novices in Thailand noted that “for them Dhamma study meant working for the annual ecclesiastical examinations.” 3 5 While this situation is not totally condemnable, since it does represent an improvement over that prevalent before the“doctrinal” examinations were reformed, it is nevertheless one in which monks and novices lack the incentive for doctrinal study aimed purely at deepening personal religious understanding. There are, of course, monks who have completed prayok 9 and can find time for further study of the scriptures and commentaries or the results ofBuddhist studies conducted overseas. But it is still true that the majority of monks are interested only in the ecclesiastical examinations, and that most of their energy is spent in preparing for them. One consequence of this situation is that probably the most effective way of learning what the Buddhist doctrine means to the Thai monk is to analyze the content of the examinations, which today are virtually settled. Although considerations of space here preclude a detailed analysis, the following outline should serve as a foothold for future study. The Nak Tham

Examinations

As of 1966, the content of the nak tham. examinations and the designated textbooks are as follows.3 6 (a) Nak tham 3 1) Essay: Phutthasatsanasuphasit , volume 1, by Prince Wachirayan. 2) Sutta Pitaka-. Nawakowat, by Prince Wachirayan. 3) Life of the Buddha: Phutthaprawat,3 volumes, by Prince Wachirayan; Pathomsomphot, by Somdet Pharsangkharat (Sa); and Satsanaphithi,compiled by the Department of Ecclesiastical Education. 4) Vinaya Pitaka: Nawakowat, by Prince Wachirayan; and Winayamuk, volume 1, by Prince Wachirayan. (b) Nak tham 2 1) Essay: Phutthasatsanasuphasit, volume 2, by Prince Wachirayan. 2) Sutta Pitaka: ThammawiphakParichet,\)yPmtceN 3Lc\nra.-ya.n. 3) Lives of the Buddha’s disciples: Anuphutthaprawat, by Prince Wachirayan; Phutthanuphutthaprawat,by Prince Wachirayan; Sangkhitikatha, by Prince Wachirayan; and Pathomsompthot, by Somdet Phrasangkharat (Sa). 4) Vinaya Pitaka-.Winayamuk,volume 2, by Prince Wachirayan. (c) Nak tham 1 1) Essay: Phutthasatsanasuphasit, volume 3, by Prince Wachirayan.

94

A State Religion in History

2) Sutta Pitaka'.Thammawichan, by Prince Wachirayan; Samathakammatthan, by Prince Wachirayan; Wipassandkammatthdn, By Prince Wachirayan; Satipatthanasutta from Majjhima Nikdya (in translation); and Girimanandasutta from the Anggutara Nikdya (in translation). 3) The Life of the Buddha: Phutthaprawat,3 volumes, by Prince Wachirayan; Phutthanuphutthaprawat, by Prince Wachirayan; Anuphutthaprawat, by Prince Wachirayan; Sangkhit.ika.thd, by Prince Wachirayan; and Phrapathomsom-photikatha, by Prince Paramanuchit. 4) Vinaya Pitaka: Winayamuk, volume 3, by Prince Wachirayan; > and the Sangha Act, b.e. 2505. At each grade the examination is comprised of four sections. In the first section candidates must write a short essay on the Dhamma, on a given topic based on the material in Phutthasdtsanasuphasit. The second section, an examination on the Dhamma, is based on various doctrinal textbooks by Prince Wachirayan. Only for nak tham 1 are original works of the Sutta Pitaka employed, and these only two short sutta in Thai translation. The third section, which covers the life of the Buddha and his disciples and the history of the Buddhist Councils, likewise relies heavily on the prince-patriarch’s textbooks, with classical works (namely, Pathomsomphot) playing a minor role. The fourth section, dealing with the precepts, is based entirely on Winayamuk, Prince Wachirayan’s threevolume commentary on the Vinaya Pitaka. Notably absent from these examination syllabi are topics related to the Abhidhamma Pitaka. While this may be quite natural for an examination on the basic doctrine of Buddhism, it also reflects the general aversion of Thais to philosophical speculation. In marked contrast to Burma, for example, where Abhidhamma studies flourished and spread to the old kingdom of Lanha Thai that centered on Chiang Mai, interest in the Abhidhamma Pitaka in most of Thailand is strikingly low. More than 90 percent of the designated textbooks for the nak tham examinations are the work of one man (and not altogether surprisingly, given the history of examinations) . Through the examinations, the doctrines expounded in Prince Wachirayan’s textbooks have come to constitute what is in effect the orthodox creed of the Thai Sangha. In this fact lies evidence for the establishment of the Thai national ecclesia; but at the same time it may account for the sterility of Buddhist research in Thailand. The Parian

Examinations

Ironically, through the introduction of the nak tham examinations, the parian examinations appear to have resumed their traditional lin-

The Establishment

and Significance of the Ecclesiastical

Examination

System

95

guistic character. At all but the lowest grade, the examination syllabi center on Pali-to-Thai and Thai-to-Pali translation. The latter, though termed “translation,” actually involves the literal reproduction of' an original Pali text from the given Thai text; free translation is not acceptable. Preparation for the exam thus requires word-perfect memorization of the entire set Pali text, from which a section of fewer than five hundred words will be chosen by the examiners. For prayok 8, for example, candidates must memorize a text of more than 160,000 words. The following are the subjects and texts set for each grade.3 7 (a) Prayok 3 1) Pali-to-Thai translation: Dhammpadatthakatha,8 parts. 2) Explanation ofword functions: Dhammapadatthakatha,8 parts. 3) Pali grammar: Bali Waiyakon. 4) Correction of Thai usage and composition of official correspondence. (b) Prayok 4 1) Thai-to-Pali translation: Dhammapadatthakatha, part 1. 2) Pali-to-Thai translation: Mahgalatthadipam, part 1. (c) Prayok 5 1) Pali-to-Thai translation: Mahgalatthadipam, part 2. 2) Thai-to-Pali translation: Dhammapadatthakatha, parts 2—4. (d) Prayok 6 1) Thai-to-Pali translation: Dhammapadatthakatha, parts 5-6. 2) Pali-to-Thai translation: Samantapasadika, volumes 3—5. (e) Prayok 7 1) Thai-to-Pali translation: Mahgalatthadipam, parts 1—2. 2) Pali-to-Thai translation: Samantapasadika, volumes 1—2. (f ) Prayok 8 1 ) Pali versification 2) Thai-to-Pali translation: Samantapasadika, volumes 1—2. 3) Pali-to-Thai translation: Visuddhimaggha, volumes 1—3. (g) Prayok 9 1 ) Pali versification 2) Thai-to-Pali translation: Visuddhimaggha, volumes 1—3. 3) Pali-to-Thai translation: Abhidhammatthavibhavini. The Pali texts used for the parian examinations are classified in Table 5 according to the division of the canon to which they pertain: the Sutta Pitaka for grades 3 to 6, the Vinaya Pitaka for grades 6 to 8, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka for grades 8 and 9. What is characteristic is that none of the texts belongs to the Pali Tripitaka-,all are extracanonical commentaries. As with the nak tham courses, students have no opportunity to address themselves to the original scriptures; they are required only to memorize and reproduce faithfully the orthodox commentaries. Recent trends concerning the nak tham and parian examinations can be seen in the statistics of the Department of Religious Affairs for 1967,

96

A State Religion in History

Table 5. Classification of Pali Texts Set for Parian Examinations Prayok Grade

Text

3-6 4-5 6-8 8-9 9

Dhammapadatthakatha Mangalatthadlpani Samantapasadika Visuddhimaggha Abhidhammatthavibavini

Table 6. Ecclesiastical a

Course

Nak tham Parian

Canonical

Examination Statistics,

181,423 20,051

144,765 5,980

Sutta Pitaka Sutta Pitaka Vinaya Pitaka Abhidhamma Pitaka Abhidhamma Pitaka

1967 (part 1) c

b

Number of Number of Students Examination Enrolled Candidates

Division

Number of . (b)/(a) (in percent) Successful

79.7 29.8

Pass Rate

Candidates

(c)/(b) (in percent)

35,744 1,471

24.7 24.6

which are summarized in Tables 6 and 7. 3 8 The first thing these statistics reveal is a low pass rate: in both courses, three out of four candidates failed. The second salient feature is the low proportion of students enrolled in the parian course who sit the examination: fewer than three in ten. Besides indicating the difficulty of the parian examinations, this can be regarded also as indicative of a decline in interest in the examination itself. I n response to these trends, the Sangha has reportedly already prepared a “new study curriculum for the Pali language examinations” which includes additional secular subjects.3 9 Should this system be adopted, it will probably signify a second wave of reformation of the ecclesiastical examinations, the successor to the “Wachirayan reformation.”

112,736 20,384 11,555

144,675

1 2 3

Total

RADE

Number -of Candidates

Table 7. Ecclesiastical

Grade

Number of Candidates

Number of Successful Candidates

Parian

co co O)

m —• >—‘ p Ui

• >—• I—‘ W N2

1.

The Establishment and Significance of the Ecclesiastical Examination System 19. 20. 21 . 22. 23.

24. 25.

26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

32.

33. 34.

35. 36.

37. 38. 39.

99

“Kotkhobangkhap samrap kanplae pliraparitattham nai sanam” (Regulation on doctrinal translation in the royal examinations) in P.K.P.S. 16: 480-486. The preceding paragraphs are based on Chun’s “Phraprawat,” pp. 1 14-122. The text of the Military Service Act is reproduced in P.K.P.S. 20: 302-3 1 4. Ru thamma, the phrase here rendered “knowledgeable of the Dhamma” is also the term used in the fifteenth-century hierarchy laws. Article 4 of the Military Service Act, which obliged every male to enter military service for two years at the age of eighteen, in practice applied only to novices, since they could not receive the full ordination until they reached the age of twenty. Chun, “Phraprawat,” pp. 177-178. The first edition appeared in 1899, and a revised edition in the following year. King Chulalongkon’s views on the book can be found in P.P.S.K., Phraratchahattalekha-laiphrahat, pp. 74—76. Ibid., p. 54. P.P.S.K., Kan khanasong, p. 129. Chun, “Phraprawat,” pp. 178—180. Ibid., pp. 180-182. The preceding paragraphs are based on ibid., pp. 182—205. Monkhonthepmum, Phra, Prawal kansatsanasuksa-kansuksa thai khong coat anongkharam lae larundnusat (History of religious education and Thai education at Wat Anongkharam), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1957). Ongkan Suksa (Department of Ecclesiastical Education), Ruangsop bdlikhong ongkdn suksa, pho. so. 2497 (On the Pali examinations of the Department of Ecclesiastical Education, b.e. 2497 (a.d. 1954) (Bangkok, 1954), p. 56. Ibid., pp. 57-58. Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs, Pramuan rabiap kansdtsana khong krom kdnsatsana krasuang suksa-thikan (Collection of regulations on religious affairs of the Department of Religious Affairs, Ministry of Education) (Bangkok, 1951), p. 241 Jane Bunnag, Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman (Cambridge: The University Press, 1973), p. 26. Uthai Phutthawangso, Phramaha, “Kansiiksa pariyattham,” (Doctrinal education) in Phutthasatsana kap sangkhom thai (Buddhism and Thai society), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1967), pp. 53-65. Ibid., pp. 6 1 - 6 2 . Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs, Raingan kansdtsana prachampt 2510 (Ecclesiastical report for b.e. 2510 (a.d. 1967) ) (Bangkok, 1967), p. 98. Uthai, “Kansiiksa pariyattham,” p. 64. The “new Pali examination” (ball phaen mai) is reportedly intended to broaden the horizons of monks and novices, and will be divided into three parts: Pali language, nonreligious subjects, and general studies.

6 The Sangha Democratic

Act under the System

The coup d’etat ofJune 23, 1932 toppled Thailand’s absolute monarchy, which, following the forty-two-year-long reign of Chulalongkon, had extended and consolidated its rule over almost every corner of the kingdom. In its place was instituted a parliamentary regime in which the king ruled under a constitution. The ensuing four decades, however, have seen more than ten attempted or successful coups d’etat and sixteen complete revisions or partial amendments of the constitution; the current situation is one of “government by decree,” with the latest “permanent” constitution having been abrogated only two years after it came into effect.1 Thailand clearly has not yet broken completely with its past in its attempt to build a democratic nation. Nevertheless, the dramatic transformation of the king’s raison d’etre and the sweeping formal democratization of the state systems that began in June 1932 urged upon the Sangha, which historically had flourished in close association with the monarchy, a revision of its relationship with secular authority. In this chapter I shall consider how Thai Buddhism fared under the new democratic system, through a comparative study of the two Sangha Acts promulgated since the constitutional revolutuon. Section 4 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Siam, promulgated on December 10, 1932, reaffirmed in law the traditional relationship between the king and Buddhism: “The King professes the Buddhist Faith and is the Upholder of Religion.” Beyond that, the leaders of the new democratic government at first went no further in spelling out a clear-cut policy toward the religion. They must have been fully aware that Buddhism was a unifying factor par excellence in Thai society, and therefore have been concerned (lest they lose popular support) not to give the impression of having substantially withdrawn the patronage of secular authority that Buddhism had enjoyed under the absolute monarchy. 100

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

101

Later, the democratic government introduced measures to tighten its control over the Sangha. The first of these was the establishment, in April 1934, of an independent committee empowered to investigate the state of monastic finances. Set up ostensibly to eliminate the confusion of Sangha property and private property, the committee was charged simultaneously with evaluting the Sangha’s assets. The second measure followed in August of the same year, when a bill came before the Assembly of People’s Representatives proposing the construction of 122 new monasteries, the passage of which transferred the power to approve construction from the king to the assembly. The presentation of this bill occasioned a heated debate in which the germ of opposition to the Sangha emerged. Although the complaint of one member that “monks were lazy and not beneficial to the people” met with general disapproval, similar anticlerical opinions surfaced in later debates on Sangha property, and in 1936 a bill to relax the application of the Military Service Act to monks was defeated. 2 While this tide of antagonism on the part of the secular authority gradually swelled, two developments took place within the Sangha. One was the attempt by Sangha leaders to establish a relationship with the new secular authority; the other was a rebellion by some of its members against the Sangha hierarchy. Never historically antagonistic toward the state, the Thai Sangha, while stressing the principle of its autonomy, had always remained within the polity and subordinate to secular authority. The Sangha Act of 1902 had greatly reinforced this situation. Following the 1932 coup, the supreme patriarch had reaffirmed the Sangha’s traditional stance on the side of the ruler by immediately setting forth a line of support for the revolutionary government. To this day such subjugation to secular authority remains a characteristic of the Thai Sangha. The second development, however, had no precedent. In September, 1932, three months after the coup, a group of young monks organized themselves in opposition to the system of Sangha administration. The response of the Sangha leadership, encouraged by its support for the new government, was high-handed: the ringleaders were forced to disrobe under an Order of the Supreme Patriarch issued in January of the following year. 3 This event was an important indicator of the movements in the Thai Sangha during the transition period. Two years later, in February 1935, two thousand monks representing twelve provinces converged on the capital to petition Prime Minister Phraya Phahon to democratize the Sangha’s administration.4 I t was a further signal that the Sangha’s control over its membership had loosened since the coup d’etat.

102

A State Religion in History

THE SANGHA ACT OF 1941 Having passed through the Assembly of People’s Representatives in August, 1941, the Sangha Act of b.e. 2484 received the royal seal and was promulgated two months later on October 14. A government statement issued at that time characterized the new law as “approximating the Sangha’s administrative organization to the mode of state government, within limits that do not violate the Vinaya.” 5 This meant the introduction of democratic principles into the Sangha administration. And, in fact, the new act was studded with democratic expressions not found in the old act. Whether this formal democratization of the Sangha was implemented in response to a heightening of the demands for democratization within the Sangha or based on a government decision taken without regard to such developments is yet to be investigated. Replacing the Sangha Act of 1902, which had been enacted on the initiative of Prince Wachirayan and had continued in force for almost forty years, the democratic government’s Sangha Act of 1941 aimed at bringing the Sangha administration formally into line with the governing principles of a modern state, the tripartite separation of powers. 6 Consequently, the wording of the act was strongly colored by the translation of political terms into Buddhist terms. With the exception of the traditional designation of sangkhardt (Pali,, sanghardja) for the supreme patriarch or “king of the Sangha,” whose office corresponded to that of the king in the polity, these terms were all newly coined by substitution of the element sangkha (Sangha) for rattha (“state”): sangkharnontri (ecclesiastical minister), corresponding to ratthamontrv, khana sangkhamontn (ecclesiastical cabinet), corresponding to khana ratthamontrv, nayok sangkamontn (chairman of the ecclesiastical cabinet), corresponding to nayok ratthamontn (prime minister); and sangkhasapha (ecclesiastical assembly) corresponding to ratthasapha. The term sangkharat, though of ancient origin, did not appear in the 1902 act. In the new act, it was used specifically to mean head of a unified Sangha. Article 5 of the new act vested in the king the power to appoint the supreme patriarch, thus clearly defining the subordination of the Sangha to the state. The supreme patriarch’s tenure of office was lifelong, and no provisions were made for his dismissal. The supreme patriarch was empowered to enact Sangha regulations (sangkhanat'} on the advice of the ecclesiastical assembly (Article 7), to control the Sangha administration through the ecclesiastical cabinet (Article 8), and to arbitrate internal disputes through the khana winaithon,or ecclesiastical courts (Article 9) . These provisions appear to be modelled

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

103

on. sections 6, 7, and 8 of the 1932 constitution, under which the king exercises “legislative power by and with the advice and consent of the House of the People’s representatives;” “executive power through the Council of Ministers;” and “judicial power through the Courts duly established by law.” The ecclesiastical assembly, the Sangha’s legislature, was to be composed of no more than forty-five members, who were to be elders of thamma rank or higher, officials of phra khanachan ek rank, or holders of the parian ek qualification (Article 11). If the number of eligible monks exceeded this complement, members were to be selected on the basis of rank, which follows the order just cited, and then seniority. Thus, for example, a phra khanachan ek official of thirteen years’ standing in the monkhood would be appointed to a vacant seat before a parian ek holder of twenty years’ standing. Elders of thamma rank or higher were the sangkharat, the somdet phrarachakhana, and the highest class of phrarachakhana, those whose titles included the element “thamma.” Phra khanachan were monk-officials who administered the Sangha’s affairs, corresponding to government officials in the national polity. 7 And parian ek were monks who had passed grade 7 or higher of the Pali examinations. The ecclesiastical cabinet was to be composed of a chairman and no more than nine other Ministers. Ministerial appointments were to be made by the supreme patriarch, but required the counter-signature of the Minister of Education (Article 28). Half of the ten cabinet ministers, including the chairman, were to hold seats in the ecclesiastical assembly (Article 29). Ministerial appointments were for four years. And ministers could be dismissed at the request of the Minister of Education (Article 3i). Corresponding to the ministries ofstate, four ecclesiastical ministries were set up: ongkan pokkhrong (administration), ongkan suksd (education), ongkan phoeiphae (propagation), and ongkan satharanupakan (public works), each of which was to be in the charge and control of one cabinet minister (Article 33). The ecclesiastical courts were judicial organs for the settlement of disputes (adhikarana-, Thai athikon) as defined in the Pali Vinaya (Article 50). A three-tier system of courts was adopted, corresponding to the secular courts. The local administrative structure of the Sangha was to be established through Sangha regulations (Article 34) . The first legislation based on this provision was enacted on November 14, 1942, a year after the enforcement of the Sangha Act, and was the Sangha Regulation Prescribing Rules for Local Sangha Administration {sangkhdnat rabiap borihan kan khanasong suan phumiphak phutthasakkarat 2485).6 This provided for local

104

A State Religion in History

administrative units at three levels, the province, the district and the commune (tambori), paralleling those of the secular administration. Enacted on the same day, the Sangha Regulation Establishing Regional Boundaries (sangkhdnatkamnotkhetph.dk pho. so.2485) grouped the provinces into six phdk,or regions: phdk klang (center) , phdk burapha (east), phdk isan (northeast), phak nua (north), phdk tai (south), and phdk phiset (special) (Article 4) , 9 These larger groupings, however, did not survive long. On August 6 of the following year reforms were implemented abolishing the six phak and reorganizing the regional administration of the Sangha along the lines of the secular administrative structure. This arrangement persisted for nine years. Then, in 1952, when nine state administrative regions were established, the Sangha followed suit, setting up “the nine regions.” 10 At the same time, the four central ecclesiastical ministries established representation at the provincial and district levels. At the bottom of the Sangha organization were the monasteries, which were of two types: “monasteries which have received Royal permission to establish a sima,” and monastic residences. That secular authority held the right to authorize the establishment of sima is a further sign of the Sangha’s subordination to that authority. Each monastery was to be in the charge of an abbot (chao dwdt) (Article 42). All ecclesiastics (monks and novices) and laymen (temple boys, etc.) resident in a monastery were placed under the abbot’s supervision, and could be expelled from the monastery if they disobeyed him (Article 44) . Figure 14 shows the Sangha organization built on the basis of the Sangha Act of 1941. With the supreme patriarch at its apex and the monasteries at its base, this hierarchical structure was more highly organized than its predecessor based on the act of 1902. SANGHA ADMINISTRATION

AND SECTARIAN DISCORD

The formally democratic administrative organization introduced into the Sangha by the act of 1941 appeared at first to function smoothly. But twenty years later, during a grave crisis in the Sangha brought about by a dispute between the Mahanikai and Thammayut sects over the Order’s leadership, it was scrapped by the Sarit government. Here I shall attempt, from the fragmentary sources available, to outline the history of Sangha government during these two decades. The Thammayut sect began as a fundamentalist reform movement founded in the 1830s by Prince Mongkut (later Rama IV) , himself then a monk. Though at first not generally accepted because of its heavy borrowing from the Mon Buddhist tradition, its prestige rose with the

I

Ongkan Pokkhrong (Administration) Ongkan Phoeiphae (Propagation)

under the Sangha

I

Khana Winaithon (Ecclesiastical Courts)

Wat (Monastery)

I

Tambon (Village)

Amphoe (District)

Changwat (Province)

Phak (Region)

(Provincial Administration)

Chan Ton (Court of First Instance)

Chan Utthon (Court of Appeal)

I

Chan Dika (Supreme Court)

Act of 1941

Ongkan Satharanupakan (Public Works)

Khana Sangkhamontn (Ecclesiastical Cabinet)

System

Fig.14. Sangha Organization

Ongkan Suksa (Education)

I

I (Central Administration)

I

Sangkhasaphd (Ecclesiastical Assembly)

Somdet Phrasangkharal (Supreme Patriarch)

The Sangha Act under the Democratic

105

106

A State Religion in History

Table 8. Sectarian Membership of Supreme Patriarchs Chairmen of the Ecclesiastical Cabinet Order of Succession

Name

and

Period of Office

Sect

1910-1921 1921-1937 1937-1944 1944-1958

Thammayut Thammayut Mahanikai Thammayut

Supreme Patriarchs 10 11 12 13

Prince Wachirayan Prince Chinaworasiriwat Tissatewo Phikkhu Prince Wachirayanawong Chairmen of the Ecclesiastical

Cabinet

1

Somdet Phramahawirawong (Tisso Phikkhu) Somdet Phraphutthakhosachan (Yanawaro Phikkhu) Phra Sasasanasophon (Utthayi Phikkhu)

1942-1946

Thammayut

1946-1951

Thammayut

1951—

Thammayut

2 3

recruitment of a succession of princes, and gradually its influence within the Sangha grew. One man who did much to consolidate the Thammayut sect’s influence was Prince Wachirayan. In 1893, while abbot of Wat Bowonniwet, he was appointed patriarch of the Thammayut sect. From this position, he took the initiative toward reformation of the Sangha, beginning, as detailed in the previous chapter, with the reform of the ecclesiastical examinations. Later he was the driving force behind the reforms that centralized power in the'Sangha through the Sangha Act of 1902, which he enacted with the king’s assistance. In the reformation of the Sangha his achievements were as momentous as those of Prince Damrong were as Interior Minister in the reform of the provincial administrative system. And when, in 1910, Prince Wachirayan was appointed supreme patriarch, becoming head of the Sangha in name and fact, the Thammayut sect’s ascendancy within the Sangha was established. Numerically, the difference in strength between the Thammayut and Mahanikai sects is striking. According to one source for 1958, for example, the Mahanikai sect had 20,295 monasteries nationwide, almost 97 percent of the total of 20,944, while Thammayut monasteries numbered only 649. 1 1 But on the top echelon of the Sangha administration, the positions of the sects were reversed. The data in Table 8 clearly show the predominance of the Thammayut. Of the four supreme patriarchs from the time of Prince Wachirayan, listed in the upper part of the table,

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

107

three belonged to the Thammayut sect; and together these three occupied the office for all but six of the forty-eight years covered by the table. The post ofchairman of the ecclesiastical cabinet (sangkhanayok') created by the Sangha Act of 1941, as shown in the lower part of the table, was occupied entirely by the Thammayut. In the ecclesiastical assembly, too, the Thammayut’s representation was disproportionately great, its members occupying twenty- two of the quorum of forty-five seats.1 2 This imbalance in the Sangha’s power structure, despite the Thammayut’s long and close connections with the royal family, must obviously have constituted a source of discontent for the majority Mahanikai sect. Prime Minister Phibun viewed the continuing antagonism between the sects with apprehension, but his approach to reconciliation was overly idealistic. Aiming ultimately at unifying the Sangha, he took such measures as building Wat Phraslmahathat, where monks of both sects would coreside, and planning a council of the Dhamma-Vinaya; but his disregard for the imbalance in the distribution of power doomed his efforts to failure. The sectarian conflict surfaced abruptly in 1949, sparked off by a circular from the secretary-general of the Thammayut ordering its governors in the provinces to “secede from the Sangha.” Unlike the central administration, which was operated on nonsectarian principles, the provincial administration had parallel structures for each sect, which appointed governors to take charge of its own monasteries. But because of their small numbers, in many provinces the Thammayut monasteries were controlled, impractice, by Mahanikai governors. It was their objection to such loss of control by virtue of the sect’s minority that prompted the Thammayut leaders to order the drastic step of secession, a measure that was blatantly in breach of the Sangha Act. The circular bearing the signature of the secretary-general of the Thammayut was dispatched on July 16, 1949 to Thammayut governors across the country. An important document pertinent to the history of this period, though rather long, I will quote it in its entirety.1 3 Wat Bowonniwet Secretariat of the Thammayut July 16, b.e. 2492 Letter no. 341 /2492 From the Secretary-general of the Thammayut To All Thammayut governors On the Matter of Control of the Thammayut in the Provinces At present, in many provinces, a tendency has emerged for governors of the Mahanikai to attempt to bring Thammayut monasteries under the control of their own sect. This is an encroachment upon sectarian autonomy and a violation of the Constitution of b.e.

108

A State Religion in History

2492. To establish principles for future steps, the Thammayut referred this matter to a committee for deliberation; and as the result of its deliberations the committee reached the following conclusions. At present, when the interim provision of the Sangha Act of b.e. 2484 remains valid, the Thammayut has the right to assert its freedom of autonomy. Further, the Constitution of b.e. 2492 also prescribes freedom of choice of sect and freedom within the sect. Moreover, the regulations of the Ecclesiastical Ministry of Education concerning the promotion of education also recognize the distinction between the sects, stipulating, for example, separate subventions for each district [amphoe] in the sum of ninety baht for the Mahanikai and thirty baht for the Thammayut. For these reasons, [the committee considers that] the monasteries of the Thammayut should revert to the state at the time of the Act of R.s. 121 [1902]. The Patriarch of the Thammayut has already given his approval to this matter, and orders that monasteries of the Thammayut in all regions should revert to their former state. This is to say, the Thammayut monasteries in all territorial divisions, from the smallest to the largest, should be under the control of governors of the Thammayut and should not be subordinate to governors of another sect. The governors in all regions require the numbers of monks and novices for the compilation of statistics, and these should be obtained through the provincial governors of the Thammayut and not directly from individual monasteries. Accordingly, you should hereafter act in compliance with this order issued by the Patriarch of the Thammayut, and endeavor to make its import fully understood in all monasteries of the Thammayut located in the province under your jurisdiction. Phra Maha Sai Tulayb The “interim provision” mentioned in the circular refers to Article 60 of the Sangha Act of 1941, which states: Until the completion of the Council of Dhamma-Vinaya, or until eight years have lapsed since the day of enforcement of this act, no Sangha regulation, Sangha decree, Order of the Supreme Patriarch, Ministerial Order, or rule shall be issued that would change the doctrines that have long been believed and practiced. Although the inaccessibility of documents pertaining to the Council of Dhamma-Vinaya contemplated by Phibun makes it difficult to grasp precisely the purpose of this interim provision, it is clear from an announcement made when the act was brought into force that Phibun aimed ultimately to unify the Sangha. In view of this, it is hard to see how the Thammayut could have sought to justify action that negated the current Sangha Act on the grounds that the interim provision was still effective. Clearly, further research is required based on reliable prime historical sources.

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

109

Be that as it may, this blatant factionalism on the part of the Thammayut stirred the inveterate antipathy of the’Mahanikai. And the sectarian antagonism was further aggravated by events surrounding the appointment of the third chairman of the ecclesiastical cabinet. In 1946, the Thammayut sect’s Somdet Phra Phutthakhbsachan (Yanawaro Phikkhu) had been appointed as the second chairman of the ecclesiastical cabinet. In his sixth year in office, however, he was incapacitated by old age. His duties became the responsibility of Phra Sasanasophon (Chuan Utthayl Phikkhu), the director of the Ecclesiastical Ministry of Propagation, and also a member of the Thammayut sect, who was made acting secretary to the chairman. Following the chairman’s death in 1951, when Phra Sasanasophon succeeded him in the office, the long-standing resentment of the Mahanikai boiled over. On June 15, 1951, four days after the new chairman’s appointment was settled, forty-seven high-ranking monks of the Mahanikai sect sent a long petition to Prime Minister Phibun. Though lengthy, I cite the whole of this document, since it is a valuable indicator of the state of the conflict between the Thammayut and the Mahanikai in this period of the postwar era.1 4 June 15, b.e. 2494 On Matters Concerning the Appointment of Somdet Phra Wannarat as Chairman of the Ecclesiastical Cabinet To His Excellency the Prime Minister and the State Government We, the Elders of the Mahanikai sect, desiring your judgment on the matters we shall describe hereafter, present to Your Excellency this letter. It is our earnest hope that you will show, justice and protection toward the Mahanikai befitting its standing and circumstances. Of the past and present state of Sangha administration Your Excellency is well aware, and there is no need for reiteration here. However, we are grieved that matters concerning the situation of the Mahanikai have not yet reached the ears of Your Excellency and your Government. At present, the Thai Sangha takes as its legal standard the whole of the Sangha Act of b.e. 2484 apart from the interim provision. This means, of course, that the Thai Sangha should be administered as a body without distinction between the Thammayut and Mahanikai sects. Further, those monks who serve the Sangha as officials should be selected according to their qualifications and abilities regardless of whether they are of the Mahanikai or Thammayut sect. At first, the Sangha was administered in accordance with this law. Subsequently, however, the Thammayut, perhaps allured by some unfathomable advantages of power, attempted by all possible means, both direct and indirect, to negate the Sangha Act of b.e.

110

A State Religion

in History

2484. Directly, they interfered in the national assembly through supporters of their sect, they distorted the provisions of the Constitution, and ultimately they succeeded in rendering the Sangha Act of b.e. 2484 a dead letter. Indirectly, they attempted to oppose the Sangha Act by fabricating a variety of pretexts and carrying out schemes like the circulation of hostile documents. But even at that they were not satisfied. That was in 1949. The present supreme patriarch, who should be a fatherly master of the Sangha, whether because he was of biased mind to begin with, or because it pleased him to be deluded, joined forces with the people of the minority sect, and while himself simultaneously holding office as patriarch of the Thammayut sect gave instruction to the secretary-general of that sect to send a circular to all Thammayut governors across the country ordering them to secede from the system of the Sangha Act ofB.E. 2484. This is in spite of the fact that many Thammayut monks are responsible as officials for a part of the system set up by this law, and that the supreme patriarch himself holds office under that system. Since that time, the Thai Sangha has been completely transformed and now deviates from the principles of this law. That is to say, the Thammayut has begun a separate Sangha administration independently of the Mahanikai. This, too, is solely because the Thammayut patriarch issued an order to reject the supervision of Mahanikai officials. Do the people of the Thammayut have the audacity to say they will not allow the Mahanikai to supervise monks of the Thammayut, while closing their eyes to the fact that their own sect continues to dominate the Mahanikai? This is not all. Since the promulgation of the new Sangha Act, the Thammayut monks have used all means to prevent the Mahanikai from assuming important posts in the Sangha, particularly that of sangkhanayok. The fact that the Thammayut has devoted itselfsolely to occupying important posts in the Sangha without regard for the Sangha Act is clear from the evidence set forth below. (1) The first sangkhanayok was Somdet PhramahawTrawong, [the abbot of] Wat Boromaniwat [that is, a member of the Thammayut] . (2) The second sangkhanayok was Somdet Phraphuttha khosachan [the abbot] of Wat Tepsirin [also of the Thammayut]. Even when he became too old to carry out his duties, this monk stayed in the post of sangkhanayok. This was only possible because he created a post called acting secretary to the sangkhanayok, which has no basis whatsoever in law. Moreover, this acting secretary was none other than Phra Sasanasophon of the Thammayut. (3) The third sangkhanayok is this selfsame Phra Sasanasophon. In this way, since the administrative organization of the Sangha was reformed, all three sangkhanayok have been Thammayut men, or, if the one acting secretary is counted, all four people have belonged to the Thammayut. Everyone acknowledges that the Mahanikai embraces several tenfold more monks than the Thammayut. The Mahanikai has many eminent elders both in their

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

111

qualifications and in seniority. Nevertheless, the supreme patriarch, the fatherly master of the Sangha, perhaps being graciously pleased to see us as lowly illegitimates, gave not the slightest help to the Mahanikai; moreover, he stripped these illegitimates of their rights, for example, to the present position of sangkhariayok, and divided them among the children of the lawful wife. Is the present sangkhanayok in charge of only the Mahanikai, with whose administration the Thammayut should, in a sense, have no connection? Since 1949 the person who should be our fatherly master has taken a wrong course in carrying his partiality to excess and trying to build up a nationwide Thammayut Sangha. And, perhaps for fear of taking a wrong course, the supreme patriarch saw fit to give to his own legitimate child the office of sangkhanayok, which both legally and circumstantially should belong to the Mahanikai. When one considers the matter in accordance with Dhamma, [one will conclude that] the position of sangkhanayok should be given this time to none other than Somdet Phrawanarat, the abbot of Wat Benchamabopit. The office of sangkhanayok the last time and the time before was occupied by the Thammayut. Should they say that this was decided on the basis of seniority according to the teaching of the Buddha, and not especially in order to disadvantage the Mahanikai, we would probably close our eyes and bow in assent. For we know our masterly father is a man who lacks the compassion befitting his position and standing. If with pure eyes, with hopes for the peace of the Sangha, and with hopes for the welfare of the Government and the majority of the people, one looks at the men and the circumstances involved, one may reach the following conclusions. (1) In comparison with Phra Sasanasophon, Somdet Phrawanarat is senior in age, better qualified, and of higher ecclesiastic rank. (2) Somdet Phrawanarat is an elder of the Mahanikai . And the current position of sangkhariayok, due to such circumstances as those already indicated, is an office commanding only the Mahanikai Sangha. (3) Somdet Phrawanarat is a man who has won the trust of several tenfold more monks and lay believers than has Phra Sasanasophon. (4) In the present Ecclesiastical Cabinet, Somdet Phrawanarat is (with the exception of Somdet Phraphuttachan, who is no longer able to attend the meetings) of longest standing in the monkhood, and, moreover, is respected by Thammayut and Mahanikai ministers alike. (5) Among the present elders of highest rank who hold the title of Somdet Phrarachakhana,Somdet Phrawanarat alone is still firm in body and able to perform his duties. When one looks as a whole at all the objective circumstances spanning the past, present, and future, and considers the qualifications and virtues of the man, there can be no doubt that Somdet Phrawanarat is the person most fitting for sangkhanayok.

112

A State Religion in History

For the preceding reasons, we, the entire body of elders of the Mahanikai, petition that Your Excellency the Prime Minister and Your Excellency’s Government will give this matter careful consideration and appoint Somdet Phrawanarat as sangkhanayok, thus bringing happiness to the Mahanikai Sangha and its lay followers. We as one do truly regret having taken such action here as will trouble Your Excellency. We do so because ecclesiastics should adopt, on principle, peaceful means above all. Nevertheless, having fully considered the various circumstances, we reached the conclusion that we could not but take some form of action for the sake of the majority. We judged that unless we endeavored to resolve this situation speedily by resorting to such means, it might result in great loss to both the Sangha and the Government. The monks of the Mahanikai feel disheartened at having been forced illegally into subservience for many years. To a man, our greatest fear is that a situation will arise in which the Mahanikai monks, when placed in such a position, will rise up together and pursue their demand for rights to the point of committing the unlawfulness to which discontented elements are prone. Those who have continually been oppressed unjustly will probably consider that they can thereby exalt the honor of the Sangha or of their beloved Thai Buddhism. For this very reason, we as one have thus, by peaceful means, appealed to Your Excellency and Your Excellency’s Government. If you take this in bad part and believe that we are monks who have not yet forsworn earthly desire and are bent on action to disturb the peace, then we can do nothing. But if certain effects ensue from the acts of men in power who have become slaves to earthly desire, those effects will naturally befit their cause. If one speaks on the basis of the truth of the principles of government, those who hold power inevitably become great in this world. How terrible it would be if that power were built unrighteously, if it were a power unbefitting the time and place. How alarming it would be if those who hold power should by magic produce a weapon and give it to Phra Sasanasophon of the Thammayut, a person who has nothing to do with the Mahanikai, and if that Phra Sasanasophon should become the one to command the elders of the Mahanikai. If the Thammayut or the lay believers who support the Thammayut say that Phra Sasanasophon is a wise and influential elder who has won the trust of the Thammayut, the Mahanikai will agree and will offer words of gratitude for the magnanimity with which he unsparingly applies his ability and intellect for the benefit of the Mahanikai. However, Phra Sasanasophon is an elder who is still unable to renounce earthly desires, and he cannot win the trust of the Mahanikai. To judge from their behavior hitherto, the Thammayut are concerned about the Mahanikai and [the] position [of sangkhanayok] . If they are not attached to the position of sangkhanayok, we would like them to show us proof by surrendering it to the Mahanikai. Only then will the Mahanikai trust them, and in future accord them respect. Finally, from our innermost hearts we pray that Your Excel-

The Sangha Act under the Democratic

System

113

lency and Your Excellency’s Government will take heed of the truth of the matters we have herein described and without delay confirm the rightfulness of our entreaty, made with the resolution of the vast majority of the Mahanikai. We also state clearly on this occasion that, for whatever reason, should results follow that differ from the burden of this petition, we regrettably cannot accept responsibility, even though a situation unfavorable to the Sangha may arise. We have also made petition of the same burden to the supreme patriarch, and look forward to realizing our objective. Phra Thammatrailokachan Forty-six other signatories This petition from the Mahanikai elders was an appeal to state authority to intervene in the Sangha’s affairs to redress the imbalance of power in the Sangha government. I t met with immediate success. Less than three weeks later, on July 3, 1951, the supreme patriarch appointed Phrawanarat as sangkhanayok', Phra Sasanasbphon was demoted to his former post as head of the Ecclesiastical Ministry of Propagation. In this way the Sangha was able temporarily to avert a crisis. The antagonism between the two sects, however, did not abate. Seven years later, in 1958, it resurfaced over the question of succession to the supreme patriarchate.

SARIT THANARAT AND THE NEW SANGHA ACT On November 11, 1958, the thirteenth supreme patriarch, Krom Luang Wachirayanawong, died of cerebral hemorrhage at the age of eighty-five, having held the post since 1945. 1 5 Although the scarcity of materials prevents our learning the circumstances in which his successor was selected, certain facts imply that a struggle took place between the Thammayut and Mahanikai sects over the supreme patriarchate: eighteen months passed before the post was filled; and from around May 1 960, leaflets were distributed charging certain high-ranking monks in the Sangha administration with trying to deceive the government. Documentary support for this inference is afforded by the Announcement of the Prime Minister’s Office on Developments in the Sangha, dated October 28, 1960. Like the two documents cited earlier, this contains many important details, and, therefore, I present a full translation as a foothold to future study.1 6 Announcement of the Prime Minister’s Office on Developments in the Sangha Today, when the Government is devoting its energies to the furtherance of national development, and you, patriotic people, are prepared to sacrifice your lives to stand against the state of emergency that has been provoked by the situation in neighboring countries, a grave situation has arisen in the Sangha. Should this

114

A State Religion

in History

situation be neglected, the danger exists not only that it will bring ruin to Buddhism itself but that it will harm the State, and therefore the Government considers it appropriate to issue herein an announcement making clear its beliefs. The government’s true thoughts are those of you the people. Namely, it believes Buddhism to be the national religion, and reveres the trinity of Nation, Religion, and King. It respects monks and novices, of whom there are as many as 250,000 in the country; it grants them privileges over the common layman; it allows them to live without borrowing or buying anything, without troubling themselves with mundane occupations; it makes it possible for them to live without paying taxes, without performing military service, and without having to brave dangers of any kind. All this because the Government cherishes the attainment of just one objective: it wishes them to be pure men who observe the precepts correctly, men who practice the Buddha’s teachings strictly, men who will make Buddhism prosper forever. The Government has, however, chanced to hear that certain high-ranking monks have long since been indulging in acts improper to their ecclesiastical status. Having received a petition from the quarter that has thereby been harmed, and having also heard the complaints of people concerned for the future of Buddhism, the Government has examined how it should deal with this. Two approaches are open. One way is for the Government to let the matter take its own course as an internal affair of Buddhism and refrain from all intervention. The other way is to call into question whether it is permissible to let the matter pass. Buddhism is the national religion, and the great majority of the people are concerned lest it should decline. And it is without doubt the Government’s duty to protect the State and the Nation, Religion, and King. Having considered the two methods, the Government has laid down that its duty is to cooperate with the Sangha. This means that at such times as the Ecclesiastical Cabinet shall require a witness or testimony, the Government will do all within its power to cooperate. Hitherto the Government has never interfered in the Sangha over what might be deliberated in the Ecclesiastical Cabinet or what kind of steps might be taken. Nevertheless, the Government has constantly kept vigil for the appearance of unsettled conditions, of situations that threaten security. The Government has never made public, until today, its views on the state of the Sangha, because it cherished the hope that the Sangha would by itself, in complete freedom, judge right and wrong, without feeling constrained by the Government. Were the Sangha to govern itselfby its own efforts, should the Government not need to meddle in any way, it would truly be a cause for rejoicing. However, the situation has developed along unfavorable lines. Pamphlets concerning the questions of the supreme patriarch’s successor and the reshuffling of the Ecclesiastical Cabinet, akin to those that created such disturbance when they were distributed five months ago, have again been distributed. This pamphlet criticizes a

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

115

certain high-ranking monk and implicitly charges that the Government has been deceived by that high-ranking monk. What of the facts? [On these matters,] the Government has not, up to the time of issuing this announcement, believed what anyone has said; nor, moreover, has the Ecclesiastical Cabinet yet communicated its final decision to the Government. Probably of utmost concern to you, the people, is the question of what action the Government should take were it asked to cooperate when the Ecclesiastical Cabinet had reached a certain decision but those affected by that decision did not comply with the Ecclesiastical Cabinet’s orders and, moreover, the Ecclesiastical Cabinet was unable to enforce its orders. Through this announcement, the Government wishes to make the following clear: If it is requested to do so by the Ecclesiastical Cabinet, the Government must cooperate within the limits allowed by law. From the outset, the Government has cherished the hope that this affair would be settled peaceably as a matter of the Vinaya rules, Sangha regulations, and internal concerns of the Sangha in general; that it would end without occasioning a decline in Buddhism, without requiring the Government’s participation. However, if the affair is not resolved peaceably, if our Government fears the State to be threatened by unsettling developments or a dangerous situation, it will have to cooperate with the Ecclesiastical Cabinet in devising absolute measures. The Government sincerely hopes that the situation will not reach the stage where it will, be obliged to take measures it would prefer not to. Herein the Government announces its beliefs to you the people. Prime Minister’s Office October 28, b.e. 2503 The prime minister behind this announcement was Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, who had seized power through coups d’etat in 1957 and 1958. Sarit’s domestic policy, as the opening lines of the announcement also show, emphasized national development, to which end he sought to raise administrative efficiency by centralizing power to a high degree in the state administrative organs, even if this meant sacrificing democratic principles. One link in this development policy was the strengthening of national unity by exalting traditional values. For this reason, developments in Buddhism, and above all in the Sangha, were not simply the concern of the religious sphere but were of strategic importance to the implementation of Sarit’s policy. The divisive struggle within the Sangha thus was seen as a threat to the national interest. And the announcement of the Prime Minister’s Office clearly shows a mixture of restraint and impatience in Sarit’s attitude toward the Sangha. Sarit judged the root of the discord in the Sangha to lie in the democratic features introduced by the Sangha Act of 1941, and, there-

116

A State Religion in History

fore, he determined to revise the law so that the Sangha could effectively play the role he expected of it. Thus he ordered a new Sangha act to be drafted. On June 28, 1962, the first draft was presented before the constituent assembly, where it was referred to a special committee for deliberation. More than five months later, on December 30, the bill came again before the assembly and was passed by a vote of 112 to 1. Promulgated on December 31, 1962, the Sangha Act, b.e. 2505 (1962) came into force on January 1, 1963. The new Sangha act swept away all the democratic provisions of the old act and concentrated power in the person of the supreme patriarch, providing for an organization through which he could control the Sangha through a Council of Elders, of which he could appoint the majority of members. While bolstering the supreme patriarch’s authority, however, the new act also deepened the Sangha’s subordination to secular authority, by stipulating that the supreme patriarch, whose tenure of office had hitherto been lifelong, could be dismissed by decree. A note appended to the act set forth clearly and concisely the reason for its enactment: The reason for enactment of this Act is that the administration of the Buddhist Church is not a matter to be based on the principle of separation of powers for the sake of balance among them as is the case under the current law. Such a system is an obstacle to effective administration.1 7 This single passage, an explicit public rejection by the government of the democratic principles introduced into the Sangha by the old act on the grounds of their intrinsic unsuitability to Sangha administration, should be of interest to scholars of Buddhist history and political history alike, as a reflection of the political ethos of the early 1960s. The democratic principles of the old Sangha act had been nothing other than an expression of “the inclination to prefer foreign principles that colored the Phibun system.” 1 8 Likewise, the new act reflected Sarit’s political philosophy: his rejection of the principles of the Phibun regime for government on the basis of Thai principles (Lak.that). Foreign Minister Thanat Koman, who acted as spokesman for Sarit, expounded this philosophy lucidly in the following speech. The basic cause of political instability in the past can probably be found in the fact that, generally speaking, various foreign systems have been transplanted abruptly into our soil without careful preparation and, still more, without regard for the social logic of our country or the character traits of our people, in a word, our national character .>. . . When one looks back at the history of the people, what one will see clearly is that this country has functioned and

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

117

prospered best under some kind of authority— not a tyrannical authority,, but a unified authority in which all elements of the nation are ordered in their surroundings.1 9 Political scientist Toru Yano has pointed out that “Sarit regarded paternalistic absolute rule as natural, like something pledged.” 2 0 And the governing principles set out in the new Sangha act also reflect this political philosophy. The final part of the note appended to the Sangha act asserts that “absolute rule” by the supreme patriarch is the most fitting system,of Sangha administration: It is therefore appropriate to amend the existing law so that the Supreme Patriarch, head of the ecclesiastical community, can command the order through a Council of Elders in accordance with both the civil law and the Buddhist disciplines, thereby promoting the progress and prosperity of Buddhism.2 1 The Sangha Act of 1962 comprises forty-six articles grouped as follows: Articles 1-6 (name of the act, etc.) Chapter 1 “The Supreme Patriarch” (Articles 7—11) Chapter 2 “The Council of Elders” (Articles 12—19) Chapter 3 “Administration of the Sangha” (Articles 20-23) Chapter 4 “Discipline and Disrobing” (Articles 24-30) Chapter5 “Monasteries” (Articles 31—39), Chapter 6 “Religious Property” (Articles 40-41) Chapter 7 “Penalties” (Articles 42-44) Chapter 8 “Miscellaneous” (Articles 45-46) By comparison, the Sangha Act of 1941 was constituted as follows: Preamble General Provisions (Articles 1—4) Chapter 1 “The Supreme Patriarch” (Articles 5—10) Chapter 2 “The Ecclesiastical Assembly” (Articles 11—27) Chapter 3 “The Ecclesiastical Cabinet” (Articles 28-37) Chapter 4 “Monasteries” (Articles 38—45) Chapter 5 “Religious Property” (Articles 46-49) Chapter 6 “Ecclesiastical Courts” (Articles 50—52) Chapter 7 “Penalties” (Articles 53—56) Chapter 8 “Miscellaneous” (Articles 57—59) Interim Provision (Article 60) The difference between the two acts is apparent even in their composition. The provisions for an ecclesiastical assembly, cabinet, and courts that characterize the 1941 act are supplanted in the 1962 act by provisions for a Council of Elders. First established by the Sangha Administration Act of 1902, the

118

A State Religion in History

Council of Elders was under that law the decision-making body of the Sangha, made up of the eight elders who were the governors and deputy governors of the four major divisions of the contemporary Sangha. The same act made no provision for a supreme patriarch, in part it seems because, when the 1902 act was passed, the office was vacant and Prince Wachirayan, who succeeded to the office eight years later, had not yet fully established his influence within the Sangha. Legally, therefore, if not in actuality after Prince Wachirayan’s appointment in 1910, the Council ofElders governed the Sangha. Not until the act of 1941 was the supreme patriarch’s leadership of the Sangha confirmed in law. And in the 1962 act it was reconfirmed/ Under the 1962 act (Article 12), the Council of Elders was to comprise as ex-officio members the supreme patriarch and monks of the somdet phrarachakhana grade, namely, the four highest ranking elders after the patriarch, together with from four to eight monks of phrarachakhana grade who were to be appointed by the supreme patriarch for a period of two years. The Cduncil ofElders was “charged with the authority and duty to administer ecclesiastical affairs in an orderly manner,” to which end it was “vested with the power to lay down rules, institute proceedings, and issue orders that are not inconsistent with or opposed to the law of the country or the Discipline of the Order” (Article 8). Although the Council ofElders revived under the new law resembled that of the 1902 act in its rights and duties, the two bodies differed greatly. While the 1902 act afforded the council members equal status, the 1962 act made the supreme patriarch ex-officio president of the council, and allowed him to dominate the council through his power to appoint from half to two-thirds of the membership. This, together with the abolition of the ecclesiastical assembly and cabinet, represented a strengthening of his power to an uprecedented degree. A further feature of the 1962 act was the explicit provision for dismissal of the supreme patriarch by decree. The 1941 act, while providing for his appointment by the king, lacked provision for his removal; implicitly, his tenure of office was lifelong, probably by virtue of a tacit general agreement. This was, then, an extraordinary provision. As one commentator has noted: “any mahathera appointed as supreme patriarch would be a man of great virtue, and consequently such a situation [as would require his dismissal] would scarcely arise.” 2 2 Not once, in fact, in almost two centuries under the Ratanakosin dynasty has a supreme patriarch been ousted from office by state authority; and even the most recent instance, the renowned episode in which a supreme patriarch of the Thonburi era, Phrasangkharat (Si), was demoted to the status of common monk for resisting King Taksin’s religious claims, was criticized in the royal, chronicle as the act of a deranged monarch.2 3

The Sangha Act under the Democratic System

1 19

The break with tradition that this provision represents implies a positive motivation behind its institution. That Sarit should furnish himself with the means to take the extraordinary step of dismissing the supreme patriarch can only be understood in the context of the national development policy to which he attached highest priority and the strategic importance of the Sangha to its implementation. To this end the Sangha had to be efficiently administrable; it had to be able to perform effectively the roles the government expected of it. The Sangha acts of 194 1 and 1962 reflect extremely well the political philosophies of the prime ministers behind them and the political ethos of Thailand at the times of their promulgation. The former act introduced formally into the Sangha the imported political principles of democracy. But the mechanical application of the system, without the least regard for the realities of Sangha politics, produced an adverse effect, serving only to intensify the dispute between the Mahanikai and Thammayut sects and to entrench their antagonism. Unlike Phibun, Sarit sought actively to use the Sangha for purposes of state government, to which end he drastically reformed those systems that hampered efficiency. Through this, the national ecclesia-building that had characterized Thai buddhism since 1902 was carried a step further, with the raising of the Sangha’s subordination to the state to its highest level.

NOTES ,1. After the article on which this chapter is based was written, the regime of Thanom Praphat collapsed as the result of the first mass insurrection in modern Thai history, that of October 14, 1973 led by Bangkok students. 2. Based on Virginia Thompson, Thailand: The New Siam (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941), pp. 638—640. 3. Ibid., pp. 641-642. 4. Ibid., p. 642. 5. “Thalaengkan ruang phraratchabanyat khanasong” (Announcement on the Sangha Act) , in Phraratchabanyat khanasong phutthasakarat 2484 phrom thang kham thalaengkan (The Sangha Act ofB.E. 2484 and the announcement thereon) (Bangkok: Rongphim Mahamakutratchawitthayalai, 1941), pp. A—B. 6. English translations of the three Sangha acts can be found in Acts on the Administration of the Buddhist Order of Sangha (Thailand: The Mahamakuta Educational Council, 1963). These form the basis of the translations of those sections of the acts cited herein, with amendments where necessary. 7. The duties of the monk-officials were set out in a Sangha regulation ofB.E. 2486 (1943) , which may be found in Saat Milinthawat, Pramuan rabiap khanasong (Collected Sangha regulations) (Bangkok, 1956), pp. 50-56. 8. Ibid., pp. 45-50. 9. Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs Pramuan rabiap kan satsana (Collected regulations on religion) (Bangkok, 1951), pp. 27-28. 10. As of 1967, the country is divided into eighteen regions. For details, see the attached

120

11. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16.

17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

A State Religion in History map in Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs, Raingem. kan satsana pracham pi 2510 (Report on religion for b.e. 2510 (1967) ) (Bangkok, 1967). Patithinsatsana 2501 khang rongphim kan satsana (Religious calendar of the religious press for b.e. 2501 (1958)) (Bangkok, 1958), p. 4. The sources of information are: on the supreme patriarchs and chairmen of the ecclesiastical cabinet, Sangiam Khumphawat, Somdet phrasangkharat samai chakriwong (Supreme patriarchs of the Chakri dynasty) (Bangkok: Ruamsan, 1965); and on the sectarian affiliation of the members of the ecclesiastical assembly, Patithinsatsana 2501, pp. 7-8. The original text appears in Sangiam, Somdet phrasangkharat, pp. 438-447. Ibid., pp. 452—454. On the date of the appointment, see the Roll of the Ecclesiastical Cabinet in Wachien Wachiraphahu, Pramuan phraratchphithi, phraratchakuson, ratthaphitht, satsanaphitla lae rabiap borihan kan khanasong (Chabap phiset) (Collection of royal ceremonies, royal religious ceremonies, state ceremonies, religious ceremonies, and regulations on Sangha administration (special edition) ) (Bangkok, n.d.) pp. 266273. Sangiam, Somdet phrasangkharat, p. 464. The text used appears in Pramuan sunthoraphot khong chomphon Sarit Thanarat pho. so. 2502-2504 (Collected speeches of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, b.e. 2502—2504 (1959-1961) (Bangkok, 1964), pp. 260-261. The English translation is by the author, and appears in Yoneo Ishii, “Church and State in Thailand,” in Asian Survey 3, no. 10 (1968): 869. Torn Yano, Tai, Biruma gendaiseijishi kenkyu (A study of the modern political history of Thailand and Burma) (Kyoto: The Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, 1968), p. 237. Ibid., p. 237. Ibid., p. 239. Ishii, “Church and State in Thailand,” pp. 869-870. Yoneo Ishii, Kairitsu no sukui: Shojo Bukkyo (Salvation through the precepts: Hinayana Buddhism) (Kyoto, Tankosha, 1969), pp. 190—1'91.. Praphat Trmarong, Tuabot lae khambanyai phrardtehabanyat khanasong phutthasakarat 2505 athibdi riang lamdap matra (Text and explanation of the Sangha Act of B.E. 2505 (1962) (Bangkok, 1963), p. 57.

7 National Sangha’s

Integration Role

and the

At the root of the communalism that impedes national integration in developing countries, Clifford Geertz identified sentiments or attachments that derive from such given conditions of man’s social existence as contiguity of dwelling, kin connection, birth into a particular religious community, speaking a particular language or dialect, and observing particular social customs. These he called “primordial” sentiments or attachments.1 He states: One is bound to one’s kinsman, one’s neighbor, one’s fellow believer, ipso facto', as the result not merely of personal affection, practical necessity, common interest, or incurred obligation, but at least in great part by virtue of some unaccountable absolute import attributed to the very tie itself. The general strength ofsuch primordial bonds, and the types of them that are important, differ from person to person, from society to society, and from time to time. But for virtually every person, in every society, at almost all times, some attachments seem to flow more from a sense of natural—some would say spiritual— affinity than from social interaction.2 These primordial sentiments or attachments act as powerful internal bonds within the constituent peoples of developing countries, generating the so-called communalism that obstructs national integration. Examples may be found in the movements in India to reorganize states along linguistic lines, in the troubles in Malaysia over the distribution of rights among the constituent ethnic groups. Paradoxically, these same primordial attachments are almost the only thing capable of providing the dynamic of national integration in developing countries with no tradition of popular government. But should an ascendant ethnic group overemphasize its own primordial attachments it risks arousing the antagonism of other groups and invites 121

122

A Stale Religion in History

the collapse of national integration. A classic case in point is the unrest in Burma over the recognition of Buddhism as the state religion. 3 The privileged status afforded Buddhism, a basis of primordial attachments among the Burmese, incited the non-Buddhist peoples who make up 15 percent of the Burman population to rebel against the Burmese-led form of national integration. In Thailand, the king and Buddhism are the two principal symbols of national integration. They are closely interrelated, for, as we saw in chapter 2, while the king owes much to his role as “defender” of Buddhism for the legitimacy of his rule, Buddhism depends on the protection of the state for the continuing support of its unworldliness. The symbolic complex they thus form is probably the most powerful stimulus of primordial sentiments among Thais. And through their representation in the national flag and the frequent ceremonial use of the flag, the primordial sentiments associated with these symbols are repeatedly invoked.4 Thailand, among Southeast Asian countries, is held to have a relatively homogeneous ethnic composition. Certainly, in comparison with Malaysia, where the core ethnic group of Malays make up barely half of the total population, or Burma, where a quarter of the populace comprises ethnic minorities, it is.no exaggeration to say that Thai society is “remarkably homogenous,” 5 with well over 90 percent of the population ethnically Tai. Nevertheless, problems involving ethnic minorities are among the variety of factors that threaten national integration in Thailand. In this chapter I shall examine, with reference to new developments in the Sangha, the role that Thai Buddhism is playing in strengthening national integration. MINORITIES IN THAILAND Jean Duffar has grouped the minorities resident in Thailand into three categories: those with small, scattered populations; those with larger, concentrated populations; and one large and ubiquitous minority.6 The overseas Chinese who constitute this third category have been extensively discussed in the literature, and since they have no direct bearing on the theme of this chapter I shall not deal with them further here.7 The first category includes both the Indians and the Catholics of Chinese or Vietnamese descent. The Indians numbered approximately 6,700 in the 1960 census and were mostly engaged in commerce; about 60 percent were concentrated in Bangkok and the remainder in provincial towns and cities. The Catholic population is reportedly around 127,000, the majority of whom are Chinese, although Vietnamese Catholic communities can be found in Chanthaburi and other provinces of the Southeast, while Nongkhai province in the Northeast has several communities

National

Integration

and the Sangha 3s Role

123

of Lao Catholics. None of these groups presents a serious political problem to the central government.8 Politically the most important of the minorities are those of the second category, of whom there are four groups: the Lao of Northeast Thailand, who number around 10,000,000; the Muslims of South Thailand, who number around 800,000; the hill tribes inhabiting the mountains of North and West Thailand, who number around 300,000; and Vietnamese refugees in Northeast Thailand, who number about 40,000. The Lao of the Northeast

The fifteen provinces that make up Northeast Thailand cover an expanse of 170,000 square kilometers, amounting to 31.5 percent of Thailand’s total land area. To the east and north, the region adjoins Laos across the Mekong River; to the south the Dangrek mountains mark the border with Cambodia; and to the west, the Phetchabun mountains run north to south, hampering communication with North and Central Thailand. The majority of inhabitants of the Northeast are Thai-Lao, who ethnically are closely affinitive with the Lao of Laos. Historically, until the late nineteenth century, their loyalty was to Vientiane and Luang Prabang rather than to Bangkok. Even until comparatively recently, because of its remoteness and inaccessibility, their region was little known to the Central Thai public and largely undeveloped by the government.9 Their regional culture, too, is distinctive: they eat a staple of glutinous rice, speak a dialect that is uncouth to the Central Thai ear, and enjoy the performance of mo lam singers accompanied on the khaen,an indigenous reed mouth-organ. Together these geographic and cultural factors have distanced the Thai-Lao psychologically from the culture of Bangkok. Economic poverty is also remarkable in the Northeast. The national farm survey for 1953, for example, records the average income of farm households in the Northeast at under 46 U.S. dollars, as against the national average of 103 dollars.10 For this reason, there is a considerable migration of workers to Central Thailand, where there are openings for pedicab drivers, laborers, and so on, and to the South, where available work includes labor in the tin mines. A survey conducted in October, 1954 revealed that about half of the holders of pedicab-operator’s licences issued in Bangkok were natives of the Northeast.11 The major cause of the Northeast’s poverty is held to be low agricultural productivity arising from the shortage or instability of the water supply. The survey of pedicab drivers just cited also ascribes their need to work away from home mainly to the water shortage in the region. 1 2

124

A Stale Religion in History

Against this socioeconomic background, the Northeast has traditionally harbored a strong antagonism toward Central Thailand. At the start of this century, when Thai rule began to penetrate the region through the progressive centralization of power, the peasants revolted, inspired by a millenarian ideology. 1 3 Today the situation is even more complex, for entangled with the problems of the Northeast itself are international political problems stemming from the rise and influence of communist power in Laos. Just how gravely the Thai government views the Northeast problem is suggested by the fact that, in October, 1961, when it established the Committee on Development of the Northeast, it deemed it necessary to reconfirm that the Northeast “is an integral and inseparable part of the Kingdom of Thailand and that the Thai nationals living in the Northeast region are Thai citizens.” 1 4 The Muslims

of the South

The Muslim population of South Thailand was around 830,000 according to the 1960 census; and in the four provinces bordering Malaysia (Narathiwat, Yala, Pattani, and Satun) Muslims of Malay descent made up over 80 percent of the population.1 5 Formerly comprised of substantially autonomous tributary states of Siam, this border region, from the end of 1901, came under the direct rule of the Bangkok government with the application of the Regional Administration Act of 1897. The majority of local people, however, who were ethnically Malay, and who thus spoke the Malay language, which is totally unrelated to Thai, who worshipped Islam, and who possessed their own culture, objected to the imposition of rule by Thai Buddhists and opposed the Bangkok government at every opportunity. When it was announced precipitately that the Regional Administration Act would be enforced early in 1902, the governors of Tani (Pattani), Saiburi, and Rangae (Narathiwat) opposed the appointment of regional officials by the central government and the transfer of financial administration to a revenue officer. In response, the Bangkok government despatched a gunboat to the area and arrested the governor of Tani, stripped him of his official post, and banished him to Pitsanulok. 1 6 Attempts to integrate the Muslim residential areas into Thailand, which from the outset involved political and military subjugation of the Islamic cultural sphere to the Buddhist one, led to distrust and defiance of the central government which were manifested in repeated attempts by the Muslims to throw off the yoke of Thai government rule. In 1947, a petition bearing 150,000 signatures was sent to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, seeking an internationally supervised poll of the region’s inhabitants to determine the country to which they should belong. 1 7

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

125

Bangkok, Thonburi, Ayutthaya, and other Central Thai provinces around the capital constitute a further area of concentration of Muslims in Thailand, whose number according to the 1960 census exceeded 190,000. 1 8 The majority of this population are descended from Malay captives who were resettled in and around Bangkok after the subjugation of South Thailand in 1832.1 9 Though retaining the Islamic faith, they have through necessity assimilated to the overwhelmingly predominant Thai culture around them, and today present virtually no political problem.2 0 Hill Peoples

of the North and Northwest

From the thirteenth century, Tai groups advanced into the intermontane basins of the North where they established a group of small states whose basis of production was comparatively intensive agriculture that relied on small- and medium-scale irrigation works. Like those of South Thailand, the principalities of the North were formerly autonomous vassal states. Since the dispatch of a governor general in 1874, however, integration of the region with Central Thailand has progressed steadily, and today the process is virtually complete. Unlike in the Northeast and South, antagonism toward Central Thailand is generally lacking in the North. The reason is that the inhabitants possess a unique traditional culture which the Central Thai admire, and enjoy a high level of agricultural productivity based on the traditional irrigation facilities. The mountain ranges that encompass the Tai-inhabited intermontane basins of the North are the habitat of the hill peoples.2 1 In the extreme north, the Daen Lao mountains run east to west forming the frontier with the Burmese Shan states; in the west the Thanonthongchai mountains shape the border with the Burmese Kayah states; in the east, the tail of the Luang Prabang range stretches southward along the Laotian border and adjoins the Phetchabun mountains; and down through the center of the region run the Phipannam and Khuntan ranges. The mean elevation of these mountains is 1,600 meters, while the highest peak1, Doi Inthanon, rises to 2595 meters. Inhabiting these mountain areas are approximately 30,000 people belonging to a dozen or so ethnic groups and speaking languages of the Tibeto-Burman, Miao-Yao, and Mon-Khmer families. The largest groups include the Karens (numbering 123,000), the Meo (53,000), the Akha (25,000), the Thin (19,000), the Lisu (17,000), the Lahu (16,000), and the Yao (16,000). These migratory peoples live principally by swidden farming and hunting, and many of them cultivate opium. They have little contact with the lowland Tai and little sense of belonging to Thailand. The Meo, in particular, harbor strong anti-Thai feelings that

126

A State Religion in History

stem from the conflict of interests between them and the central government over such matters as the restriction of opium cultivation, and which, on occasion, have lead to armed clashes with Thai authorities. Vietnamese

Refugees

in the Northeast

After the Second World War, large numbers of Vietnamese refugees crossed the Mekong, mainly from .Laos but also from Cambodia, and sought shelter in Northeast Thailand. The Thai government at first allowed them to take up residence in thirteen provinces, but later confined them to five and announced a policy of repatriation to North Vietnam, to which end informal contacts with North Vietnam were opened through the Bandung Conference of 1955. In August, 1959 a repatriation agreement was concluded in Rangoon by the Red Cross representatives of Thailand and Vietnam. On the basis of this agreement around 35,000 Vietnamese refugees were sent back to Vietnam in the thirty-month period from January, 1960 to June, 1962. In a survey conducted in November, 1959, however, approximately 85,000 persons had reportedly registered as wishing to be repatriated. Under a new agreement, the repatriation effort continued until July, 1964, when, with the escalation of the Vietnam War, the North Vietnamese proposed a temporary halt to admissions on the grounds of safety, and the flow of repatriates stopped. At present (September, 1973) there is no prospect of the repatriation work restarting.2 2 BASIC POLICIES TOWARD ETHNIC MINORITIES The composition of ethnic minorities in Thailand is extremely complex. Ethnically, only the Thai-Lao of the Northeast are Tai, while the remainder belong to a diversity of groups: Tibeto-Burman, Miao-Yao, Mon-Khmer, Viet-Muong, and Malay. The Thai-Lao and Khmer are Therayada Buddhists like the Thai, while the ethnic Malays of South and Central Thailand are Muslims, the Vietnamese refugees practice Catholicism or a syncretic amalgam of Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, and the hill peoples of the North and Northwest, apart from those who have espoused various Protestant sects, mostly lie beyond the sway of the world religions, being so-called animists. A similar diversity obtains in the occupations of the minorities: the Thai-Lao are subsistence rice farmers, the Vietnamese refugees are market gardeners, craftsmen, retail traders, and so on, the Muslims of the South are farmers and fishermen, while the hill tribes of the North and Northwest are swidden farmers. Their connections, moreover, with other countries involve directly or indirectly all of Thailand’s neighbors: Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Burma, Malaysia, and China.

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

127

Against this complex background, the Thai government’s policies toward the ethnic minorities have been equally diverse, ranging from active assimilation and gradual integration to containment and exclusion, depending on such factors as the language and religion, the historical background, and the present situation of the people concerned. The basic government policy toward the Muslims of South and Central Thailand, apart from the period when the Phibun administration took positive measures toward assimilation, has stressed gradual integration. The keynote of the policy toward Islam, which derives from the explicit constitutional principle of religious freedom, has been the offer of similar protection and encouragement to that afforded Buddhism. The legal expression of this basic stance is the Royal Decree on the Patronage of Islam, enacted in May, 1945 (and partially amended in 1948) . This decree concerns the protection and promotion of the religious activities of Muslims by the king in his constitutional capacity as the “upholder of religion.” Based on the provisions of this decree, in 1950 a five-year Islamic College was founded in Bangkok for the furtherance of Islamic education.2 3 The decision announced in October, 1946 to apply Islamic law in the four provinces of the South in civil actions involving family and inheritance laws in which both parties concerned are Muslims, can also be considered a step taken in line with this basic ideology. While the government thus sanctioned religious autonomy for Muslims, at the same time it introduced measures designed to bring the Muslim community as a whole under its control— measures that made the 1945 decree as significant to Islam’s position in relation to the government as the Sangha Administration Act of 1902 was to Buddhism’s position. The decree vests ultimate responsibility for Islam in a chularatchamontn,a government official whose duty it is to “protect” Islam on the king’s behalf. It further provides for the establishment of an administrative organization comprising a Central Committee for Thai Islam headed by the chularatchamontn,and below it Islamic Committees at the provincial and the mosque or prayer house (surau) levels. This laid the foundation for a unitary organization through which the chularatchamontn, a government official, would command all Thai Muslims through the surau. While rejecting a short-term religious policy of assimilation (that is, conversion to Buddhism) in favor of appeasement and control, the government at the same time established a long-term integration policy based on the extension of primary education with emphasis on the standard Thai curriculum. In the period 1965—1967, for example, seventy-eight new primary schools were opened in the four border provinces. Moreover, the average teacher-pupil ratio in schools in these provinces, ranging between 1:28 in Yala and 1:33 in Narathiwat, was well

128

A State Religion in History

within the target level set in the second five-year national development plan, which aimed to reduce the national ratio from 1:38 to 1:35. The proportion of Muslim children to all pupils in these government schools, however, though high in the lower grades, fell sharply in the higher primary grades, reflecting parental preference for the traditional pondok (Islamic religious schools).24 Nevertheless, in the long run this educational policy, I believe, can beexpected to promote the integration of the Thai Muslims. In Northeast Thailand, on the plane of international politics, considerations of communist strategy encompass the recent problem of the Vietnamese refugees and the historical problem of the antagonism against Central Thailand that stems from the building of a state centered on the Siamese in the late nineteenth century. Government policy toward the refugees, as described earlier, is basically one of surveillance of their activities through restriction of their residential areas and of repatriation. In 1967 the total number of Vietnamese living in the Northeast was 44,800, not all of whom wished to be repatriated. ‘The government believed that some of them were supporting communist terrorists in the region. 2 5 The problems involving the Thai-Lao of the Northeast are often cited in the context of the security of the Thai-Laotian border. Because of the historical and socioeconomic factors underlying these problems, the government has adopted a two-tier policy of symptomatic treatment and prophylaxis, comprising measures both to suppress guerilla activities and to raise living standards in the region through public welfare and economic development. Thailand’s decision in 1966 to send troops to South Vietnam occasioned a sharp increase in the number of armed clashes between Thai security forces and rebels in Northeast Thailand. The jungles of the Phu Phan mountain range straddling the three provinces of Nakhon Phanom, Sakon Nakhon, and Kalasin reportedly harbored some 1,200 insurgents in direct contact with Hanoi and Peking, against whom the Thai government frequently dispatched army and police units. In counterinsurgency operations in Nakhon Phanom, for example, it was announced that in the first five months of 1972, Thai security forces lost 57 killed and 73 wounded and themselves killed 42 terrorists, wounded 145, and captured 70.2 6 Parallel with counterinsurgency measures, efforts were launched by the Sarit cabinet in 1961, and, in the main were continued by the Thanom government, to dispel the antagonism of the Thai-Lao toward the central government by raising their living standards through regional development. In 1961, with Sarit himself as chairman, a Committee on

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

129

Development of the Northeast was set up to draft a five-year development plan for the period 1962—1966. The plan aimed to raise living standards in the Northeast to a comparable level to those of the other regions and to provide a socioeconomic basis for future economic stability and development. This would be achieved through: (1) provision of water for home use, agriculture, and industry; (2) construction and improvement of roads and railways; (3) promotion of agriculture; (4) extension of power supplies; (5) encouragement of private trade and industry; and (6) promotion of community development, public health, and education. Khon Kaen was singled out as the first “area development center,” wherein economic progress was expected to accelerate development in the surrounding rural areas. 27 In 1964, the pace of development was stepped up with the inauguration of an Accelerated Rural Development Program, which was. applied first to the Northeastern border provinces ofNakhbn Phanom, Loei, Nong Khai, Sakon Nakhon, Udon and Ubon, and in the following year was extended to Chiang Rai, Nan, Uttaradit, Roi Et, and Kalasin. The emphasis of the plan was on rural road construction, and in 1965 in the first six provinces 202 kilometers of new roads were opened. Other projects included the training of local people, agricultural promotion, school building, and the provision of irrigation facilities and health centers. In 1966, mobile health units were organized to dispense medical treatment in the remote villages.2 8 The so-called hill tribes resident in the North and West of Thailand traditionally maintained a relationship of mutual tolerance and noninterference with the lowland population. Their numbers were never accurately known, since they were always excluded from the government’s census reports and district gazetteers, and until recently, though lying within Thai territory, the mountainous border areas they inhabited were not effectively under government control. In December, 1958, however, Prime Minister Sarit banned opium production and charged the Interior Ministry with responsibility for overseeing the ban. Since many of the hill tribes cultivated opium, this led to the intensification of their relationship with the central government as they became the subject of its controls. In June, 1959, the cabinet approved the Interior Ministry’s plan for Land Settlement Projects for hill tribes. “Settlement areas” (nikhom) would be established to which these people would be encouraged to migrate. Pilot projects set up by the ministry’s Public Welfare Department in the four provinces of Tak, Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, and Loei, however, were not ultimately accepted by the hill peoples, and the trial ended in failure. In 1961-1962, the same department conducted a socioeconomic

130

A State Religion in History

survey of selected opium-growing peoples, the Meo, Yao, Lisu, Lahu, and Akha„ with the cooperation of international organizations and foundations. Following the recommendations made on the basis of the survey findings, the government launched three projects in 1963—1964: (1) intensification and broadening of settlement project activities; (2) mobile development workers to approach the hill peoples outside the settlement project areas; and (3) establishment of a Tribal Research Centre. The intensification and expansion of the settlement program involved use of the settlement areas as agricultural experimental stations, demonstration centers for farmers, marketing centers for cash crops, training centers for development workers, and bases for development work.2 9 These various plans were intended to bring a peaceable end to both the illegal cultivation of opium and the shifting cultivation that causes erosion of the mountain soils, and to discover means to provide the hill peoples with an alternative livelihood. At the same time the aim was to extend government control to these people and to foster in them a sense of belonging to the Thai nation. A new dimension, that of security, was before long added to the originally fairly limited problem of the hill tribes, when it became apparent that communist infiltrators were operating in the North. Their activities included attacks on Thai government officials and even the murder of the governor of Chiang Rai. In March, 1972 some 500 communists, including Pathet Lao, North Vietnamese, and Meo tribesmen, were reported to have taken control of the Phae Lae mountain range, which runs along Chiang Rai’s border with Laos. I n June, 1972 it was announced that communist forces had crossed the border from Sayaburi province in Laos and established a base in the mountains in the Thung Chang area of Nan province, and that as a countermeasure, companies of hilltribesmen loyal to the Thai government had been formed and were stationed in the mountainous areas of Nan, Chiang Rai, and Phetchabun, where they would carry out engagements.30

THE SANGHA AND SOCIETY Buddhism

as a Basis of Primordial

Attachments

According to the 1960 census, 93 percent of the population of Thailand is Buddhist, that is, some 24,560,000 in a total of 26,350,000 people. 3 1 Since these figures include the four provinces of the South whose populations are over 80 percent Muslim, the proportion of Buddhists in the rest of the country is actually as high as 96 percent. In the rural areas, where the ethnic composition is more homogeneous, the proportion must be even higher. I n these figures lie the statistical backing for the

National Integration and the Sangha 3s Role

131

government’s official statement ofits belief that “Buddhism is the religion inherent in the (Thai) nation” (satsana phut pen satsana pracham chat') ,3 2 As discussed in Part 1 herein, Theravada Buddhism centers on the Sangha, which is given concrete form by the monasteries and the resident monks and novices. According to national statistics for 1967 released by the Department of Religious Affairs, monasteries numbered 24,634, while monks and novices totalled 282,490, an average of 11.5 per monastery.3 3 In the same year, the number of communes (tamhon) in Thailand was 5,036, each of which thus contained an average of 4.8 monasteries. In terms of population, Thailand had one monastery for every 1,316 people; and one in 115 people, or one in 56 of the male population, wore the yellow robe. According to the same statistics, the state-supported royal monasteries in Thailand numbered only 161, of which 78 were concentrated in Bangkok, accounting for 41 percent of the city’s 186 monasteries. The privately supported commoner monasteries, on the other hand, totalled 24,473, of which 24,365 were located in the provinces. Over 99 percent of provincial monasteries, therefore, were commoner monasteries. Provincial royal monasteries, moreover, were all situated in urban areas, meaning that rural monasteries across the country had all been built and were being supported by donations from local people. For the rural inhavitants of Thailand, then, who make up 88 percent of the kingdom’s population, the Buddhism into which they are born expects of them the active support essential to its survival and prosperity. It means that to be a villager is inevitably to be a Buddhist. And anthropological studies have shown this to be true not just of Central Thailand, which we shall now examine in greater detail, but, with the exception of a part of the South, of rice-growing villages in every corner of the kingdom.3 4 Table 9 summarizes the data obtained by Howard Kaufman in a survey conducted in Bangkhuad on the income of the village monastery for the year 1953—1954.3 S Located about twenty-five kilometers northeast of Bangkok, Bangkhuad comprises three hamlets built along a canal and is typical of the small rice-growing villages of the Central Thai delta. At the time of the survey, the village had 744 people in 147 households. Its monastery, Wat Bangkhuad, had ten resident monks, a figure close to the average cited earlier. In addition to 30,032 baht in cash and 5,680 baht of worth of material goods, the monastery received 6,200 liters of paddy rice which it sold and 3,600 liters of raw rice for consumption during the Lenten season when the monks forgo the daily alms-round. If we subtract from the total value of cash and goods the sum deriving from the rental of monastery

132

A State Religion in History

Table 9. Annual Income of Wat Bangkhuad, 1953-1954 (after Kaufman) ' Cash

Baht

Rent from house compounds owned by wat Sale of gold leaf Donations for Kathina festival Occasional rents Personal contribution of the abbot

432 130 24,000 1,470 4,000

Rice

Litres

Raw rice for consumption during Lent Paddy rice given in lieu of money (sold by wat at 0.4 baht/litre) Glutinous rice

Material

Goods

Tools, pencils, books, etc. Special donations to abbot (cigarettes, soap, etc.)

3,600 6,200 1,600

Baht 800 4,880

property and the sale of gold leaf, the extra ordinary donation of 20,000 baht from a British firm for the Kathina festival, and the abbot’s personal contribution of 4,000 baht, the remaining 9,680 baht in cash and goods and 9,800 liters of rice represent the contribution of the Bangkhuad villagers to the monastery. On average each of the 147 households gave the equivalent of 66 baht in cash and 67 liters of rice in the year for the upkeep of the monastery. Such quantification, of course, by no means represents the relation ship between the monastery and the villagers ofBangkhuad in its entirety. The giving and receiving of money and goods is merely one aspect of a deeper bond, for Buddhism is associated in some way with many, if not all, of the rites of passage that every villager experiences in his lifetime.3 6 The childbirth ritual, in which the parturient woman asks the Goddess of Fire to protect her during and after the birth, also includes a recitation of the Namo (Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambudhassa;, “We worship the Blessed One, Arahant, Supreme Lord Buddha”).3 7 When the child is born, the Namo is again recited three times as the umbilical cord is being cut. One month after the birth, a head-shaving ritual (kon phomfai) is held and monks are invited to bless the child. In Bangkhuad, as in the rest of Central Thailand, while few young men become novices, 80 percent of them spend at least one Lenten season

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

133

as a monk while they are between the ages of twenty-one and thirty.3 8 And the occasion of their ordination provides not only them but many of their fellow villagers with opportunity for religious experience. Participation, in the ordination ceremony is believed to be a particularly effective means of making merit (thorn bun). I t is also for reasons of tham bun that monks are often invited to weddings, even, though the Thai ceremony has no direct connection with Buddhism. In Bangkhuad, monks are invited to the bride’s house before the ceremony, where they bless the bride and groom. Rites for the dead are among the most important of Buddhist functions. In addition to the chanting through the night of the death, and on the seventh, fiftieth, and one-hundredth days after the death, a large service is held on the day of the cremation. This often takes place from February to May, when the paddy has been sold and the relatively large sum of money needed is on hand. Not only does Buddhism thus color all of the major rites of passage of the individual, it also acts to mark the passage of time through the tropical year. Monks participate in various ways, by receiving offerings offood, for example, or chanting, not only in such purely Buddhist events as Makhabucha (February), Wisakhabucha (May), the start of the Lenten period (July), and the Kathina festivals (mid-October to mid-November), but also in those that essentially have no connection with Buddhism, such as New Year’s Day, .Songkran (April; New Year’s Day in the old calendar), and Loikrathong (November). The passage of time is also marked by the four monthly holy days (wanphra), which include the days of the full and the new moon, and which also serve to remind the villagers of Bangkhuad that they are Buddhists. They reportedly regard sexual intercourse as taboo on wan phra and the preceding day.3 9 The Sangha

as a Prestigious

Social Entity

The constituent elements of Buddhism are the Three Gems: the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. In considering Buddhism as a social reality, however, the Sangha assumes special importance, since it is only through the Sangha that the Buddha and the Dhamma find expression in society, and it is also through the Sangha that they are transmitted. Buddhist doctrine presupposes the existence of monks oriented to an other-worldly goal; and the formation of a community in which the monks could carry out their spirtitual practices more efficiently gave rise to the Sangha. By relying totally on the laity for its survival, the Sangha has maintained the other-worldliness of its goal and the unworldliness of its conduct. Formally, at least, entry into the monkhood is strictly other-worldly

134

A State Religion

in History

oriented, even though, as we saw in chapter 1, the Sangha’s prosperity in Thailand is due, in part, to the reinterpretation of ordination in the worldly context of tham bun. Even those who, by custom, become monks for just a short period must declare during the ordination ritual that they are joining the Order in pursuit of Nibbana.4 0 Although their objective may be purely to secure future happiness in this world by making merit, rather than to transcend this world and reach Nibbana, they nevertheless remain formally part of an unworldly order that is set apart from the secular order— providing they maintain such external features of monkhood as the yellow robe, the shaven head, and the observance of the precepts. Lay society, too, in order that it can make merit, requires that monks confine themselves to this unworldly order. While thus rejecting the secular order at an ideological level, the Sangha not only locates itself physically in the midst of lay society but also allows laity to approach freely, unlike the closed societies of certain Catholic orders. In traditional society, this resulted in the Sangha’s assumption of a range of secular functions. As pointed out in chapter 1, monks were teachers, doctors, mediators, and counselors; monastery buildings served as classrooms, meeting places, lodges, village administrative offices, courts, warehouses, hospitals, old people’s homes, museums, and art galleries. And the combination of these secular functions with the Sangha’s religious roles, with the people’s reverence for the Sangha as a “sacred entity,” served further to enhance its prestige. NEW DIRECTIONS IN THE SANGHA AND SOCIETY With the formation of the Sarit cabinet in 1959, its formulation of domestic policies that gave priority to national development {kanphatthana prathet'),and its inauguration of Thailand’s first long-term economic development plan, the question of development rose rapidly to prominence in Thailand. Through Sarit’s forceful mounting of a campaign that mobilized all of the mass media, the word “development” {kanphatthana) acquired entirely new connotations and an established currency. In the implementation of his development policy, Sarit assigned a strategic role to the Sangha, and, as we saw in the previous chapter, in order that he might use the Sangha more effectively he reorganized its administrative structure through the Sangha Act of 1962. As a basis of primordial sentiments, Buddhism was seen as a tool to strengthen national integration, through which Sarit hoped to promote development; as a prestigious social entity, the Sangha would provide the instrument with which to motivate people toward community development. In the Sangha, the first signs of “development” appeared in the expansion of their secular interests by the Buddhist universities in Bang-

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

135

kok, the Mahanikai sect’s Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University and the Thammayut’s Mahamakut Buddhist University. In 1961, Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University, for example, added to its single Faculty ofBuddhist Studies a Faculty of Education, comprising departments of education, psychology, library science, and mathematics and physical science. Two years later it opened a Faculty of Southeast Asia Studies, which in 1966 was reorganized as the Faculty ofHumanities and Social Welfare.41 Behind this burgeoning of secular interests there also lay demands from within the Sangha that it act to remain relevant in a changing society and to recapture the influence that, particularly in urban areas, was gradually being eroded by the transfer of its secular functions to state institutions as the nation modernized. In explanation of this expansion, the Assistant Secretary General of Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University is reported to have pointed out that: In the past Buddhist monks and laymen had an intimate rapport with each other because the milieux in which they lived was [sic] much the same; however, today the widening gap between the life of the laymen, (especially in urban areas), and the Bhikkhu demands that monks receive a more widely gauged education. “It is not,” [he asserted], “that we are trying to secularize the Buddhist monk. Rather we are attempting to restore his traditional place as religious leader and guide of the people” (emphasis added).42 Thus equipped to provide monks with a broader education relevant to contemporary society, the Sangha began to cooperate with the government in the realization of its national goals. Development

Projects

and the Sangha

In 1963, the Buddhist universities drew up plans to send graduates to the provinces as teachers, for which they won financial support from the Asia Foundation. Although graduates at first evinced little interest in the project, with only one volunteer being posted in the first year, Mahachulalongkon University reported that in the four years to 1966 a total of sixty-three graduates had been sent to twenty-six provinces. These graduates stayed in their respective posts for one to two years, where— besides teaching at nak tharn schools, Pali schools, and monastic private schools — they assisted in the establishment and expansion of such schools, ran Buddhist Sunday schools, taught and propagated Buddhism elsewhere when opportunity arose, gave guidance in meditation to those who sought it, and also took part in local community development programs.43 This pioneer effort to involve Buddhist monks in rural development

136

Table 10. Destinations 1967-1968

A Slate Religion in History

and Numbers of ThammathUt Monks, Number of Monks

Region Number and Center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Bangkok Ayutthaya Phitsanulok Chiang Mai Udon Ubon Prachinburi RatburT South Thailand Total

‘

1967

1968

114 36 53 221 545 190 94 77 18 1,348

105 35 84 301 448 364 150 100 17 1,604

inspired the government to formulate a grander plan on similar lines, the thammathut program announced by the Department of Religious Affairs in 1965. In the following year, administration of this program was transferred to the Sangha, which had shown itself willing to cooperate on all fronts. Nine regions were established to which monks could be sent, and, as Table 10 shows, a large proportion of them travelled to the Northeast (Regions 5 and 6), where the government was concentrating its development efforts in an attempt to strengthen the integration of the Thai-Lao inhabitants. In 1967, 735 monks, or 54 percent of the 1,348 participants, were dispatched to the Northeast, while in 1968 their number was increased by 77 to 813. Thammathut, or “envoy (thuf)o£ the Dhamma,” means basically a Buddhist missionary or propagandist. The Pali form of the word, dhammaduta,is applied to Thai Buddhist missionaries who go abroad.44 Accordingly, the province of the domestic thammathut was primarily the propagation of Buddhism, and in this narrow sense their missionary activities included preaching to villagers and giving guidance in Buddhist study and meditative techniques to officials, school children, convicts, and others. But unlike the missionaries sent abroad, their mission also encompassed secular activities, the direct participation in rural development schemes. Table 11 shows a quantitative breakdown of thammathut activities for 1967. Closely related to the thammathut project, so closely in fact that participating monks were often referred to as thammathut, the Project for Encouraging the Participation ofBhikkhus in Community Development (khlongkan oprom phraphiksu phua songsoem kanphattana thongthiri) was ini-

Thammathut .Monks

Monks and Novices Taught

55,146 33,360 34,117 100,050 174,494 149,494 91,086 49,848 73,717 761,327

Members of the Public Taught 33,697 9,011 51,948 16,449 21,510 70,183 2,885 1,556 11,741 218,980

Prisoners Taught

People Given People Triple Trained in Refuge and Five Meditation Precepts

Times Monks Participated in Rural Development

HOME

Visits Made

I 1

i . tn cm c-" co

I

"

co S co § tn m — co co co ~ ~

3,317 2,885 1,205 1,169 16,978*

School Children Taught

Government Officals Taught

1967

I~ Iw 2 £ ° I I§

l " 1 I S 1 — S CM w

Source: Department of Religious Alfairs, Annual Report of Religious Activities for 1967 (Bangkok, 1967). ♦These figures appear to be in error, but follow those in the source.

No.

Region

Table 11. Activities of Thammathut Monks,

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

137

I 8 I CO

t

138

A State Religion in History

tiated in 1966 by the two Buddhist universities. This project had as its objectives: 1. To maintain and promote the monks’ status as refuge of the people by providing them with religious education and general knowledge concerning community development. 2. To encourage monks and novices to participate in community development and thus help existing community development programs to achieve their aims. 3. To promote unity among the Thai people and thus help to promote national and religious security. 4 5 The rationale for the project is clearly set forth in the Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University catalog: In Thailand up to the last two or three decades, Buddhist monks played a leading role in all areas of religious, educational and social activities. Buddhist monasteries were centers of learning with monks as teachers. The monks also rendered voluntary social services, both material and spiritual, for the welfare of the community, such as giving advice and help in the event of family problems and misfortunes among members of the community, settling personal disputes and giving medical care. The operation of the state educational system, inaugurated in the 1870s and 1880s, had at first to rely on monastic help; monks became teachers and most of the government schools were conducted in monasteries. Though, at present, monks are no longer responsible for public education, fewer monks teach in schools and the number of monastery schools has declined, the majority ofschools are still attached to monasteries. Widely, especially in rural society, monks still continue to render voluntary social welfare assistance. Besides spiritual services, they provide schools, hospitals, resting places, wells, and roads for the public and encourage others to do the same. In Bangkok and Dhonburi, though very few monks teach in public schools, about 9,914 boy students from the country, mostly 14-20 years of age, live under the monks in some 200 monasteries. Upcountry, the people put their trust and confidence in the monks; obedience and cooperation in any activity becomes automatic if the request comes from the monks. In an age of accelerated development, community development programs are sure to be effectively accomplished with monastic help and cooperation. Having this in mind and in line with the national development policy of the Government, the University deemed it advisable to initiate a project for training monks for the promotion and coordination of community development activities, with an aim to contribute to the Government’s efforts in raising the standard of living of our rural population, (emphasis added) 46 The training program comprised two courses: Course A, for selected monks from the provinces, who were required to have been in the robe for

139

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

Table 12. The Project for Encouraging the Participation Bhikkhus in Community Development (1966-1968)

of

Number of Graduates Course A B

1966

1967

1968

34 39

37 26

29 35

Total 100 100

Source: “Kansammana phraphiksu,” n.p.; for full citation, see chapter 7, note 43, herein.

at least five years but no more than twenty-five years and to hold nak thorn grade three or higher; and Course B, for graduates of the Buddhist universities. Those who completed Course A were expected to return to their native areas where they would act as a nucleus for rural development. Beginning in 1966, A and B courses, running respectively for from four to six months and for two. months, were held yearly for three consecutive years by the two Buddhist universities, and each course produced in total a hundred graduates (Table 12). On July 5 and 6, 1969, the two universities held a joint seminar to evaluate the first three years of the training program. The seminar was divided into five sections dealing respectively with social problems, the monastery and community development, the security of the state and Buddhism, rural society and the propagation of Buddhism, and rural society and education. Reports were heard from monks with working experience in the various regions, and criticism of the governments’s use of the Sangha was voiced by one lay participant.4 7 The report of the seminar is interesting in revealing the nature of the Sangha’s participation in rural development and its perception of the problems involved. Discussions centered on the following points: (1) the poverty in rural villages, particularly in the Northeast, where water shortages were causing unmitigated privation; (2) the inability of monks to take leading roles in rural development because of insufficient training, even though they were winning the respect of the local communities; (3) the general lack of capable people to lead development; (4) the prevalence of bandits (chonphurai), who, whether communist guerillas or not, caused people great suffering; (5) the lack of immediate prospects of spreading Buddhism to non-Buddhist minorities; (6) the need for efforts toward greater mutual understanding with ethnic minorities; and (7) the social problem of juvenile delinquency. After the seminar, a statement was issued to the effect that, in the face of such problems, regional development could not depend solely on the government’s efforts, but

140

A State Religion in History

also required the endeavors of local residents, and for this reason monks should also cooperate.4 8 The Sangha

and the Integration

of the Hill Tribes

F rom around 1963, as we have seen, the Thai government’s hill- tribe policies launched four years earlier moved into full stride. It was in these circumstances that the thammacharik project was conceived. This project aimed to instill a sense of being Thai into the hill tribes through their conversion to Buddhism, which would be achieved by sending missionary monks to their villages.4 9 The notion of promoting “Thai-ization” through conversion to Buddhism owed much to the personal experience of Prasit Ditsawat, the head of the Tribal Welfare Division of the Interior Ministry’s Department of Public Welfare. In 1964, while Prasit was spending the rainy season as a monk at Bangkok’s Wat Benchamabophit, he rediscovered for himself the importance of Buddhism’s role as a spiritual bond between Thais, and hit upon the idea that the best way to bring the hill tribes into the national fold would be first to convert them to Buddhism by sending missionary monks to their villages. The abbot of Wat Benchamabophit, Phra Thammakittisophon, approved of Prasit’s new idea, and instructed Phra Siwisutthiwong, a monk in the same nionastery and the chairman of the Moral Culture Committee of the Ministry of Education’s Center for Promotion of Thai Culture, to cooperate in its implementation. Deciding it was necessary first to understand the problems involved through an on-the-spot survey, Phra Siwisutthiwong inspected Meo settlements in Phetchabun, Phitsanulok, and Loei provinces in the company of Interior Ministry officials, and on his return to the capital drew up plans for a small experimental project, which he submitted to the Department of Public Welfare for approval. The following year, ten groups of five monks each were sent to centers in Tak, Mae Hong Son, Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, and Phetchabun provinces, in settlements of Meo, Yao, Akha, Lisu, Karen, and Lahu peoples. These were the first thammacharik missions. At their conclusion after a month and a half, eight hundred tribesmen had been converted to Buddhism, of whom twelve travelled to Bangkok to be ordained at Wat Benchamabophit.5 0 In 1966, the second year of the program, the support of local monasteries was enlisted, and sixteen groups comprising a total of sixty monks undertook missions. The number of tribesmen ordained rose to twenty. The following year the program expanded to include ninety-six monks in twenty-one groups; as a result, forty-six tribesmen were

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

141

ordained, four of them as monks. In 1968 and 1969, the number of thammacharik groups fell by one to twenty, but in 1970 it rose again to twenty-one.5 1 The daily thammacharik activities began, at least in areas where people were prepared to welcome the monks and offer them food, with the early morning tour of a village to receive alms. Having returned to their stations for the morning meal and sutta recitation, the groups spent their days visiting nearby tribal villages. In the evening, after the sutta recitation, the monks stayed in the stations explaining Buddhist doctrine to visiting tribesmen, learning their languages, giving medical treatment as far as they were permitted to as monks, and trying to explain to the tribesmen the government’s attitude toward them. 5 2 The knowledge of Buddhism imparted through the thammacharik missions appears, from the report just cited, to have been of its formal observances rather than the underlying doctrines. Undoubtedly the language barrier precluded detailed exposition of the Dhamma. Tribesmen who visited the mission stations for medical treatment, for example,, were always taught the elementary rite of prostration three times before a Buddha image, both before and after being given medicine. Those visited by monks in their homes were taught to greet monks with the same formal display of respect. Having imparted the basic motions of Buddhist ritual, the monks, then gave interested tribesmen the “Triple Refuge and the Five Precepts” and presented them with a token of their confirmation as Buddhists (perhaps a small Buddha image). Lastly, they took photographs of monks and converts together for use in missions to other settlements. The direct objectives of the Thai government’s policy to assimilate the hill peoples were: 1. To prevent the destruction of forest and sources of natural streams, by encouraging stabilized agriculture to replace the destructive shifting cultivation practised by the hill tribes. 2. To end poppy growing, by promoting other means of livelihood. 3. To develop the economic and social conditions of hill tribes so that they may contribute to the national development, by promoting community development among the hill tribes grouped in settlements. 4. To induce the hill tribes to accept the important role of helping to maintain the security of national frontiers, by instilling in them a sense of belonging and national loyalty to the nation.5 3 It was principally to the Sangha that the government looked to achieve, through the thammacharik program, the last of these aims. Because of its nature, however, the program could not be expected to produce rapid results.

142

A State Religion in History

One quantitative index of the degree of interest in Buddhism engendered among the hill tribes is the number of ordinations, which, as we have seen, rose steadily year by year. In 1968, the standard composition of the five-man thammachdrki groups was reported as two Bangkok monks, two local Thai monks, and one hill tribesman.5 4 This involvement of tribal monks in the execution of the project means that a more important indicator of its success is probably the length of time tribesmen stayed in the robe rather than the numbers of ordinations. Of those ordained in 1965 and 1966, all but two novices had disrobed by February, 1968. In 1969, fifty tribesmen were ordained, four of them, men aged fifty, fortyeight, forty, and twenty-eight, as monks and the remainder, boys of eleven to sixteen, as novices. After the rainy season, twenty-seven (58 percent) of the ordinands stayed in the robe, including only one of the monks, the twenty-eight year old, who was learning Thai and preparing for the nak tham examinations.5 5 The high “drop-out” rate among the older men was explained as a consequence of the fact that they had to return home to support their families, and that many were illiterate and could not participate fully in all activities of clerical life.5 6 In a first-hand survey of the thammacharik program in the Karen settlements of Mae Sariang district, anthropologist Charles F. Keyes found that the monks were unable to communicate with the Karen owing to the absence of a common language and that consequently they merely transmitted fragments of overt behavior, such as how to give alms to the monks, without the underlying ideology. He warned that such a superficial understanding of Buddhism is potentially more dangerous than no understanding at all, citing the case of the Buddhist millenarian movement among the Pwo Karen in Kanchanaburi province. 5 7 In the next chapter I shall look in more detail at Buddhist millenarian movements against the government. As far as the missionary activities of the thammachdrik monks are concerned, suffice it to say that should they provide an ideological basis for such movements, it would be entirely counter to the aims of the program.

NOTES 1.

Clifford Geertz, “The Integrative Revolution: Primordial Sentiments and Civil Politics in the New States,” in Old Societies and New States, ed. Clifford Geertz (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1963), pp. 105—157. 2. Ibid., pp. 109-110. 3. Donald E. Smith, Religion and Politics in Burma (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965), pp. 230-280. 4. The present Thai flag was adopted on September 28, 1917 under a law promulgated by Rama VI (“Phraratchabanyat kaekhai phratchabanyat thong phraphutthasak-

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

5. 6. 7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

17.

18. 19.

20. 2.1.

143

karat 2460” [Act revising the Act on the National Flag, b.e. 2460 (1970)], inP.K.P.S., vol. 30, pp. 391-395). Called trairong (“the Tricolor”), the flag has a height-to-width ratio of two-to-three; through the center runs a dark blue horizontal stripe occupying one-third of the height; above and below this are white horizontal stripes each of onesixth of the height; and outside these are two red horizontal stripes (Article 3). According to Rama Vi’s own explanation, the blue symbolizes the monarchy, the white religion (Buddhism), and the red the nation. Wendell Blanchard, Thailand: Its People, Its Society, Its Culture (New Haven, Connecticut: HRAF Press, 1958), p. 56. Jean Duffar, Les forces politiques en Thailande (Paris: Presses Universitarires de France, 1972), pp. 85-126. Two fundamental studies on the Chinese in Thailand are: G. William Skinner, Chinese Society in Thailand: An Analytical History (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1957), and Richard J. Coughlin, Double Identity: The Chinese in Modem Thailand (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960). Duffar, Forces Politiques en Thailande, p. 85; Harvey H. Smith et al., Area Handbook for Thailand (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 213. Reginald Le May, The Economic Conditions of North-Eastern Siam (Bangkok: Ministry of Commerce and Communications, 1932), p. 1. Thailand, Ministry of Agriculture, Thailand Economic Farm Survey, 1953 (Bangkok, 1955), p. 26. Robert B. Textor, From Peasant to Pedicab Driver (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, 1961), pp. 6-7. Ibid., pp. 15-16. See chapter 9 herein. Thailand, Office of the Prime Minister, The Government of Thailand, The Northeast Development Plan, 1962-1966 (Bangkok, n.d.) , p. 1. Thailand, Thailand Official Yearbook,1968 (Bangkok, 1968), p. 547 Tej Bunnag, “Phraya khaek chet huamuang khop khit khabot ro. so. 121” (The 1902 conspiracy to rebel of the Malay rulers of the seven provinces), Wanwaithayakon. Chumnum bothkhwan thdngwichakdn thawai phrachaoworawongthoe krommamun narathippongpraphan (Wan Waithakakon. Collected articles presented to Prince Narathip), vol. 2 (Bangkok: Social Science Association of Thailand, 1971), pp. 15—39. There are as yet few comprehensive works published on the ethnic Malays of South Thailand, but the following are fairly substantial: Virginia Thompson and Richard Adloff, Minority Problems in Southeast Asia (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1955), pp. 158-165; Duffar, Forces Politiques en Thailande, pp. 97-107; Astri Suhrke, “The Thai Muslims: Some Aspects of Minority Integration.” Pacific Affairs 43, no. 4: 531-543. Thailand, Thailand Official Yearbook 1968, p. 547. Pierre Fistie, La Thailande (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1963), pp. 13—14; Thipakorawong, Chaophraya, Phraralchaphongsawadan krung ratanakosin chabap hbsamut haeng chat: ratchakan the 3-4 (National library edition of the royal chronicles of the Bangkok dynasty: Third and fourth reigns) (Bangkok: Khlangwitthaya, 1963), p. 121. Duffar, Forces politiques en Thailande, pp. 97-98. On the hill peoples of North and West Thailand, the following three works are fundamental: Peter Kunstadter, Southeast Asian Tribes, Minorities and Nations, 2 vols., (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1967); Frank M . Lebar, Gerald C. Hickey, and John K. Musgrave, Ethnic Groups of Mainland Southeast Asia (New Haven, Connecticut: HRAF Press, 1964); and Gordon Yong, The Hill Tribes of Northern Thailand (Bangkok: Siam Society, 1962).

144

A State Religion in History

22. The most comprehensive work on the Vietnamese in Northeast Thailand is: Peter A. Poole, The Vietnamese in Thailand: A Historical Perspective (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1970). 23. “Rabiap krasuang suksathikan wa duai itssalam witthayalai haerig prathet thai” (Ministerial regulations concerning the Islamic college of Thailand) in Pramuan rabiap kansatsana khbng kromkdnsatsana krasuang suksathikan (Collected regulations on religion of the Department of Religious Affairs) (Bangkok, 1951), pp. 156-159. 24. Suhrke, “The Thai Muslims,” p. 543. 25. On June 2, 1972, Vice-Premier Praphat, in his capacity as director of the'National Security Council, stated that some refugees were supporting communist terrorists in Thailand and collecting funds for North Vietnam. See “Background to the Security Situation on the Thai-Laotian Border,” Asia Research Bulletin 2, no. 3: 1061B. 26. Ibid., pp. 1063B-1064A. 27. Thailand, Northeast Development Plan, 1962—1966, pp. 1-3. 28. Thailand, Thailand Official Yearbook 1968, pp. 390—391. 29. Hans Manndorff, “The Hill Tribe Program of the Public Welfare Department, Ministry of Interior, Thailand: Research and Socio-economic Development,” in Southeast Asian Tribes, Minorities, and Nations, vol. 2, ed. Peter Kunstadter (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1967), pp. 525-551. 30. “Background to the Security Situation,” p. 1063B. 31. This figure apparently refers only to Theravada Buddhists, since Chinese Mahayana Buddhists are included in the figure of over 460,000 “Confucians.” 32. In the Announcement of the Prime Minister’s Office on Developments in the Sangha, October 1960, of which a full translation is given in chapter 6 herein. Although the phrase satsana pracham chat is there rendered “national religion,” the word pracham, as mentioned in chapter 2, carries the implication of inherence. 33. Thailand, Department of Religious Affairs, Annual Report of Religion Activities for 1967 (Bangkok, 1967), p. 59. (In Thai) 34. On North and Northeast Thailand, see respectively Konrad Kingshill, Ku Daeng: The Red Tomb (Chiang Mai, Prince Royal’s College, 1960), and Charles Madge, “Survey Before Development in Thai Villages,” mimeographed (Bangkok: U.N. Secretariat, 1955). 35. Howard K. Kaufman, Bangkhuad: A Community Study in Thailand (Locust Valley, New York: JJ. Augustin Inc., 1960), pp. 105-109. 36. Ibid., pp. 140-162. 37. Kenneth E. Wells, Thai Buddhism: Its Rites and Activities (Bangkok: privately published, 1960), p. 47. 38. On other parts of the kingdom, see Yoneo Ishii and Yoshihiro Tsubouchi, “Regional Patterns of Kaan buan (Entering the Sangha) in Thailand,” S.E.A.S. 8, no 1 (1970): 2-5. 39. Kaufman, Bangkhuad, p. 156. 40. Ibid., p. 126. 41. The curricula in the two new faculties, while including several courses in Buddhism, Pali, and Sanskrit in the first two years, taken in common by students ofall faculties, in the third and fourth years differ little from those of secular universities. Mahachulalongkomrajavidyalaya Buddhist University Catalogue B.n. 2510-1111967-68 a.d. (Bangkok, n.d.), pp. 14-31. 42. Donald K. Swearer, “Some Observations on New Directions in Thai Buddhism,” The • Social Science Review 6, no. 2 (1968): 54. 43. See the address by Mr. William Klausner of the Asia Foundation in “Kansammana phraphiksu phua songsoem phatthana thongthin khong mahawittthayalaisong na

National Integration and the Sangha’s Role

44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

50. 51. 52. 53.

54.

55. 56. 57.

145

mahachulalongkon-ratchawitthayalai nai phraboromarachupatham, wan sao thi 5 lae wan athit thi 6, karakadakhom, 2512,” (Seminar of monks for the promotion of regional development by Buddhist Universities, held at Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University, Saturday July 5 and Sunday July 6, 1969), 2 vols., mimeographed (Bangkok, n.d.); and Mahachulalongkomrajavidyalaya, p. 87. “Introducing ‘Dhammaduta,’ ” Dhammaduta 1 (Bangkok, 1969): 1—2. Mahachulalongkomrajavidyalaya, p. 89. Ibid. Opposition to the project was voiced by Sulak Sivaraksa in a special address on the second day of the seminar. See “Kansammana phraphiksu.” Ibid. The name “thammacharik” derives from the Buddha’s exhortation in Mahavagga I: 11, 1: “Caratha bhikkhave carikam”{“VIa&., monks, on tour (for the blessingof the manyfolk)”). Dept, of Public Welfare, Raingan kanphoeiphae phraphutthasatsana kae chaokhao thang phak nua pi 2509 (Report on the propagation of Buddhism among the hill tribes in the North, 1966) (Bangkok, 1967), p. 47. Ibid., pp. 45—48. Charles F. Keyes, “Buddhism and National Integration in Thailand,” J.A.S. 30: 39-44. Dept, of Public Welfare, Raingan kanphoeiphae phraphutthasatsana, pp. 39-44. Suwan Ruenyote, “The Development and Welfare Scheme for the Hill Tribes in Thailand,” Chiengmai,Thailand: Tribal Research Center First Symposium on Hill Tribes in Thailand, August 29, 1967, pp. 18-19, quoted in Keyes “Buddhism and National Integration,” p. 564. Tribal Welfare Division, Dept, of Public Welfare, Phaenkan thawdi khwamsaduak kae khana thammacharik khun paiphoeiphae phraphutthasatsana kae chaokhao changwat tangtang nai khetpatibatkan thang phak nua pracham pi 2511 (Program for providing facilities to the Thammacharik monks going to propogate Buddhism among hill Tribes in various provinces of the North, 1968) (Bangkok, 1968), p. 11. Dept, of Public Welfare, Raingan kanphoeiphae phraphutthasatsana, pp. 27—51. 67—71. Keyes, “Buddhism and National Integration,” p. 563. Ibid., pp. 564-65. On the millenarian movement in Kanchanaburi, see Theodore Stern, “Ariya and the Golden Book: A Millenarian Buddhist Sect among the Karen,” J.A.S. 27: 297-328.

8 Thai Nationalism

PROTONATIONALISM

and Buddhism

IN THAILAND

Nationalism is above all a historical concept; the pattern of its origination and development is closely related to the history of the people concerned. In Europe, nationalism is commonly held to begin with the dissolution of the universal medieval order symbolized by the Roman Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire, and the establishment of the national state and the national church. The national states thus formed in sixteenth- and seventeenthcentury Europe were, until the late eighteenth century, characterized by the fact that the nation “resided wholly in the person of the King,” and “international relations were relations between kings and princes.” 1 The aim of national economic policies, similarly, “was not to promote the welfare of the community and its members, but to augment the power of the state, of which the sovereign was the embodiment.” 2 E. H. Carr defines this time as the “first period” of nationalism.3 And in terms of its bearer, the nationalism of this period can be called “sovereign nationalism.” 4 This was replaced in the second period by “democratic nationalism” or “bourgeois nationalism,” when, prompted in part by the French Revolution, nationalism came to be borne by the middle classes. In the third period, beginning roughly with the twentieth century, the basis of European nationalism expanded further with the development of “nationalism of the masses,” characterized by the socialization of the nation.5 The history of nationalism in Asia differs entirely from that in Europe. Awakened by the impact of European powers in the nineteenth 146

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

147

century, Asian nationalism developed in response to the European challenge. It evolved, moreover, broadly into two forms, “colonial” and “noncolonial,” depending on whether the state concerned was successful in retaining its political independence. Most Southeast Asian countries were colonized, and the nationalism that thereby developed can be defined as “a political, economic and cultural self-emancipation movement seeking the sovereign independence and sovereign equality of the colonially oppressed people” (emphasis added). 6 Only Japan and Thailand remained independent, and their “noncolonial” nationalism was in essence a political, economic, and cultural self-defense movement by the traditional ruling classes. That these two countries avoided colonization was due, in large measure, to the success of the ruling classes in imposing reform from above and , though to different degrees, in centralizing power in the state. In passing, i t might be noted that nationalism in China represented an intermediate between the colonial and noncolonial patterns, with leanings toward the former. Despite the failure of a reform movement by progressives within the ruling class, China managed to retain political sovereignty; but the economic encroachment of various imperialist powers in the latter half of the nineteenth century nevertheless reduced it to quasi-colonial status. I t was emancipation from this economic imperialism that Chinese nationalism sought. Its bearers, moreover, were not the traditional ruling class but an opposing revolutionary force seeking social and political reform. The first to feel and react to Europe’s impact in Asia were the traditional ruling elites. Irrespective of whether their domains were subsequently colonized, these rulers commonly displayed a cautious attitude toward the unknown barbarians, one based on suspicion and fear and which was typified by Japan’s joi (“expel the barbarian”) ideology. Masao Maruyama has termed the nationalism of this stage “protonationalism.” 7 I t is characterized by having the traditional ruling class as its bearer; by its genesis in the desire of these rulers to maintain their privileged status; by the lack, in common with Europe’s sovereign nationalism, of any sense of popular solidarity; and, as a natural consequence of these features, by the monopoly of nationalist symbols by the ruling class. I n the colonized countries, protonationalism disappeared in the process of colonization together with the traditional ruling class that bore it; in its place emerged a new nationalism, colonial nationalism, borne by subjects of the former rulers who sought emancipation from the imperialist rule of the foreign colonists.

148

A State Religion in Histoiy

In the countries that resisted the pressure of the colonial powers, on the other hand, the entrenchment of the traditional ruling classes through self-reorganization stifled any dynamics for change in the bearers of nationalism. Consequently, nationalism in these countries has tended to retain the features of protonationalism down to modern times. In Japan, for example, nationalism “was separated from the doctrine of popular emancipation; rather it checked it in the name of unity of the state.” 8 Confronted by overwhelmingly superior western powers, the traditional ruling classes in Japan and Thailand deemed it necessary to adopt European civilization as a weapon with which to resist colonialist pressure. On the other hand, they foresaw that such a move would involve acceptance of European values, those of Christianity, liberalism, and democracy, for example, which would inevitably clash with the traditional values on which their positions rested and eventually would undermine the foundations of their existence. They found the key to this dilemma in the separation of “material culture” from “moral culture” and adoption of only the former. This meant actively using Europe’s industrial and military technology to strengthen their rule. It was in this way that the Meiji government, pursuing a policy of national wealth and military strength, succeeded in modernization from above. At the same time, it meant rigorous exclusion of the moral aspects of European civilization. Like the earlier Jot ideology, this was a logical consequence of their desire to maintain their privileged status.9 Nationalism in Thailand developed in the noncolonial mold from its genesis in protonationalism. The first country to have an impact, and one which continued to impinge on Thailand, where a de facto “closedcountry” policy had been firmly maintained vis-a-vis Western powers since the death of King Narai in 1688, was Great Britain. In 1821, when John Crawford, an envoy from the Governor-General of India, landed in Bangkok, the Thai rulers, though they received him amicably enough, beneath the surface remained wary of Britain and were reluctant to enter into a treaty. A Thai dynastic chronicle records that Crawford had boasted of being able to subjugate the likes of Thailand with two or three warships, and that rumor of this boast had contributed directly to a hardening of the Thai government’s attitude.1 0 Nevertheless, Thailand’s isolationist policy vis-a-vis the West ended in the reign of Rama II (1809—1824); the country was partially opened in the reign of Rama III (1824—1851); and the opening was completed in the Fourth Reign. Rama IV (Mongkut, 1851—1868), as we shall see later, even before his accession had been in favor of adopting Western scientific knowledge; on the throne, he paved the way for the modernizing reforms from above that became known as the Chakri Reformation. The following passage

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

149

from a letter he wrote concerning the appointment of an English teacher to the court, however, reveals his character as the bearer of Thai protonationalism. It is not pleasant to us if the School Mastress much morely endeavoured to convert the schoolars to Christianity than teaching language literature &c &c like American Missionaries here because our proposed expense is for knowledge of the important language & literature which will be useful for affairs of country not for the religion which is yet disbelieved by Siamese schoolars in general sense.11 It was during the long, forty-two-year reign of Chulalongkon (Rama V, 1868—1910) that modernization was successfully implemented from above and the institutions of a centralized national state were firmly implanted. By the end of the Sixth Reign (Wachirawut, 1910-1925), Thailand had joined the League of Nations and secured her position as a member of the comity of modern states. And in the Seventh Reign (Prachathipok, 1925—1935), the Constitutional Revolution replaced the absolute monarchy with a constitutional one. 1 2 The modernization of Thailand, planned and executed by the ruling classes, had as its aim the entrenchment of their privileged position by rationalizing the enforcement of their authority. The masses were constantly excluded from the process and, consequently, even up to recent times, never acquired a sense of modern citizenship. Even the Constitutional Revolution was in essence a court revolution, for the reform of the polity it brought failed to alter fundamentally the relationship between ruler and ruled. For the vast majority of the Thai people, it was no more than an exchange of royal absolutism or an oligarchy of princes for military oligarchy. In these circumstances, Thai nationalism lacked the dynamics to reject the privileged ruling class that was traditionally its bearer. Ultimately, the People’s Party which toppled the absolute monarchy had to seek political legitimacy in recognition by the king.13 This situation, moreover, has been repeated after each of the coups d’etat in the series that reaches to the present day. This chapter is an attempt to elucidate the roles Buddhism has played in the history of Thai nationalism. Firstly, to clarify its role as a nationalist symbol, we shall consider its traditional function in legitimation of the kingship. Secondly, from there we turn to the Thammayut reforms of Prince Mongkut, which can be thought to be a cultural expression of protonationalism. Thirdly, we shall examine the character of King Wachirawut’s nationalism and how Buddhism was treated therein. Fourthly, we shall look at the relationship between

150

A State Religion in History

Buddhism and the nationalism that has emerged since the Constitutional Revolution, in particular, the nationalism of Sarit Thannarat. THE KING AND BUDDHISM The relationship between the traditional notion of kingship in Thailand and Buddhism is far from simple. Its complexity derives from the multiplicity of cultural influences the Siamese received through contact with neighboring peoples as they advanced into the great plain of the Chao Phraya. Though much remains unknown about the history of the Siamese before the thirteenth century, from which time reliable inscriptional materials are available, there is little doubt that the Mons of Dvaravati, prior inhibitants of the Chao Phraya plain, had a profound influence on them. One element of Siamese cultural heritage from the Mons is the Phra Thammasat.1 4 This fundamental code of law, believed to have been brought in ancient times from Mount Chakrawan at the edge of the universe by the hermit Manosan, was for centuries, until the introduction of modern law, revered by the Siamese as the norm of traditional rule. Throughout the code is strongly influenced by the Pali scriptures, and in part it sets forth the Buddhist ideal of kingship.1 5 Here, let me cite a section of the Agganna Suttanta-. Chosen by the whole people, Vasettha, is what is meant by Maha Sammata; so Maha Sammata (the Great Elect) was the first standing phrase to arise. Lord of the Fields is what is meant by Khattiya; so Khattiya (Noble) was the next expression to arise. He charms the others by the Norm— by what ought (to charm) — is what is meant by Raja; so this was the third standing phrase to arise. Thus then, Vasettha, was the origin of this social circle of the Nobles, according to the ancient primordial phrases [by which they were known]. 16 The first king that mankind had was, according to the Phra Thammasat,one chosen (sammata) as arbiter of disputes between men, and in Thai he was called Maha Sommutirat (Maha + Sammata + Raja). Such a king: abides steadfast in the ten kingly virtues, constantly upholding the five common precepts and on holy days the set of eight precepts, living in kindness and goodwill to all beings. He takes pains to study the Thammasat and to keep the four principles of justice, namely: to assess the right or wrong of all service or disservice rendered to bim, to uphold the righteous and truthful, to acquire riches through none but just means, and to maintain the prosperity of his state through none but just means. 1 7

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

151

The “ten kingly virtues” mentioned in this passage are almsgiving, morality, liberality, uprightness, gentleness, self-restriction, nonanger, noninjury, forbearance, and nonobstruction.1 8 The concept of kingship the Siamese inherited from the Mon through the Phra Thammasat was thus one of a king chosen by the people and who ruled in conformity with Buddhist Law, the Dhamma. This ideal of kingship is expressed concretely in various passages in the Sukhothai stone inscriptions. The following, for example, is from King Lithai’s stele of 1361 : [This king] rules in conformity with the Ten Royal Precepts. He is merciful to all his subjects. When he sees someone’s rice he does not covet it, when he sees someone’s wealth he does not get angry. When anyone quarrels with him about large matters or small, [the king] does not put him to death or injure him. When he captures enemy warriors, he does not kill or beat them, but looks after them well so that they may not die (5/1/14-22).1 9 A similar picture of the ideal Buddhist king is also painted by the Rama Khamhaeng inscription.2 0 The passage cited from the Agganna Suttanta also describes the ideal Buddhist king as one who “charms the others by the Norm.” This idea is encapsulated in the title Thammaracha (Pali, dhammaraja) adopted by King Lithai and his successors in Sukhothai. I n the Pali scriptures, the term dhammaraja appears frequently as an epithet for the chakravartin, the ideal universal emperor.2 1 Thai dictionaries define the style Thammaracha as meaning “one who is king because of the Dhamma” or “king in the Dhamma.” 22 I t means a king who rules in accordance with the Dhamma. I n the Thai view, it is because he rules in accordance with the Dhamma that the king can claim legitimacy as sovereign. Should the king depart from the Dhamma, his sovereignty can be rejected. King Taksin of Thonburi (1767-1782), for example, became mentally disturbed and unable to rule in his later years, and was removed from the throne by his subjects. The dynastic chronicles condemn him for acts of dishonesty and unrighteousness (asat dthammaj ,2 3 After the Mon, the Siamese were next influenced by the culture of their Khmer neighbors in the east. From them the Siamese concept, of kingship acquired the notion of devaraja,divine king, of the monarch as an incarnation of a Hindu god, such as Siva or Vishnu. This influence manifested itself in the names of the Ayutthayan kings: Narai, for example, means Vishnu; Naresuen derives from nara, “man,” and Tsvara, Siva.

152

A State Religion in History

H. G. Quaritch Wales saw in the combination of the divine kingship theory and the notion of the king as a Bodhisatta, an incipient Buddha, the basis for the conception of absolute monarchy that was established in the Ayutthaya period. 2 4 The Thai historian Prince Dhani Nivat, on the other hand, implicitly criticizes Wales’ view, claiming that in old Siam the theory of divine kingship was never anything more than a means of conferring outward dignity on the king. 2 5 While this criticism is undoubtedly valid, Prince Dhani’s view is itself one-sided, for he stresses only the legitimacy of the king as one “elected by the people” and as a “King of Righteousness,” and overlooks the charismatic side of Siamese kingship. To the people, the king is not merely a paternalistic ruler; unquestionably, he is also a “sacred entity” {sing saksif). The modern expression of this is the constitutional stipulation that “the person of the king is sacred and inviolable” {thi khawrop-sakkara). Such inherent sanctity itself has an important bearing on the legitimacy of monarchical rule. And the variety of paraphernalia embellishing the kingship that came from the khmer with the devaraja conception— the series of rites that constitute the coronation ceremony, the special language used for the king in address and reference, the various taboos concerning the person of the king, and so on— all function as a constant reminder of the king’s inherent sanctity. The Phra Thammasat,as we have seen, sets forth the expectation that the king rule in conformity with the Dhamma, as a thammarachd. And it is, of course, the Sangha that is responsible for the maintenance and transmission of the Dhamma with which his rule must conform. Provided the Sangha continues to function correctly, “the Wheel of the Law is turned,” the Dhamma is perpetuated. The Sangha, moreover, by definition can exist only with outside support. Desiring the continuance of the Dhamma upon which his rule rests, the king therefore must ensure the survival of the Sangha through provision of material support. From this derives the king’s role as “defender of religion.” While many instances of Siamese kings’ “defense” of Buddhism can be found in the stone inscriptions, dynastic chronicles, ancient law codes, and so on, it was King Mongkut who explicitly stipulated that the king should be “defender of Buddhism.” From that time, each new king has given at his coronation the following kind of oath before the assembled elders of the Sangha, in response to which the Sangha gives its blessing to the king.2 6 My Lords! Whereas being a believer and one pleased (with the religion of the Buddha), having taken refuge in the Trinity in due

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

153

form, and now having been anointed in sovereignty, . . . I shall provide for the righteous protection, defence and keeping of the Buddhist Religion. If agreeable, my Lords, may the Brotherhood recognize me as “Defender of the Buddhist Faith” [phraboromarachupathamphok phraphutthasatsand\. The words “of the Buddhist Faith”have, in the constitutions promulgated since the Constitutional Coup d’ Etat of 1932, been amended to “of religion.” This alteration, however, was made merely to avoid conflict with the freedom of religion clause indispensable in a modern constitution; and in compensation, the separate constitutional provision was introduced that “the King shall profess the Buddhist Faith,” thus, in effect, maintaining the king’s traditional postion as “defender of Buddhism.” In earlier chapters, we saw that the king’s defense of Buddhism had both positive and negative aspects. The former consisted in the main of his material support of the Sangha, through such acts as the maintenance and repair of monastery buildings, the donation of lands and servants to monasteries, and the offering of food and clothing to monks, all of which are abundantly cited in the inscriptions, annals, law codes, and elsewhere. In addition, the Great Councils have all been sponsored by monarchs. The negative aspect of the king’s defense of Buddhism was his supervision of the Sangha with respect to its purity. If the king judged the Sangha to have been abased by delinquent monks, he could order their forcible disrobing. Known historical examples of this are, the expulsion of delinquent monks by King Narai (1656-1688) of the Ayutthaya dynasty, and by Rama I (1782-1809) of the present dynasty. This relationship between the king and Buddhism is embodied in the structure of traditional rule in Thailand: in his capacity as “defender of Buddhism,” the king supports the Sangha; with the king’s support, the Sangha functions as maintainer of the Dhamma; maintained by a pure Sangha, the Dhamma provides the king with a norm of rule; and theking that rules in conformity with this norm is legitimated as a thammarachd. A threat to any part of this structure, therefore, is perceived as ultimately a challenge the to king’s legitimacy, which is why Christianity’s attack on Buddhism was as much a political as a religious challenge. Conversely, the strengthening ofBuddhism serves directly to fortify the system of rule, which is why the traditional ruling class adopted Buddhism as a nationalist symbol. This traditional relationship, moreover, has survived the Constitutional Revolution, being made use of by the People’s Party and subsequent democratic governments, who found legitimacy by defining themselves as defenders of the king’s position as defender of Buddhism. Sarit, for example, in justifying his need to resort to coup d’etat, made

154

A Slate Religion in History

reference in Revolutionary Party Edict 4 to Communists who “endangered the monarchy and wished to destroy Buddhism.” 2 7 The Theravada Buddhism of the Thais comprehends a complex of principles that can statisfy the religious needs both of the virtuoso and of the masses.2 8 At the doctrinal level the philosophic content of the Theravada is highly rational. As we shall see in the next section, it was with this aspect of Buddhism that Prince Mongkut armed himself to counter Christianity’s challenge. Yet other elements of the Theravada appeal to the masses seeking benefits in this world. For happiness in this and future lives, people turn to the Sangha as a “field for merit;” for immediate help they invoke Buddhist magic to avert danger and confer blessing, seeing the Sangha as a “sacred entity.” The magical power of sanctity is not confined in the popular mind to the bounds of Buddhism. Among things sacred is, as pointed out earlier, the king, in whom sanctity is inherent; and the common sanctity of the king and Buddhism leads to the fusion of the two in the minds of the people. This bond of sanctity between them enhances the effectiveness of the combination of king and Buddhism as a nationalist symbol. THE THAMMAYUT MOVEMENT: CULTURAL NATIONALISM At the time of Prince Mongkut’s birth in 1804 as the eldest son of Rama II, the impact of European powers was just beginning to be felt in Thailand and her neighboring states. In 1786, the island of Penang, known through Thai history as Ko Mak (“Betel Island”), was ceded to the British East India company by the Sultan of Kedah, one of Siam’s vassals. In 1800, Province Wellesley was also lost to Great Britain. Malacca, too, which is mentioned in the Palatine Law as a Siamese tributary state, came under British control from 1794. In 1819, Raffles landed in Singapore and took the first steps toward imposing British rule over the Malay peninsula. In 1821, Crawford visited Bangkok bearing a letter of credence from the Governor-General of India. In 1824, the year of Rama H’s death, the British occupied Rangoon. The following year, they captured Prome and advanced on Ava. In February, 1826, with British forces poised to attack, the Ava court accepted a peace treaty under which Arakan and Tenasserim were ceded to the British, and Burma was opened to commerce with Britain. In these changed international circumstances, the Siamese court in 1826 concluded the “Burney Treaty” with Great Britain. The product of political concessions made in order to maintain Siam’s peace and independence, this thirteen-clause treaty is pervaded by a dogged reciprocity that depicts vividly the Siamese side’s caution and their distrust of foreigners. At the same time, however, a trade agreement was signed

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

155

which, while imposing various restrictions, opened Siam to trade with Britain. In 1833, a similar agreement was reached with the United States. By 1835, a British merchant named Rober Hunter, having set up business in Bangkok early in the Third Reign, had built a large establishment with four vessels working for him. In 1854, fifty-four square-rigged vessels came to Bangkok seeking trade, from Bombay, Singapore, China, and from Britain itself. 2 9 When his father died in 1824, Prince Mongkut, who was later to open Siam’s doors fully through the celebrated Bowring Treaty, concluded after his accession in 1851, was in the yellow robe. As the eldest legitimate son of Rama II, he rightfully should have succeeded his father; but in practice the absence of succession laws made the dynamics of court politics at the time of the king’s death a more significant determinant of succession than birth. At the time of his father’s death, Mongkut was an unknown quantity. His elder half-brother Chetsadabodinthon, on the other hand, was already experienced in both domestic politics and foreign diplomacy, and this secured him the support of the council of senior ministers upon whose recommendation the succession was decided. Mongkut accepted this decision and resolved to remain a monk. Mongkut spent his first days in the robe at Wat Samorai, following the ancient custom of princes. Set in quiet surroundings away from the metropolis, this Arannavasr monastery was renowned for the teaching of meditation and spiritual exercises. Once his hope of succession had vanished, Mongkut transferred to Wat Mahathat near the palace, where he studied Pali for three years and acquired considerable competence in the language. At the urging of the king, he became the first member of the royal family to sit the Pali examinations, which, in just three days, he passed to grade five. Having studied the Pali canon and deepened his understanding of Buddhism, Mongkut became greatly disaffected with the Sangha’s laxity in observing the Vinaya precepts. He even considered leaving the order, feeling it meaningless to remain, and called for guidance upon a Mon monk of his acquaintance who was learned in the Vinaya. There he was encouraged by finding that the monk’s conduct conformed with the ideas he had gained through his Pali Vinaya studies, and resolved to adopt a monastic lifestyle modelled on the monk’s. In 1829, he returned to the suburban Wat Samorai, removing himself from the capital in the hope, perhaps, of mitigating the Sangha leaders’ criticism of his adoption of Mon practices. There, with six monks sympathetic to his ideas, he established a separate community which asserted its identity through the independent performance of the sangha kamma offices. Mongkut called his reformist group Thammayut (“those yoked to the Dhamma”). From 1836, when Mongkut was appointed abbot of Wat Bowon-

156

A State Religion in History

niwet, the Thammayut movement entered a new stage, having for the first time its own monastery as headquarters. Thenceforth, despite some fairly fierce opposition from the established order, the new monastic order, supported by Mongkut’s special relationship with his brother the king, continued steadily to attract support.3 0 The Thammayut movement was characterized firstly by its emphasis on the original scriptures as the basis for understanding Buddhist doctrine. This led to the encouragement of Pali language study, and with the further stimulus of the import of numerous Pali canonical texts from Ceylon between 1840 and 1845, Wat Bowbnniwet became the center of Pali studies in Siam. Secondly, as a result of its emphasis on canonical study, the Thammayut came to reject most of the Buddhist literature that was currently popular, on the grounds that it was postcanonical and heterodox. In particular, it rejected the Traiphumikatha, the cosmological treatise that provided popular Buddhism with the theoretical basis for merit-making. Thirdly, the Thammayut stressed the rationalism of Buddhism. I t aimed to purify the religion by restoring to it the outstanding qualities of rationality and objectivity that- had characterized early Buddhism but been lost with its popular acceptance. Fourthly, because of its beginnings in Mongkut’s concern for proper monastic discipline, the Thammayut also stood for the correct observance of the Vinaya precepts. Unfortunately, this has created the tendency for the Thammayut to be associated solely with strictness in such formalities as the manner of wearing the three robes and holding the almsbowl, and in Pali pronunciation. Set in the historical context of the 1830s, this Buddhist reform movement that emphasized the rationalistic side of the religion arguably became the cultural expression par excellence of protonationalism in Thailand. While this hypothesis cannot be substantiated without further advances in research into the origins and growth of the Thammayut, and, through concrete examples, further clarification of the West’s impact on Mongkut, nevertheless, it is supported by a considerable body of circumstantial evidence. As a monk, Mongkut was removed from the secular world. Nevertheless, he was still a member of the royal family, a prince of the highest rank, who was eligible to, and after twenty-seven years in the robe did, ascend the throne. In short, he belonged to the privileged ruling class that was the bearer of Thai protonationalism. It would hardly be surprising, therefore, had Mongkut felt the impact of the West as poignantly as did his brother the king and the royal government. Mongkut’s nationalism, however, would have been manifested not in politics, from which as a

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

157

monk he was excluded, but on the cultural level of religion. Since, however, Buddhism and politics, as we saw earlier, were integrally linked, to defend Buddhism from the attack it faced would mean simultaneously defending the interests of the ruling class. The West’s impact on Mongkut was delivered mainly by Christian missionaries. Prince Damrong makes the following interesting observation on the differences between the Catholic and Protestant missions opened during the Third Reign. Although the American missionaries and the French priests were identical in being propagandists of Christianity, they showed important differences in some respects. The Roman Catholic priests sought to maintain and promote their religion’s standing by defining themselves as phra [“monks”], establishing parishes and ministering to their converts. The American Protestant missionaries, on the other hand, presented themselves as khru [“teachers”], and tried to introduce all of us foreigners, irrespective of whom we might be, to their religion and civilization. Their method of conversion was to gain people’s confidence by such practical means as curing the sick and imparting technical knowledge, and then to preach religion. 31 The Catholics’ approach to their missions was thus totally religious; their impact was concentrated in this one area. I t was only in this area, therefore, that resistance need be mounted. The conflict was limited to one between the two systems of faith, Buddhism and Christianity. The impact of the Protestant missionaries, in contrast, was extremely diffuse. To them, Christianity was inseparable from Western civilization. The basic attitudes with which they came to Siam, and which appear frequently in their diaries and other writings, were that because the West’s advanced science and technology had been produced by Christians, Christianity was manifestly the superior religion. This meant, conversely, that backwardness was the result of idolatry like Buddhism, that the religions professed by barbarians were as inferior to Christianity as the barbarian civilizations were to that of the West. The first foreigner to introduce Mongkut to Western knowledge was the French priest Pallegoix, who came to Siam in the early 1830s with the task of rebuilding the Catholic Church there. Because his church happened to be adjacent to Wat Samorai, Pallegoix often visited Mongkut with questions about the Siamese language, culture, and so on.3 2 Through this the two men came to exchange Latin and Pali instruction. The limited information presently available suggests that his meetings with Pallegoix aroused in Mongkut little of the hostility he later developed toward the Protestants. They did arm him, however, with knowledge that he would use in his confrontations with the Protestants, a knowledge of Western

158

A State Religion in History

classical culture that, for example, allowed him to compare the Latin and English Bibles, and which, after his accession, he displayed by using the Latin style Rex Siamensium. Incomparably greater, both in extent and substance, than the impact of the Catholics on Siam was that of the Protestant missionaries, especially the Americans, who were the ones to arouse Mongkut’s hostility. Following the two pioneers, the German Carl Gutzlaff and the Englishman Jacob Tomlin, both of whom were active between 1828 and 1831, a succession of missionaries arrived from 1831, among them David Abeel, Dan Beach Bradley, Jesse Caswell, John Taylor Jones, and J. H. Chandler of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, and Stephen Matton, Samuel House, and S. G. McFarland of the Presbyterian Mission. 3 3 That many of the Protestant missionaries were also doctors greatly influenced attitudes toward them, for it was as doctors (mo) that they first presented themselves to the Siamese. Gutzlaff ’s diary records that he was often invited to court to give medical treatment.3 4 Ten days after his arrival in Bangkok, Bradley was requested by the king to treat a group of slaves and prisoners who were suffering from smallpox and cholera. The king was motivated not by compassion but a wish to test the doctor’s skill before asking him to treat dignitaries. 3 5 In 1837, Bradley successfully amputated the arm of a monk injured when a cannon burst. And in the following year he performed the first successful smallpox inoculation in Siam, prompting Rama III to send his chief physician to him to learn the technique.3 6 The products of Western civilization that the missionaries brought were not only medical. In 1839, at the government’s request, Bradley printed at his press nine thousand copies of a Royal Proclamation contrabanding opium.37 One high official frankly stated Siamese expectations when he told one missionary of his “strong desire that missionaries should be experienced botanists, chemists and genealogists and mineralogists.” 3 8 While Mongkut held the missionaries’ medical skills in high regard, and several times called upon their services, their attitude that the superiority of the their scientific knowledged implied the superiority of Christianity to Buddhism was a challenge he could not ignore. Buddhism had to be defended from attack by an alien religion. Failure to do so would mean the defeat of Siamese values and the undermining of the ruling class’ base. Mongkut’s strategem was to divide the enemy’s forces and crush the separate elements. First he isolated science and technology from religion, and studied science in an attempt to demonstrate that he could match Westerners in this field. In the field of religion, he sought to purify Buddhism, which had lost its original rationality and objectivity through

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

159

popular acceptance, and to show not only that it could stand the critical scrutiny of the Western scientific mind, but that it was a superior religion to Christianity, one in line with modern ideas. Mongkut’s isolation of science from religion differed somewhat from the strategem of selective adoption of the West’s material culture while suppressing to a minimum the infiltration of Western ideas, the strategem employed by nationalist statesmen in the process of modernization, not only in Siam but in China and Japan. 3 9 While the latter’s standpoint was the negative one of defending the traditional values against foreign incursions, Mongkut’s position was more critical, for as a monk, an embodiment of the traditional values, failure not only to defend those values but also positively to counterattack Western values would jeopardize his very existence. The key to Mongkut’s aggressive defensive strategy was the English language. His immediate hopes to study with Dr. Bradley after becoming abbot of Wat Bowonniwet, however, were not realized; not until 1845 did he begin receiving private instruction, from Jesse Caswell, also of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. These lessons continued four times weekly for over eighteen months. So great was Mongkut’s desire to learn English that in return for instruction he offered Caswell the use of a room in a building adjacent to Wat Bowonniwet where he could preach Christianity and distribute tracts.4 0 Armed with English, Mongkut avidly studied geography, physics, chemistry, mathematics, and astrology, and absorbed information about current affairs in the world. On his bookshelf were a Bible from the American Bible Society, a Webster’s English dictionary, and a set of nautical tables. 41 He also had a penchant for calculating forthcoming solar eclipses— he died of an illness contracted on an expedition to observe an eclipse — that can be better understood as an expression of his active desire to demonstrate his ability to rank with Westerners in the realm of science, than as simply a private hobby. Through his association with missionaries, particularly his English tutor, Caswell, Mongkut developed a keen interest in Western scholarship, especially the natural sciences. At the same time, his discussions with the missionaries made him realize that it was the folk beliefs appended to Buddhism that underlay their contempt for his religion. He became firmly convinced that in order to defend Buddhism from the pressures of Western civilization, he must strip it of these heterodox accretions. 42 This objective accorded precisely with the views he had consistently held since entering the monkhood and that, in due course, fired the Thammayut movement. At the present stage of research, it is impossible to substantiate a

160

A State Religion in History

causal link between the birth of the Thammayut movement and the influence of Christianity, since it is yet to be determined exactly when the movement formed. Certainly, the existence of the movement in a fairly definite form before Mongkut’s appointment to the abbotship of Wat Bowonniwet in 1836 would argue against its birth in response to Christianity, as there are firm grounds for believing that Mongkut’s first direct contact with missionaries postdated Bradley’s arrival in 1835. 43 But even if its origin did not lie directly in Christianity’s influence, there can be little doubt that the confrontation with Christianity vindicated the Thammayut movement and lent it further strength. Mongkut’s pride in Buddhism is shown in, the following excerpt from a letter he wrote to friends in New York in 1849. I The wiseman like myself and other learned have had known that this religion of Christ was but ancient superstition of the Jew who were near Barburious. . . . We communicate with the English and American friend for knowledge of sciences & arts, not for any least admiration or astonishment of vulgar religion . . . My Christian friends generally think that . . . if I were converted to it then afterward many more of noblemen & people of this country might be converted & introduced to Christianity very soon & easily . . . . Such vulgar desire of those my friends was for they accustomed to do the Savage and Barburious nation like those occanican of Sandawed Island &c. but our country is not like those nation as here were longly some knowledge of morality & civility bearing legible wonderful accurate system & believable consequences more admirable than the same Jewish system though this was corrupted & mixed with most reproveable superstitions of Brahmines & forest & cc. 44 Mongkut’s rationalistic assault on Christianity succeeded in casting the missionaries onto the defensive. Feltus, for example, wrote as follows in his biography of Samuel Reynolds House. Apparently Chao Fah Yai [Mongkut] approached the subject of Christianity as a vigourous mind approaches any ponderous subject that presents itself; he considered it philosophically. Every religion studied philosophically presents insuperable difficulties; a religion may be rightly judged only by its effects on the human heart. Had he attempted to study Christianity in a practical manner as he did the science of the West his conclusions would doubtless have been different. 4 5 The Thammayut movement, even if it was born out of one religionist’s ideological pilgrimage, thus came to fulfill a loftier mission that, in the historical context of the midnineteenth century, transcended the personal: it surmounted a national crisis.

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

161

WACHIRAWUT’S NATIONALISM AND BUDDHISM Wachirawut was born in 1881, the eldest son ofKing Chulalongkon and Queen Saowapha. In 1893, at the age of twelve, he was sent to England for his education. During his nine years there, he studied at Sandhurst and later at Oxford, where he read history.46 Through his education he became “more English than a king of England.” 47 He was enamoured with English culture and, as one of the most prolific writers in Thai literary history, he produced numerous translations and adaptations of works by British writers, including such Shakespearean classics as The Merchant of Venice (Wenitwanit), As You Like It {Ruang Tain Chai Than), and Romeo and Juliet {Romeo lae Chuliet).4 3 Spending the majority of his formative years as an “Englishman” had a profound influence on Wachirawut’s ideas and actions. Though not originally heir to the Thai throne, he became crown prince while in England, being invested at the Siamese embassy in London in 1895 following the death of his elder half-brother. From this time on, as future king of Thailand, he bore the responsibility to defend the traditional values that underpinned his existence. However Anglicized his education may have made him, he could no longer allow himself to become deracinated. The traditional ruling class that first felt the West’s impact had armed itself with the West’s material culture while guarding the identity of its own moral culture. Mongkut had refined and strengthened the traditional Siamese values with which he had grown up, and employed them as a weapon .to counterattack Christianity. But Wachirawut spent the greater part of his youth in England, where he was foremost an “Englishman” with English values. His investiture as crown prince, therefore, carried with it the mission of becoming“Thai.’’ He had to learn the traditional values, internalize them, and even assert their superiority. It is in the process of extraction of his ego as a “Thai” from that as an “Englishman” that the origins of Wachirawut’s nationalism should be sought. If nationalism begins with individual self-awareness premised on the existence of “other,” then for Wachirawut the “other” was neither a universality nor other individuals, but something within himself. His nationalism was born of the struggle between the “Englishman” within and the “Thai” who was destined to become king. Following ancient custom, Wachirawut was ordained as a monk on August 21, 1904 at Wat Bowonniwet, and stayed 111 days in the robe.49 According to one source, his scholarship was such that the abbot of Wat Bowonniwet, his uncle Prince Wachirayan, had him help mark the doctrinal examination papers of newly ordained monks. 5 0 There is,

162

A State Religion in History

however, no evidence that he was a particularly zealous student of Buddhist doctrine. His later writings on Buddhism contain popular expositions of fundamentals rather than detailed studies of finer points of doctrine. The readership for whom he wrote, moreover, was Westerneducated youth and those with at least an interest in Western culture. The “sermons” Wachirawut frequently addressed to the members of the Sua Pa (“Wild Tigers”) volunteer corps, a paramilitary organization of his founding, shed further light on his attitude toward Buddhism.5 1 Directed to educated Thai youth, these lectures were at the same time an apologia for the “Englishman” within and a self-persuasion of “Thai” identity. They show Wachirawut’s concern solely with the moral side of Buddhism, to the exclusion of the spiritual. Even Buddhist morality was not presented as something unique; in his lectures, Wachirawut used the word satsana not in its traditionally limited meaning of “Buddhism” but to designate “religion” in general, including Christianity. In a discussion, for example, that begins “Why must we defend Buddhism?” he mentions other religions in his second breath: All religions share a common goal, even though their doctrines differ. I t is to lead people to goodness . . . . Even if a man professes a different religion, I recognize him as good, for his goal is the same as mine.5 2 While harboring, it seems, a personal lack of conviction about Buddhism, Wachirawut was nevertheless well aware of Buddhism’s effectiveness as a powerfully evocative symbol of the primordial sentiments of the Thai people. When Thailand entered the First World War, he stipulated that she should have as her national flag a tricolor “like many of the Allied Nations,” and that one of the colors should symbolize Buddhism. Addressing troops leaving for the front, Wachirawut explained the symbolism of the new flag with a poem: White is for purity and betokens the three gems And the law that guard the Thai heart Red is for our blood, which we willingly give up To protect our nation and faith. Blue is the beautiful hue of the people’s leader And is liked because of him.5 3 In addressing his people as a propagandist of nationalism, Wachirawut frequently used the word satsana in its traditional meaning of “Buddhism” in combination with the word chat (“nation”). As the compound chat satsana,for example, these words appear in the poem just cited (“our nation and faith”). The messages he repeatedly stressed were that adherence to Buddhist morality was the way to build a strong and

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

163

prosperous nation, and that, at a time when all Thailand’s Buddhist neighbors had become colonies of Western powers, Thailand must be the bastion of Buddhism. He made reference to the current situations of China, Cambodia, and Burma, countries that in the past had harrassed the Thais by their immoral behavior, and he claimed that Thailand’s enjoyment of freedom was due to the people’s continued adherence to the Dhamma. 5 4 Those who claimed that Buddhist morality was out of tune with modern society he admonished with the following words: There are no fashions in moral behavior. As long as people live relying on others, whether in the home or in the country, honesty, trust, honorable behavior and the like will always be virtuous. For this reason, Thais should hold firm to the ancient teachings of Buddhism. It is the way of the Dhamma that can win the respect of international society, that will lead to true civilization.5 5 The claim has been made that, having studied the world’s religions and concluded that Buddhism was the best, Wachirawut became a firm believer. 5 6 However, neither “Lectures, to the Wild Tigers,” reputedly the most typical of his works, nor the article that in one sense might be called the most religious, “What Is the Knowledge Attained by the Buddha on His Enlightenment?” appears to be the work of either an ardent believer or a Buddhologist concerned with obstruse philosophical principles. 5 7 There is no doubt that Wachirawut was an ardent defender of Buddhism; but there is ground for doubt whether he was truly able to internalize Buddhist values. It might even be said that the higher he raised the voice of Buddhist propaganda, the clearer the image emerged of an “Englishman” who could not fully become a Buddhist. SARIT’S NATIONALISM AND BUDDHISM The Constitutional Coup d’Etat by the People’s Party in June 1932 has been called “a revolution with little means of self-justification.” 5 8 Even after the coup, the Chakri monarchy, which had skillfully parried the thrusts of European and American powers through a timely selfreformation, and had guarded Thailand’s national sovereignty while developing the country into a modern state accepted into the comity of nations, remained socially relevant. In December 1932, at the close of one chapter in the Constitutional Revolution, the leaders of the People’s Party in audience with the king apologized to him for the disrespect they had shown him, and the king pardoned them “with words of dignity.” This historical event had an important bearing on the problems of legitimacy faced by subsequent “democratic” governments.5 9 The modern principle of representation that the People’s Party had originally aimed to implant in Thai soil did not ultimately take

164

A State Religion in History

root, despite the endeavors of the “civilian faction” leaders. It died with Sarit’s coup d’etat of September 16; 1957, following confused years of ambivalence between authoritarian and democratic inclinations that marked the long postwar administration of the Phibun regime in the 1950s. “Sarit’s emergence provided the impetus for a political reformation that was, with regard to the representation principle, equally as important as the 1932 Revolution.” 6 0 After Sarit’s coup, “the psychological adherence to Western principles and the tendency to prefer a hypocritical idealism that had persisted until Phibun, disappeared,” and an “atavistic” political administration began that was “essentially no different in its ideology of rule from the absolute monarchy of a century earlier.” 6 1 Despite his apparent reactionism, Sarit had as his political goal the modernization of Thailand. Through this he intended to protect the country from the political instability of her neighbors, especially from the invasion of communism. To this end, Sarit’s policies were focused entirely on national development {kanpatthand prathet'y, it was Sarit who, for example, formulated and executed Thailand’s first national economic development program. And the ideal national order for achievement of this political goal was one based on “Thai principles” {lak that), one in which government, bureaucracy, and the people were arranged in a social hierarchy, and one governed by a patriarchal, paternalistic absolutism dating back to the Sukhothai era.6 2 The concept of lak thai, the germ of which can be found in Wachirawut’s establishment of the tricolor, and which was systematized in Khun Wichitmatra’s article of the same name for which he won a royal award, is basically of the Thai state supported by the triumvirate of nation, religion (Buddhism), and king.6 3 These three constituent elements of lak thai, however, do not stand on the same level. Of newest origin, a product of Wachirawut’s nationalism, is chat, the Thai word here translated as “nation.” Deriving from the Pali jati, this word originally meant a lifespan in the cycle of rebirth, in which sense it is used in such expressions as chat ni (“this life”), chat kon (“past life”), chat ltd (“future life”), and chat manat (“life as a man”). According to Wachirawut, chat phrdm and chat kasat meant respectively “life as a Brahman” and “life as a king,” and subsequently each came to indicate the collectivity of people born to such status. In the same way, chat thai meant the collectivity of people born as Thais, namely, the Thai nation.6 4 Not only is the concept of nation of newest origin, it is inferior to the king and Buddhism, being an entity which supports them. It is not simply for effectiveness of design that the Thai tricolor carries the blue band symbolizing the king in the center, flanked on either side by the white of

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

165

Protection BUDDHISM

KING

Legitimation

Support

Support

NATION

Fig. 15. Internal Structure of Lak Thai Buddhism’s purity, and bordered by the red of the nation. The king and Buddhism, on the other hand, as we discussed earlier this chapter, are related by the king’s defense ofBuddhism and by Buddhism’s provision of the king with a standard and thus legitimacy for his rule. These relationships, which constitute the internal structure of lak thai, are depicted in Figure 15. Through the political reforms of 1932, the king’s position as ruler lost its direct political significance and became merely symbolic. To Thai statesmen, however, the king remained more than a symbolic figurehead, for he retained the power to confer legitimacy on their government. In Sarit’s case', he sought legitimacy for his government by supporting a lak thai social order, one in which the king reigns as head of state, Buddhism prospers, and the people revere the king and profess the Buddhist faith. Just as the king had formerly justified his sovereignty by being the defender of Buddhism, so Sarit sought legitimacy by being the defender of an order in which the. king is defender of Buddhism, namely, by being defender of lak thai. This relationship between lak thai and constitutional government is depicted in Figure 16. Because of this relationship, Buddhism’s prosperity and popular acceptance had not only religious but also political significance for Sarit, ranking with the elevation of monarchical prestige as a prerequisite to the achievement of his political objectives. Buddhism, I need hardly reiterate, is given concrete form in society by the Sangha. And the Thai Sangha, following the establishment of a national ecclesia through the Sangha Administration Act of 1902, was extremely well ordered.6 5 Headed by the sangkharat, the Sangha hierarchy displayed a degree of organization unmatched in other Theravadin

166

A State Religion in History

LAK THAI

Legitimation

Protection

GOVERNMENT

Fig. 16. Lak Thai and Constitutional

Government

countries. Following the Phibun regime’s introduction into the Sangha in 1941 of the secular political doctrine of separation of powers, however, an undercurrent of discord between the Mahanikai and Thammayut sects surfaced that disrupted Sangha administration. The death in 1958 of the sangkharat,a Thammayut monk, generated further sectarian conflict over the succession and left the Sangha leaderless for a year and a half. Even when a successor was appointed in May, 1960, from the ranks of the Mahanikai, the internecine struggle showed no signs of abatement; contentious pamphlets continued to circulate and a charged atmosphere continued to hang over the Sangha. Sarit’s concern was not with which sect would provide the new sangkharat but that an open schism would lower the Sangha’s social prestige. This in turn threatened to weaken his system of government. On October 28, 1960, he issued the Announcement of the Prime Minister’s Office on Developments in the Sangha.6 6 I t began: Today, when the Government is devoting its energies to the furtherance of national development, and you, patriotic people, are prepared to sacrifice your lives to stand against the state of emergency that has been provoked by the situation in neighboring countries, a grave situation has arisen in the Sangha. Should this situation be neglected, there is the danger not only that it will bring ruin to Buddhism itself, but that it will harm the State, and therefore the Government considers it appropriate to issue herein an announcement making clear its beliefs. The burden of the announcement, respectfully couched, was a highhanded warning to the Sangha that the government was ready to intervene in its affairs. Having set forth its belief of Buddhism to be the national religion, its respect for the trinity of nation, religion, and king, and its earnest wish that Buddhism should prosper, the government noted that

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism

167

certain high-ranking monks had long been behaving in a manner unbecoming to the robe. The government was, therefore, pressed to decide whether it should wait for the Sangha to exercise its autonomous powers to put its house in order, or intervene in accordance with its “duty to defend the State and the Nation, Religion, and King.” The announcement concluded that since the government judged it a threat to the state to leave the situation unattended any longer, it would “have to cooperate with the Ecclesiastical Cabinet in devising absolute measures.” During the lull in the conflict that this warning produced, Sarit moved to prevent its recurrence. Carrying his political philosophy to its j logical conclusion, he introduced a new Sangha act that demolished the Sangha’s “democratic” machinery and concentrated power in the person of the sangkharat. While the new act thereby raised the efficiency of Sangha administration, at the same time it tightened governmental control over the Order by depriving the sangkharat of lifelong tenure of office and making him subject to dismissal by the government.6 7 Buddhism is said to be “the religion inherent in the Thai nation” (satsana pracham chat). In view of the fact that over 93.6 percent of the Thai population is Buddhist, it is certainly not wrong to call Buddhism the ! “state religion” of Thailand, the term by which satsana pracham chat is I often translated into English. More important, however, is the fact that ’ Buddhism is the people’s religion, that support for the Buddhism is rooted j deep in the people’s hearts. It is on such popular faith that, as the defender 1 of Buddhism, the king has traditionally established his religiopolitical position. < Nationalists in Thailand, as elsewhere, have furthered their cause by manipulation of the traditional values. And because of the structures through which it gives legitimacy to the political ruler, Buddhism has functioned, and for the foreseeable future should continue to function, as the foremost and most effective of nationalist symbols.

NOTES E. H. Carr, Nationalism and After (London: MacMillan, 1968), pp. 2-3. Ibid., p. 5 Ibid., pp. 2-6 Shunpei Ueyama, Nihon no nashonarizumu (Japanese nationalism) (Tokyo: Shiseido, 1965), p. 32. J 5. Carr, Nationalism and After, pp. 6-26; Ueyama, Nihon no nashonarizumu, pp. 32-38. 6. Yoichi Itagaki, Ajia no minzokushugi to keizaihatten (Nationalism and economic development in Asia), 6th ed. (Tokyo: Toyokeizaishinposha, 1965), p. 134. 7. Masao Maruyama, Gendaiseiji no shiso to kodo (Ideas and actions in contemporary politics), 35th ed., enl. (Tokyo: Miraisha, 1969), p. 158.

t

1. 2. 3. 4.

168 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16.

17. 18. 19.

20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

A Stale Religion in History Ibid., p. 160. Ibid., pp. 157-160. P. P. R. 2, p. 682. Abbot L. Moffat, Mongkut the King of Siam, (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1961), p. 167. An excellent analysis of the 1932 Constitutional Coup d’Etat may be found in: Toru Yano, Tai-Biruma gendai seijishi kenkyu (A study of the modern political history of Thailand and Burma) (Kyoto: The Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, 1968), pp. 7—280 Ibid., p. 68. “Phra Thammasat,” K. T.S.D. 1: 7-41 . See also Robert Lingat, L’influence indoue dans I’anciendroilsiamois (Paris: Institut de Droit Compare, 1937); idem, “La conception du droit dans 1’Indochine hinayaniste,” B.E.F.E.O. 44: 163—185. Dhani Nivat, Prince, “The Old Siamese Conception of the Monarchy,” J.S.S. 36, no. 2 (1955): 93-96 Agganna Suttanta 21. T ranslated into English in S.B.B. vol. 4, Dialogues of the Buddha, pt. 3, trans. T.W. and C.A.F. Rhys Davids (1921; reprint ed., London: Luzac & Co., 1965), p. 88. “Phra Thammasat 4,” K.T.S.D. 1:16. The English translation is from Dhani, “Old Siamese Conception of The Monarchy,” p. 94. E. B. Cowell, ed., The Jataka, vol. 3 (London: Luzac & Co., 1957), pp. 173-174. The English Translation is based on A. B. Griswold and Prasert na Nagara, “The Epigraphy of Mahadharmaraja I of Sukhodaya: Epigraphic and Historical Studies No. II, Part I,” J.S.S. 61, pt. 1 (1973): 154-155. Inscription 1/1/18-31. T. W. Rhys Davids and William Stede, eds., The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary, part 4 (1923; reprint ed., London: Pali Text Society, 1952), p. 174. Kitiyakara, Prince, Pathanukrom bali-thai-angkrit-sansakrit (Pali-Thai-English-Sanskrit Dictionary) (Bangkok, 1969), p. 379; Photchanukrom chabap raUhabanditsathan, pho. so. 2493 (Royal Academy’s Thai Dictionary, 1955) (Bangkok, 1955), p. 481. P.P.H.L., pp. 437-438. H. G. Quaritch Wales, Ancient Siamese Government and Administration (1934; reprint ed., New York: Paragon, 1965), pp. 16—17. Dhani, “Old Siamese Conception of the Monarchy,” p. 101. H. G. Quaritch Wales, Siamese State Ceremonies (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1931), pp. 98-90. Samnak Nayokratthamontri (Prime minister’s office), Prawat lae phonngan chomphon Sarit Thanarat (Biography and achievements of Field Marshal Sarit Thannarat), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1964), p. 70. Yoneo Ishii, “Bukkyo no kozo” (The structure of Buddhism), Ajia Keizai 12, no. 2 (1971): 36-50. Walter F. Vella, Siam under Rama HI (Locust Valley, New York: J. J. Augustin Inc., 1957), pp. 125-126. Damrong Rachanuphap, Kromphraya, Ruangphrachomklaw (On King Phrachomklaw (Rama IV)), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1957), pp. 10-28. Ibid., pp. 33-34. Ibid. Two works on Protestant missions in Siam are: George B. McFarland, ed., Historical Sketch of Protestant Missions in Siam, 1828-1928 (Bangkok: Bangkok Times Press, 1928); and Kenneth E. Wells, History of Protestant Work in Thailand, 1829-1958 (Bangkok: Church of Christ in Thailand,. 1958).

Thai Nationalism and Buddhism 34.

35 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.

41. 42. 43.

44.

45. 46.

47. 48.

49. 50. 5 1.

52. 53.

54.

55.

169

Charles Gutzlaff, Journal of Three Voyages along the Coast of China in 1831,1833with Notices of Siam, Korea and the Loo-choo Islands (London: Frederic, Westley & A. H. Davis, 1834), p. 26. McFarland, Historical Sketch of Protestant Missions, pp. 12-13. Ibid., pp. 16-17. Ibid., p. 16. Vella, Siam under Rama III, p. 36. Maruyama, Gendaiseiji no shiso to kodo, pp. 158-60. McFarland, Historical Sketch of Protestant Missions, p. 19; Abbot L. Moffat, Mongkut,the King of Siam (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1961), pp. 19-20; George Haws Feltus, Samuel Reyonlds House of Siam, Pioneer Medical Missionary,1847—1876 (New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1924), p. i Daxaron Ruangphrachomklaw,. 35. Feltus states that Mongkut studied English with Caswell for three years. Feltus, Samuel Reynolds House, p. 53. Ibid., p. 50. Much remains unknown about Mongkut’s relations with the missionaries who preceded Bradley. Although Gutzlaff makes reference to Mongkut, he does not claim to have met him {Journal of Three Voyages, p. 27). Mongkut, Prince, Samnao lae khamplae phraratchahatthalekhd phrabat somdetphra chom klao chaoyu hua kon thaloengthawan ratchasombat (Copy and translation of the royal letters of King Phrachomklaw (Mongkut) before his accession) , cremation volume (Bangkok, 1932), pp. 6 - 7 . Feltus, Samuel Reynolds House, p. 51. Biographies of Wachirawut include the following: S(awai) Watthanaset, Kiatikhun phramongkut klao, kasat nak prat khong chat thai (In honor of King Wachirawut, the Thai nation’s great literary monarch) (Bangkok: Watthanaphanit, 1957); Praphat Trinarong, Chiwit lae ngan khong atsawaphahu (The life and works of Asvabahu) (Bangkok: Watthanaphanit, 1963); Sathien Phantharangsi, Phramongkut klao lae chaoja phetcharat (King Wachirawut and Princess Phetcharat) (Bangkok: Phrae Phitthaya, 1950); and Prayut Sitthiphan, Ratchasamnak phramongkut klao (King Wachirawut’s royal household) (Bangkok: Samnakphim Thammasewi, 1955). Phra Sarasas, My Country Thailand (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1942), p. 132. An annotated bibliography of Wachirawut’s six major literary works can be found in Praphat, Chiwit lae ngan khong atsawaphahu, pp. 645-730. A useful analysis of Wachirawut’s literary works has been made by P. Schweisguth, Etude sur la litterature siamoise (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1951), pp. 321-334. Wachirayan, Prince, Tamnan wat bowonniwetwihan (History of Wat Bowonniwet), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1922), pp. 102-104; Praphat, Chiwit lae ngan khong atsawaphahu, p. 198. Wachirawut’s “sermons” to the Wild Tigers have been published in Thetsana sua pa (Lectures to the Wild Tigers) (Bangkok, 1937) and Pluk chai sua pa (Instilling the Wild Tiger spirit) (Bangkok, 1951). S(awai) Watthanaset, Kidlikhrm phramongkut klao, pp. 327-328. Sanguan Anghong, Sing rack nai muang thai (First things in Thailand) (Bangkok: Phrae Phitthaya, 1959), pp. 365-366. The English translation is taken from Walter F. Vella, Chaiyo! King Vajiravudh and the Development of Thai Nationalism (Honolulu, Hawaii: University Press of Hawaii, 1978), p. 140. “Prayot haeng kanyu nai thamma” (The benefits of morality), in Pramuan hot phraratchaniphon, phak pakinaka suan thi2 (Compilation of the writings of King Wachirawut, miscellaneous pieces, part 2) (Bangkok: Sirisan, 1961) pp. 33—43. Ibid.

170 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67.

A State Religion in History Prayut, Rdtchasamnak phramongkut klao, p. 258. King Wachirawut, Phraphutthdchao tratsarii arai (What is the knowledge attained by the Buddha on His enlightenment?), cremation volume (Bangkok, 1964). Yano, Tai-Biruma gendai seijishi, p. 113. Ibid., p. 113. Ibid., pp. 114-1 15. Ibid., p. 235. Ibid., pp. 235, 239.Khun Wichimatra, Lak th(ii (Thai principles) (Bangkok, 1928). S(awai) Watthanaset, Kiatikhun phramonkgut klao, pp. 321—22. See chapter 5 herein. This Announcement is translated in full in chapter 7 herein. On the Sangha Act of 1962, see Yoneo Ishii, “Church and State in Thailand,” Asian Survey 8, no. 10 (1968): 864-871; see also chapter 7 herein.

Millenarian

Movements

in Thailand

In the absence of any prospect of relief through political means, the accumulated discontent of an oppressed class with the existing order occasionally may find expression in a frenetic burst of energy released by a charismatic leader who is supported by a millenarian ideology. Classic examples include the millenarian movement of the Anabaptists, which arose in Munster in Northern Germany in early modern times. Being religious movements that trace their origins,toJudeo-Christian apocalyptic literature, millenarian movements have arisen largely in areas reached directly or indirectly by the influences of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.1 Undoubtedly, as with Hinduism and Buddhism, it is “difficult to construct a millenarian ideology within a religious tradition which sees the world as a constant flux, or series of cyclical movements, or as a permanently stable thing.” 2 In particular, the doctrines of Theravada Buddhism advocating salvation through rational self-effort appear totally alien to millenarism. But even the Theravada has the potential to generate its own brand of millenarism, through syncretism of the orthodox notion of the Future Buddha and folk beliefs. In Burma, for example, the traditional belief in magicians (weikza) has been integrated with Buddhistic beliefs in the Future Buddha or a Universal Emperor to produce a unique religion that might be termed millenarian Buddhism.3 Millenarian Buddhism in Thailand has hitherto attracted little scholarly interest. It would be no exaggeration to say that Buddhologists, at least, have totally ignored the phenomenon. Recent historical research, however, has revealed the outbreak in Thailand in the early years of this century of an outwardly millenarian uprising that required the mobilization of troops to suppress. 171

172

A State Religion in History

The first scholar to mention this incident was the Thai historian Prince Damrong Rachanuphap, who, as Interior Minister at the time, bore ultimate responsibility for its suppression. In Nithan borannakhadi, a collection of essays on historical events not recorded in the official chronicles, the prince describes a “phi bun rebellion” that took place in Northeast Thailand in 1902. 4 The account of this religious rebellion is further elaborated in Fangkhwa. maendrn khong, the work of the Northeast Thai scholar Toem Singhatsathit.5 Probably the first scholar to analyze the phi bun rebellion was the historian Tej Bunnag. His short paper entitled “The phu mi bun Rebellion in Northeast Thailand in the Year 121 of the Ratanakosin Era,” presented in Thai in 1967, was the first article to so deal with millenarian movements in Thailand.6 He again discussed the phi bun rebellion in a Ph.D. thesis submitted to Oxford University the following year, wherein he attempted to place this incident, together with the antigovernment disturbances that broke out around the same time in the North and the South, in the context of antiestablishment movements by border peoples opposed to the centralization of administrative authority by the Bangkok government.7 Both of these studies by Tej are outstanding in their extensive documentation through primary sources, and should provide a point of departure for future research. The 1902 phi bun rebellion in the Northeast has not been the only millenarian movement in Thai history. The dynastic chronicles, for example, contain an account of a provincial government established briefly in the confusion following the fall of Ayutthaya, and which might have been supported by a millenarian ideology. More recently, in 1959, the emergence of a phi bun who claimed to be a reincarnation of King Chulalongkon led to clashes with the police and the loss of lives. In this chapter, we shall look first at the general features of millenarian movements worldwide, and in this light then reexamine the 1902 phi bun rebellion in order to illuminate its uniquely Thai features. We shall also look briefly at other Thai Buddhist millenarian movements, on which available information is presently limited, although there are signs of this situation being remedied,8 in an attempt to characterize such movements and establish a foothold for further study. FEATURES OF MILLENARIAN MOVEMENTS But in those days, following that distress, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. (Mark 13:24-26)

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

173

I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshipped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (Rev. 20:4) In the Biblical context, the term “millenarian” (or “chiliastic” ) refers to the millenium of supreme bliss over which Christ will rule together with the resurrected saints. Now, however, it is used not in its specific and limited historical sense but typologically, to characterize religious movements that expect imminent, total, ultimate, this-worldly, collective salvation.9 Millenarian movements are fueled by discontent with the existing order. They may arise among, for example, peasants impoverished by the penetration of modern capitalism into rural society (as in the Lazzaretti movement in Italy), oppressed and starving urban lower classes (the Munster Anabaptists) , or primitive peoples socioeconomically discontent with white rule (the “cargo cults” of Melanesia) . In sum, millenarian movements are what Lanternari called “the religions of the oppressed.” The millenarists’ fervent hope and expectation is liberation from their immediate suffering. They are not, however, reformists; they would not be satisfied by an improvement in their situation. What they seek is the collapse of the whole existing order and the realization of a completely new and perfect world, a world of supreme bliss. One feature of millenarian movements is a vagueness about the actual way in which the new order might be realized.10 Often millenarists are politically unorganized and, therefore, excluded from the political process. They long for liberation from their sufferings but lack institutionalized means to communicate their feelings. For this reason, millenarism has been called “essentially a prepolitical phenomenon.” 1 1 Millenarian movements have, of course, run the gamut from the “purer” movements, those without rational activities aimed at reform, to those like the Sicilian Fasci, which, while outwardly a traditional millenarian movement, was closer to a modern revolutionary movement in that it possessed a leadership, a modern ideology, and a program. But, ideally, the millenarian movement is characterized by its lack of a revolutionary program. According to Hobsbawm: Its followers are not makers of revolution. They expect it to make itself, by divine revelation, by an announcement from on high, by a miracle — they expect it to happen somehow. The part of the people before the change is to gather together, to prepare itself, to watch the signs of the coming doom, to listen to the prophets who predict the coming of the great day, and perhaps to undertake certain ritual

174

A Stale Religion in History

measures against the moment of decision and change, or to purify themselves, shedding the dross of the bad world of the present so as to be able to enter the new world in shining purity12 (emphasis added) . That the millenarist’s behavior is decidedly religious in no way prevents his expectations and concerns being terrestrial. In fact, he “is not actually concerned with the millenium that is to come; what is important for him is that it happen[s] here and now” 1 3 (emphasis added). “The Son of Man coming in clouds” will establish an everlasting kingdom on this earth. This point is important', because the mundane orientation of millenarism inevitably brings the movement into confrontation with temporal authority, inviting its suppression by that authority and ultimately its collapse and extinction. The tragic end of the Anabaptists entrenched in Munster is a classic case in point. Finally, the majority of millenarian movements are messianic. 1 4 Salvation is brought about by a redeemer, who is a mediator between the divine and the human. Probably the most celebrated example is Jesus of Nazareth. In Europe of the middle ages a common motif was that of the king waking from his immortal sleep to save his people. In primitive societies, the expected messiah may be a leader who has died at the hands of authority or even may be a host of ancestral spirits. An important role in millenarian movements is also often played by charismatic leaders who claim to have received supernatural powers from God. THE ONG MAN REBELLION: A PHI BUN UPRISING In the year 1 19 of the Ratanakosin era (1900 /190 1 ) , throughout the areas of Northeast Thailand bordering the Mekong, word spread about a fragment or palm-leaf manuscript {lai thaeng) which prophesied the advent of a great calamity.1 5 While the origin and authorship of the manuscript are obscure, its content, synthesized from a variety ofsources, seems to have been roughly as follows. In the third or fourth month of the year 120 of the Ratanakosin era (February or March, 1902),1 6 a major catastrophe {phetphai) would occur. At that time, gold and silver would turn to pebbles, and pebbles would become gold and silver.17 Pigs and albino buffalo with deformed horns would become ogres {yak), which would capture and devour people. Gourds and pumpkins would become elephants and horses. Then Thao Thammikarat, the King of Righteousness, would come to rule the world. Whoever wished to escape misfortune when the catastrophe came should pass on to others the import of the predictions written on the palm leaf. Those without sin should collect pebbles and await the advent of

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

175

Thao Thammikarat, who would transform their pebbles into gold and silver. Those who had done evil should purify themselves by inviting monks to perform the ritual of “holy water” (nam.mon).Those who feared death should kill pigs and buffaloes before the day came, and so prevent their turning into man-eating ogres. Young maidens and unmarried women should hurry to get married before the ogres ate them. Dismissing the prophesy as the superstitious belief of ignorant peasants, a rumor that would soon die down, local government officials did nothing. Interior Minister Damrong, reflecting on the events of the time, recalls sharing this attitude.1 8 In the midst of official complacency, however, word of the prophesy spread through Monthons Isan, Udon and Nakhbn Rafchasima, and the whole of the Northeast. As the time for fulfillment of the prophesy approached, unrest grew widespread. A report from Selaphum, for example, stated that residents had already made preparations to slaughter their pigs and were eagerly collecting pebbles. When the government finally realized the gravity of the situation and sent orders to the local village and hamlet chiefs that they should try to reason ,, with the people, it was too late, for mass hysteria had already set in. Against this abnormal psychological backdrop, there emerged in I various localities white-robed ascetics who claimed to have supernatural powers, and who attracted people’s attention by performing “miracles.” Most of these ascetics had monastic experience, and all were conversant with the ritual for consecration of nam mon and its lustral sprinkling. This ritual, involving the recitation of scriptural spells (parit) and the use of holy thread (sai sin), is an important element of popular Buddhism which is still commonly practiced all over Thailand in rites for protection and blessing. The mystical power believed to exist in the holy water, while deriving primarily from the sacred nature invested in the parit, is also related to the qualifications of the consecrator, and people recognize special virtues in holy water consecrated by “phu wiset,” those who have acquired supernatural power through ascetic practices. It was only natural, therefore, that the credulous people should willingly comply when the ascetics, who had succeeded through their “miracles” in convincing them of their supernatural powers, exhorted them with references to the accepted prophesy to purify themselves with holy water in prepaj ration for the coming calamity. Before long, groups obedient to their charismatic leadership formed around certain of these white-clad ascetics. The peasants of the Northeast called these ascetics phu mi bun, prefixing their names with the honorific “Ong” (as, for example, Ong Man). A phu mi bun (literally, “he who has merit”) is “one who, as the result of the long accumulation of good deeds, has been able to achieve a preeminent

176

A State Religion in Histoiy

station in life,” and in the literature this epithet is applied to the Buddha, arahats, and chakravartin.1 9 Once, however, the behavior of the phu mt bun and their followers had developed, or threatened to develop, into antigovernment riots, the phu mi bun came, at least in official circles, to be called by the pejorative “phi bun” and Ong Man became despised as Ai Man.2 0 Though his origin is obscure, Ong Man is said to have been a Lao mystic who was active around Savannakhet. He claimed to have descended from heaven to save mankind, and styled himself variously as phu mi bun, Chao Prasatthbng, and Phaya Thammikarat. The meaning oiphu mi bun I have just discussed. Chao Prasatthbng may be a reference to Phrachao Prasatthbng, the twenty-fifth king of the Ayutthaya dynasty, though what this king’s name meant to the Lao and why it would have been adopted by a “savior of the world” are unclear. It was, however, a name often adopted by Siamese kings. Phaya Thammikarat is likewise open to two interpretations. It may be the name of an actual king, in which case a leading candidate is Phra Chao SuryavongsaThammikarad, the ruler of Lansang for fifty-seven years from the midseventeenth century, whose administration was successful domestically and abroad, and who is said to have built a golden age of literature.2 1 Alternatively, the name can be regarded as deriving from dhammikaraja, a common noun meaning “a king who serves the Dhamma,” that is, a chakravartin. I n l 9 0 1 , O n g M a n crossed the Mekong from Laos, where his reputation as a phu mi bun had attracted to him a host of followers. His intention was to establish his influence in Thailand, particularly in Ubon, the capital of Monthon Isan. Between Ubon and the ancient settlement of Khemmarat on the Mekong, in the village of Trakan Phutphon, Ong Man secured the support of a local doctor named Luang Wicha (later to become known as Ong Fa) and raised a local following of about two hundred. He then led his band to Khemmarat, intending to enlist further support, but there was opposed by the local governor, who sensed the unsettling effect Ong Man would have. Enraged, Ong Man seized the deputy governor and a village official (kromkan), dragged them to the outskirts of Khemmarat and executed them, then took the governor hostage. As a further display of his power, Ong Man had the captured governor paraded around on a litter at the head of a procession. Moving on to Ban Saphoeyai, Ong Man demonstrated his “miracles” to the villagers, including firing a flintlock loaded with sand instead of gunpowder, and performed the nam mon ritual for large numbers of them. Here his band grew to over a thousand men; here, too, he was joined by six other phu wiset, drawn from other parts by his fame. Ong

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

177

Man organized his followers along military lines, placing a fighting unit under the command of each of the phu wiset. He ordered the procurement of provisions, flintlocks and other weapons, and made ready to advance on Ubon. The assembled forces led by the phu wiset, who wore their multicolored robes in monkish fashion and wrapped around their heads palm leaves bearing magical formulae, must have presented a bizarre spectacle. Toem captured the atmosphere of this time in the following passage. The phu wiset in command of the fighting units guarded Ong Man’s person in turn. “Keep the watchfire burning. Keep the fuse cord alight. Keep your weapons at hand. Should a mighty demon appear screaming, strike off its head and offer it to Ong Man. All of you, be on your guard.” When this order was heard, the war cry was raised as if by one voice: “Sa! Sa! Sa!” 22 In Ubon, meanwhile, the High Commissioner of Monthon Isan, Prince Sanphasitthiprasong, received word that Ong Man’s followers were assembled in Ban Saphoeyai, in high morale, about to attack Ubon. His first response was to dispatch a small patrol of police (or locally conscripted soldiers) to arrest the rebels. Confronted by Ong Man, however, the patrol members— probably Isan-born Lao — were terrorstricken and fled, deserting their leader, Captain Mom Rachawong Lai. This spectacle further boosted the morale of Ong Man’s followers. The Commissioner had at the time fewer than five hundred troops at his disposal, two hundred of them from Bangkok, and the remainder locally recruited Lao. His next move was to order Major Luang Sorakit Phisan, commander of the infantry regiment stationed in Ubon, to send out a reconnaisance party. The party, made up of twelve fully armed infantrymen under the command of Second Lieutenant Li, set off for Ban Saphoeyai. According to Toem, whose father was concerned with the incident and provided verbatim notes on the testimony of one private Pom, when the party reached Ban Khru it encountered a vastly superior band of Ong Man’s forces and retreated toward Ban Kasem to seek reinforcements. On route, however, it fell into an ambush set by Ong Man, Lieutenant Li was captured, and with the exception of Pom, who managed to flee, the remainder of the group was killed. At this point, the Isan High Commissioner decided to commit a fullscale fighting force equipped with heavy artillery. Prince Sanphasitthiprasong ordered Major Sorakit to organize a punitive force composed of one hundred of his Bangkok soldiers and N.C.O.S. equipped with two cannons along with local militia led by the governor of Ubon, and to send

178

A State Religion in History

this force under the command of Captain Luang Chitsorakan to subjugate Ong Man. The outcome of the expedition was that Ong Man’s “millenarian army” was totally silenced by four rounds of cannon fire. Three hundred of his followers were killed, another four hundred taken captive. Ong Man himself took advantage of the confusion to escape, disguised as a farmer, across the Mekong into French-ruled Laos. Having successfully put down the Ong Man rebellion, the Tsan High Commissioner sent directives to all local officials to arrest the phi bun and others party to the Ong Man affair who might be hiding in their respective areas, and send them under guard immediately to Ubon. Among the phibun leaders arrested in connection with this affair were five “Ong” who had been active in various parts of Tsan, Phrakhru In, a monk from Ban Samran in Yasothon district, and Kamnan Sui, the village head of Ban Sanmin, Kasemsima district, who had led an expeditionary force that had transferred its allegiance to the phi bun. Apart from those who were monks, the ringleaders were sent back to the areas where they had been active and were executed there as an example to others. The monks were confined to their monasteries, under threat that should they leave the robe they would be imprisoned for life. The Ong Man rebellion was not the only phi bun movement to emerge in Northeast Thailand in the years around 1902. A similar uprising in Selaphum, for example, was put down only after the High Commissioner of Nakhbn Ratchasima had requested support, on the basis of which 1,140 troops were mobilized, 620 of them from their stations in the regions of Buriram and Khbrat, and 520 conscripted locally in Yasothon. According to calculations made by Tej based on the reports oi monthon High Commissioners held in the National Archives, by the end of July 1902, forty-three phi bun had been arrested in Monthon Tsan and fifty-four in Monthon Udon. Add to these at least twenty more whose arrests are documented, and the total number of phi bun to have emerged in 1902 alone reaches well over a hundred.2 3 That the rumor of the palm-leaf manuscript prophesying a major calamity spread across the whole of the Northeast suggests that the various phi bun movements of the time were probably of similar form. While differing in scale, all showed the same basic pattern: the emergence of a prophet or, as in the case of Ong Man, a charismatic figure who proclaimed himself to be a “messiah,” who impressed upon people the imminence of doomsday, and who performed the nam mon ritual as a means of giving salvation. I t is clear that the f bun uprisings in Northeast Thailand, as typified by the Ong Man rebellion, reflect fairly well the general features of millenarian movements described in the previous section. The motif of

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

I | •

179

gold and silver turning to pebbles and pebbles to gold and silver is an expression of the expectation and hope that existing values will be overturned and a wholly new order born. This transformation was to be brought about by Thao Thammikarat, the “Messiah.” Unlike Ong Man, who declared himself to be Thao Thammikarat, the lesser phi bun like the one at Selaphum probably made no such claims but built their followings primarily through practice of the nam mon ritual, which was believed to confer eligibility to enjoy the coming salvation. FEATURES OF MILLENARIAN MOVEMENTS IN THAILAND

The/>Ar bun tradition in Thailand did not die out with the suppression of the spate of uprisings of 1902. There have probably been many phi bun who never ventured as far open rebellion; and, certainly, there have been others who did. In 1924, for example, twenty-two years after Ong Man, another phi bun rebellion broke out, albeit on a small scale, in Ban Nong Makkaeo, Tambon Nong Dan, Wang Saphung district, Loei province. The episode began with the appearance of one Bunma Chatrat, a I native of Chaiyaphum province, who attracted the following of local peasants by performing “miracles,” and prophesied the imminent coming of man-eating ogres. Bunma claimed to have come from heaven to save mankind, and besides frequently performing the nam mon ritual to avert the evil of the ogres, he distributed talismans and magical robes, he reportedly attracted over one thousand followers, some from as far afield as Rbi Et and Mahasarakham, and on one occasion took advantage of local police weakness to lead a band of twenty-three rebels in an attack on Wang Saphung distinct office. Eventually, however, the uprising was suppressed.24 A more recent phi bun rebellion took place in 1959 in Chpkchai district, Nakhon Ratchasima. Its leader was Chan Sila, a native of Ubon, who claimed to be a reincarnation of King Chulalongkorn With over a hundred followers he occupied the village of Ban Chongthamle in Tambon Ban Mai Thaicharoen, Chokchai district, and declared autonomy. The ensuing clash with the police produced fatalities on both sides.2 5 That the phi bun tradition remains alive in people’s memories is ■J further evidenced by the report of an American journalist who traveled Northeast Thailand in 1966. When one Luang Pho Yi, the abbot of a monastery in a small Northeastern village, performed such “miracles” as filling is empty begging bowl with rice by reciting a spell, and catching a pure gold fish in a fishnet placed against a tree, villagers immediately raised the cry c£“ph.i bun.” 2 6 It is a feature of these phi bun that they all emerged in Northeast

I I

180

A State Religion in History

Thailand.2 7 To judge from instances hitherto reported, phi bun can be called a peculiarly Northeastern and, therefore, a predominantly ThaiLao phenomenon. Millenarism, as we have seen, is the religion of the oppressed; millenarian movements are fueled by people’s pent-up grievances. Without doubt, popular discontent underlies the frequent appearance of phi bun in the Northeast. The form of the phi bun uprisings, moreover, is closely related to the religious tradition of the Northeast. We now turn, therefore, to the socioeconomic background against which the phi bun emerged, then to the religious basis that gives form to the phi bun movements. The Socioeconomic

Background

Under a treaty concluded with France in 1893, Thailand ceded all her territories on the left bank of the Mekong to France, and further agreed not to place military establishments within twenty-five kilometers of the right bank, even though this territory remained Thai. 2 8 This “twenty-five-kilometer zone” effectivly came under French control, with Frenchmen free to import goods without restriction by Thai authorities, whose entry into the zone was limited to those government officials who were native to the area, namely, those who were Lao. At the same time, the French authorities levied taxes on Lao inhabitants in the name of the king of Luang Prabang, and even on occasion arrested Thai officials and sent them to Luang Prabang.2 9 While the Thai government thus exercised little authority in areas along the Mekong at this time, it nevertheless recognized that, if it wished to secure the independent sovereignty and territorial integrity of the kingdom, it must act quickly to establish an administrative system through which central authority would reach the outlying districts. To this end, King Chulalongkon turned his energies to building a provincial administrative system, and appointed Prince Damrong, the most trusted of his brothers, to the Interior Ministry. The outlying regions, which hitherto had been under the substantially autonomous governance of hereditary local nobility, were gradually organized into monthon thesaphiban, which were placed under the control of High Commissioners posted by the central government. (The king’s half-brother, Prince Sanphasitprasong, for example, was appointed High Commissioner of Monthon Isan.) In 1899, the outmoded system of tributary payments was abolished, and in its place a uniform commutation tax of four baht annually per head on was imposed all ablebodied men as a preliminary to the introduction of a modern tax system. In addition, the word “Lao” was dropped from the names of monthon in an attempt to dispel ethnic consciousness.3 0

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

181

The integration into Thailand’s centralized administrative system of the Northeast, a Lao-inhabited area hitherto controlled only nominally by the central government, inevitably had far-reaching repercussions. Local petty officials, for example, suffered a severe blow to their interests by this development. Until the introduction of the commutation tax, they had enjoyed considerable privileges, not only in deriving income from various commissions, bonuses for tax collection, and so forth, but in being able to use peasant labor for their personal benefit. With the introduction of the new tax, the private conscription of peasant labor was banned, and the total sum appropriable by local officials was reduced to a maximum of 16 percent of the four baht per head commutation tax, that is, five-eighths of a baht. It was further laid down that the lowest officials, those holding such positions as nai mwat and nai kong,should each not receive in excess of 3.125 satang (0.03125 baht) of this amount. For them, this meant a sharp drop in income. The first backlash against the administrative integration of the Laoinhabited regions came in 1902. Petty officials in the rural areas were naturally discontented by the central government’s encroachment into their vested rights and interests and the concomitant devaluation of their prestige. 31 And their discontent, like that of others, found expression in the phi bun movements. The High Commissioner of Tsan reported: “Among the khunmun, phon and thanai (low-grade officials), those who supported their livelihood by the traditional means have lost their vested interests and become phi bun.” 3 2 Phra Yanrakkit, head of the Sangha in Tsan, attributes the phi bun rebellions of 1902 to the poverty of the peasantry.33 The paddy crop by which they lived was, in the absence of a stable and sufficient supply of water, largely at the mercy of the weather and, in many years, came close to total failure. Sources of cash income were also severely limited, since there was no ready market for their labor. Their destitution was thus unmitigated. And their daily sufferings were further aggravated by the oppression of local officialdom. In particular, as centralization progressed and a complex administrative system was introduced into the outlying areas, certain officials capitalized on the peasants’ ignorance of administrative procedures. The abuse of an institutional reform requiring transactions of domestic animals to be registered, for example, became a stumbling block to smooth trading and forced peasants into unnecessary expense. In early 1902, moreover, the peasants’ suffering was increased by an unprecedented spate of cattle thefts. 3 4 One can readily imagine how the compounding of these factors left the peasants psychologically susceptible to the demagogy of the phi bun. Lastly, the inhabitants of the Northeast felt wronged and discrimi-

182

A State Religion

in History

nated against by Bangkok. Formerly a sparsely populated region, Northeast Thailand received a large influx of Lao migrants in the aftermath of the so-called Vientiane rebellion of 1826, when the Bangkok government forcibly moved large numbers of people across the Mekong in pursuance of its policy of depopulating the Vientiane kingdom.3 5 This historical circumstance left many of the Lao inhabitants of the Northeast with feelings ofinferiority as a conquered and subjected people, of being injured and discriminated against —feelings so deeply rooted that they persist to this day. People, moreover, felt excluded from the political process that centered on Bangkok. These factors, together with poverty, made the Northeast fertile ground for the growth of millenarian movements.

The Basis in Buddhism

,,

Although the Pali canon contains few scriptures that discuss the notion of a Buddhist “savior” comparable to the Messiah of the JudeoChristian tradition, one scripture that does so is the frequently cited Cakkavatti Sihanada Suttanta of the Digha Nikaya.3 6 Dealing with both Metteyya, the Future Buddha, and the chakravartin, or ideal king, this scripture stands at the point of contact of Theravada Buddhism and millenarism. It is this work that Spiro cites as the scriptural basis of millenarian Buddhism in Burma.3 7 According to the Cakkavatti Sihanada Suttanta,in a time when men live for 80,000 years, there will appear in the world as protector ofhis people a Wheel-turning monarch possessing the seven precious things, who will rule over the whole earth, “not by the sword, but by righteousness.” At this time, there will arise in the world an Exalted One named Metteyya, Arahant, Fully Awakened, . . . a Buddha. . . . The truth lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, will he proclaim, both in the spirit and in the letter, the higher life will he make known, in all its fulness and in all its purity.3 8 The noncanonical literature of Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, deals quite fully with the messianic concept. One such work is the Andgata-vamsa, which describes how, after the death of Gautama the Buddha, the Dhamma will disappear from the world in five stages, and finally Metteyya will appear to save people. It goes on to discuss in detail the qualifications for enjoyment of this ultimate salvation. 3 9 Whether either this canonical or noncanonical literature was widely known in its originalform in Thailand at the turn of the twentieth century is extremely doubtful, at least judging from the depressed condition of theological education in the kingdom. Until the late 1830s, when the Thammayut movement emerged as the driving force of a reactionary Buddhist reformism that stressed the importance of the Pali scriptures,

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

183

Thai Buddhism had rested on such popular Buddhist “scriptures” as the Traiphum (or Tebhumikatha), purportedly written by Lithai, a fourteenthcentury king of Sukhothai. That the Thammayut reforms included the study of the Pali scriptures, not for the purpose of recitation, but to understand their meaning, seems ascribable to. the fact that in only a handful of the urban monasteries and almost none of the provincial monasteries were these scriptures ever read. We have also seen how King Chulalongkbn, on a tour of Southeast Thailand in 1877, happened to visit a local monastery where he heard a monk give an sermon, and how the king expressed deep concern at the nonsense he heard preached.40 If, then, the peasants of the remote villages of the Northeast had learnt of Metteyya or of a chakravartin, it must have been by means other than the Pali scriptures and noncanonical literature. The sanctuaries of monasteries all across Thailand are decorated with wall paintings, many of which draw their motif from the Traiphum of King Lithai. It is through these that Thai peasantry is thought to have long been familiar with the substance of the Traiphum. The “Three Worlds” of the Traiphum are three states of existence: kamaphumi, the temporal world; rupaphumi, the world of form; an arupaphumi, the incorporeal world. By depicting in striking detail the various states of existence of living beings, this popular Buddhist treatise sets forth plainly and simply what man should do to avoid falling into a disagreeable state and rather to be born into desirable circumstances. Much of this highly practical work is concerned with the temporal world, of which the “world of men” (manutsaphumi ) alone occupies two-fifths of the whole volume.41 At the beginning and end of the Traiphum, more than thirty sources are cited as authority, including the Anagata-vamsa and other works that deal with Buddhist eschatology. 42 One section of the “world of men” is particularly interesting in connection with the millenarism of Northeast Thailand. It describes how a chakravartin possessing the seven precious things will arise and rule the whole world in accordance with the Dhamma, winning the praise of his people; it also counts chakravartins, together with Buddhas and bodhisattas, as phu mi bun.4 3 Undoubtedly, the Traiphum played a key role in the propagation of the idea of the future advent of an ideal king. This ideal king is known in Thai and Lao as “thammaracha” or ‘Thammikarat” (derivations respectively from the Pali dhammaraja and dhammikaraja) , which appellations have been incorporated into the names of actual kings. Another popular Buddhist work equally as familiar to the Thai peasantry as the Traiphum is the Phra Malai. Found widely not only in Thailand but in many parts of Southeast Asia, this work is reportedly based on the Ceylonese Metteyasutta.44 In Laos, it is known by such names

184

A State Religion in History

as Tamnan Pra Mettai and Pun Pra Si An.45 The existing Thai version of Phra Malai, said to be the work of Chaofa Thammathibet (also called Chaofa Kung), a poet of the late Ayutthaya period, is an epic which has as one of its themes the Future Buddha, Sri Ariya Metteyya (popularly called Si An). It tells the story of Phra Malai, a Ceylonese monk who, having attained supernatural powers through 'his ascetic practices, traveled around heaven and hell, and eventually met with SI An. This work explicitly sets forth the notion that SI An will one day come to this world to save mankind. How the Phra Malai became known among the people is explained by Anuman Rajadhon: its recitation at one time formed an important part of the marriage ritual. According to a traditional Thai custom called non fao ho, the groom was not allowed to sleep with his bride on the night of the wedding ceremony, but had to spend three, five, or seven nights, or even longer, alone in his bedroom awaiting an auspicious day. During this period, the parents of the bride and groom would each invite two learned laymen to recite from the Phra Malai outside the groom’s bedroom. The recitation of this Buddhist moral teaching in the guise of a journey through heaven and hell was presumably an admonition to the groom about his conduct in married life. Where the Traiphum provided a moral education through the visual medium of wall paintings, then, the Phra Malai was, through its recitation, an auditory means ofeducating the masses. While this custom has gradually disappeared, the Phra Malai is now recited in some areas as part of the funeral rites and is addressed to the departed soul.46 We can posit from the foregoing discussion that, first, the phi bun of the Northeast arose against the background of a popular amalgam of the notions of the Future Buddha and the chakravartin, which were well known through the visual and auditory expressions of such popular Buddhist literature as the Traiphum and Phra Malai. Second, these two notions were amalgamated in the word thammikarat,“a king who rules in accordance with the Dhamma.” This king, moreover, is conceived of not as a legendary figure, but as a true historical personage. In the case of Ong Man, the appellation Thao Thammikarat may have referred to an actual Lao king. In the Chokchai incident of 1959, the name of Chulalongkon was invoked. Thai-Lao millenarian movements thus also appear to be characterized by the equation of the Future Buddha, a chakravartin, and a historical monarch. CONCLUSION Millenarian movements, as we have seen, have not been restricted to areas touched by the Judeo-Christian tradition, but have also arisen in

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

185

Buddhist countries. In Thailand, millenarian movements led by phi bun or phu mi bun have emerged only in the Northeast. The reasons for this are both psychological and economic: as the descendants of a conquered people, the Lao who inhabit this region feel discriminated against, repressed, and excluded by the Siamese who govern Thailand; moreover, they must endure, constant poverty, since without a secure water supply, the agriculture by which they live is at the mercy of the climate and is extremely unstable. The unprecedented spate oiphi bun uprisings in 1902 can be attributed to the addition of a new element, the opposition of the local ruling classes, whose interests were threatened by the centralization of administrative power that accompanied Thailand’s modernization, to the forcible incorporation of the Lao into Thai society. In the preceding chapters, based on the assumption that Buddhism plays a positive role in the integration of Thai society, we sought to discover the conditions that allow Buddhism to fulfill this role in its triadic relationship with the state and society. We found that the state and Buddhism are complementary, and that Buddhism and society are firmly bound through the medium of the Sangha. In this chapter, in contrast, we have found the/iAf bun uprisings to be antiestablishment movements built wholly within the framework of Buddhism. The evidence that characteristically Thai millenarian movements can arise through the combination of the nam mon rite, which although originally Brahmanic is now an essential element of popular Buddhism, with belief in Si An, the Future Buddha, or in a chakravartin, is testimony that certain elements of Buddhism can also function negatively, for the disintegration of Thai society. NOTES 1.

In the first and second editions of Primitive Rebels [1st ed. published as Social Bandits and Primitive Rebels (New York: Free Press ofGlencoe, 1959); 2nd ed. (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1963)], E. J. Hobsbawm expresses the opinion that classical millenarian movements arise “only, or practically only, in countries affected by Judeo-Christian propaganda” (2nd ed., p. 57). In the third edition (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1971), he revises this view: “Religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism produce different rationalizations of millenial expectations, but plenty of movements which are recognizably like millenarian ones” (pp. 57-58). 2. Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels, 2d ed., pp. 57-58. 3. Melford E. Spiro, Buddhism and Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), pp. 162-164. 4. Damrong Rachanuphap, Kromphraya, Nithan bordnnakhadi (Historical anecodotes) (Bangkok: Samnakphim Kawna, 1962), pp. 421-427. 5. Toem Sanghatthit, Fang khwa maenam khong (The right bank of the Mekong), 2 vols. (Bangkok: Samnakphim Khlang Witthaya, 1956), 2: 221-244. See also Toem Wiph-

186

6.

7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20.

21. 22. 23. 24. 25.

26. 27.

A Slate Religion in History akphotchanakit (Sanghatthit), Prawatisdt isan (A history oflsan), 2 vols. (Bangkok: Sanmakphim Samakhom Sangkhomsat haeng Prathet Thai, 1970), 2: 559-587. Tej Bunnag, “Khabot phu mi bun phak isan ro. so. 121” (The 1902 holy men’s rebellion in Isan), Sangkhommasdt Parithat (Journal of social sciences), 5, no. 1 (Bangkok, 1967): 78-86. Tej Bunnag, “The Provincial Administration of Siam from 1892 to 1915: A Study of the Creation, the Growth, the Achievements, and the Implications for Modem Siam of the Ministry of the Interior under Prince Damrong Rachanupap” (Ph.D. thesis, Oxford University, 1968). Social anthropologist Charles F. Keyes of Washington University, for example, is furthering the study of religious movements in Northeast Thailand. Yonina Talmon, International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, s.v. “ Millenarism” (hereafter cited as I.E.S.S.). Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels,3d ed., p.58. Yonina Talmon, “Pursuit of the Millennium: The Relation between Religious and Social Change,” European Journal of Sociology 3(1962): 138. Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels,3d ed., p. 58. Karl Manheim, Idelology and Utopia, trans. Louis Wirth and Edward Shils (1936; reprint ed., London: Routeledge and Kegan Paul, 1976), p. 195. Talmon, “Pursuit of the Millenium,” pp. 133-134; idem, I.E.S.S., s.v. “Millenarism.” This section is based mainly on Toem, Prawattisat isan-, Damrong, Nithdn borannakhadv, and Tej, “Khabot phu ml bun.” I follow Tej, p. 78; Toem and Damrong both cite the sixth lunar month. Professor Kazutake Kyuma of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, has pointed out that severely weathered tropical soils and laterite often contain blackish-brown ferrous formations of buckshot size known as concretions or pisoliths. Since lateritic soils are common in the region, such concretions may be the “pebbles” referred to here. Damrong, Nithan borannakhadi, p. 422. See, for example, Traiphum phra ruang khdng phraya lithai (The Traibhumikatha of Phraya Lithai) (Bangkok: Ongkankha khong Khurusapha, 1963), p. 93. The first instance of the use of the term “phi bun” is, according to Tej, “Khabot phu mi bun,” p. 78, in a telegraph sent by the High Commissioner oflsan to Interior Minister Damrong, dated 12 April 1902. Maha Sila Viravong, History of Laos (1959; reprint ed., New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp., 1964), pp. 75-77. Toem, Prawattisat isan, p. 566. Tej, “Khabot phu mi bun,” p. 84. Toem, Prawattisat isan, pp. 579-587. Thai Noi [pseud.], Nayokratthamontrikhon thill kap phunampatiwat (The eleventh prime minister and three leaders of the coup d’etat) (Bangkok: Phrae Phitthaya, 1964), pp. 481-484. Louis E. Lomax, Thailand: The IKar That Is, the War That Will Be (New York: Random House, 1967), pp. 65-76. If the “Buddhist Kingdom” of Chaophra Fang that is mentioned in the Royal Autograph Edition of the Dynastic Chronicles was in fact associated with a phi bun or a similar millenarian movement, then phi bun may be a social or cultural phenomenon common both to the Thai-Lao and the Lao of Northeast Thailand and Laos and to the Thai Yuan of North Thailand. Formed when Thai unity was shattered by the fall of Ayutthaya in 1767 and local chiefs across the country held their own territories, this

Millenarian Movements in Thailand

28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44.

45. 46.

187

“kingdom” reportedly covered an area stretching north from Phitsanulok. Its ruler, Ruang, was a native of the North and the head monk of Sawankhaburi. Not only did he remain in the robe after becoming “king,” all leading figures in the “kingdom” were also monks. After three years, he was overthrown by Phraya Taksin, founder of Thonburi. See P.P.H.L., pp. 306 f. Pensri Duke, Les relations entre la France et la Thailande ( Siam) au XIXe slide d’apres les archives des affaires etrangeres (Bangkok: Librairie Chalermnit, 1962), pp. 178-179. M.L. Manich, History of Laos (Bangkok: Chalermnit, 1967), p. 302. Tej, “Provincial Administration of Siam,” pp. 271 f. Tej, “Khabot phu mi bun,” pp. 80—81. Ibid., p. 79. Ibid., p. 81. Ibid. Maha Sila, History of Laos, p. 135. G. P. Malalsekera, The Pali Literature of Ceylon (Colombo: M.D. Gunasena, 1958), p. 161. Spiro, Buddhism and Society, p. 171. S.B.B. vol. 4, Dialogues of the Buddha, part 3, trans. T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys Davids (1921; reprint ed., London: Luzac & Co., 1965), pp. 73—74. Henry Clark Warren, Buddhism in Translation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1953), pp. 481-486. See chapter 6 herein. This is true at least in the edition of the Traiphiim cited in note 19 above. George Coedes, “The Traiphumikatha: Buddhist Cosmology and Treaty on Ethics,” East and West 7 (1957): 350-351. Traiphum phra ruang khong phraya lilhai, pp. 93-94. See Prince Dhani Nivat’s review of “Phra Malai, Royal Version, by Chaofa Kung, Prince Royal of Ayudhya” in J.S.S. 37, pt. 1 (1948): 69—72; see also Eugene Denis, “L’origine cingalaise du Phrah Malay,” in FelicitationVolume of Southeast Asian Studies presented to H.H. Prince Dhaninivat (Bangkok: The Siam Society, 1965), pp. 329-338. Louis Finot, “Recherches sur la litterature laotienne,” Bulletin de PEcole Franfaise d‘ Extreme-Orient 17, no. 5 (1917): 64-65. Anuman Rajadhon, Phraya, Phrapheni nuang nai kan taengngan lae phrapheni nuang ni kan pluk ruan khong sathiankoset (Customs relating to marriage and house-building, by Sathienkoset) (Bangkok: Samnakphim Samakhom Sangkhomsat haeng Prathet Thai, 1964), pp. 251-257.

Index

A abbot, 7, 104 Act on the Administration of the Sangha (R.S. 121). See 1902 Sangha Act almsgiving (dana), 13, 16-18, 40-41, 45, 151 apotropaic Buddhism, 29 See also Buddhism Ayutthayan Sangha, and secular authority, 61-62

and passage of time, 133 and phi bun tradition, 182-183 and rites of passage, 132—133 and Sangha and ecclesia, 165-166 and Sarit, 165-167 as socializing force, 48, 63 as spiritual bond, 140 as state religion, 35, 122, 166-167 and Thai identity, 48 and Three Gems, 43-44, 133 as unifier of Thai society, 100, 185 and Wachirawut, 161-162 See also Thai Buddhism; Theravada Buddhism Buddhist doctrine orthodox, 76—77 understandable in Thai, 89 Buddhist ecclesia and Catholic church, 50-51 and Pali language study, 76-77 and regional sectarianism, 74 and Sangha Act of 1902, 69—71 structure of, 47-52 Buddhist research, sterility of, 94 Buddhist state, structure of, 46—47 Buddhists, as percentage of population, 39, 130, 167 bun (merit), 15 See also Merit making Burma, 35-36, 81 and non-Buddhists, 36 state patronage ofBuddhism, 36, 122 Burney Treaty, 154—155

B Bali Waijakon, 87 See also Wachirayan, Prince Boromatrailokanat, King, 63 Bowring Treaty, 155 British East India Company, 154 hunt rian (go forth to study), 26 Buddha, and relation to king, 61 Buddhism apotropaic, 29 in Burma, 35-36, 81, 122 and Catholic Church, 50—51, 76 in Ceylon, 34-35 and Christianity, 34-35, 153, 157160 and hill tribes, 140-142 kammatic, 29 Khmer, 42 and kingship, 149-152 Lankawong, 60, 62 and Mongkut, 158-159 nibbanic, 29 188

Index C Caswell, Jesse (missionary), and Mongkut, 159 Catholic Church, compared to Buddhism, 50-51, 76 Catholic missionaries, 157 Central Thailand, minorities in, 124-126 Ceylon Buddhism in, 34-35 Christianity in, 35 Chakri Reformation, 148 chatsatsana,and Wachirawut, 162-163 China, nationalism of, 147 Christianity and Mongkut, 157—160 as political and religious challenge, 153 Christianity and Buddhism in Ceylon, 34-35 in Thailand, 158-160 Chulalongkon, King (Rama V) educational reform of, 68 and modernization and centralization, 149 and Sangha reform, 68 colonial nationalism, 147 commoner monasteries, 72, 74 See also Monasteries; Royal monasteries communalism, and nationalism, 121 communism and hill tribes, 130 and Sarit, 164 Constitutional Coup d’Etat, and Chakri monarchy, 163 Constitutional Revolution, 149, 153-154 cosmic hierarchy, 15-17, 24 Council of Elders, and Sangha Acts, 177— 178 cultural values, and Sangha, 24-26 D Damrong, Prince, 68, 106, 172 dead, rites for, 133 defender of Buddhism, king as, 61, 63, 65, 67, 122, 152-154, 163 dek wat (temple boy), 25-27 democratic features, and Sangha discord, 115-116 dhamma (Dhamma) 13-14, 152-153

189

and King and Sangha, 46 Dhamma and Vinaya, and Sangha, 14 dhammaraja (Righteous Monarch) , 45 disrobing, of monks, 8-9, 10, 101 doctrinal examinations, 76-77 See also Ecclesiastical examinations E ccclesia. See Buddhist ecclesia ecclesiastical assembly, 103 ecclesiastical cabinet, 103 ecclesiastical examination, 26 curricula and grades, 84—85 importance in secular society, 92-93 and Military Service Act, 88-90 organization and reforms of, 85-88, 9092, 189 and Prince Wachirayan, 81 and secular authority in Sangha, 83 See also Doctrinal examinations ecclesiastical ministers, 103 educational reform, and Sangha reform, 68 education, temple, and Sangha, 25-27, 29-30 ethnic minorities (in Thailand), 122-126 Chinese, 122 hill tribes, 123, 125-126 Indians, 122 Lao, 123-124 Muslims, 123, 124-125 policies toward, 126-130 Vietnamese, 122, 126 F field for merit, Sangha as, 154 See also Sangha flag, Thai. See Thai flag formal organizations, 6 Four Noble Truths, 4, 5 G going forth, and merit making, 18-20 See also Merit making H heaven and hell, 13 hierarchy, Sangha, 74-76 See also Sangha hill peoples, 125-126

190 and government policy, 129-130 as opium cultivators, 125-126, 129-130 and thammacharik programs, 140-142 I ideal king. See King independent doctrinal examinations, 87 Islam, 124-125 J joi (expel the barbarian), 147 K kammalikhit,3, 16 kammatic Buddhism, 29 See also Buddhism Kathina ceremonies, 18, 41, 133 khana winaithon (ecclesiastical courts), 102, 103 Khmer influence, and kingship, 151 king as Buddhist, 38-39, 40-41, 48, 152, 154 and Constitution of Siam, 100 as defender and supporter of Buddhism, 39, 44, 46, 61, 63, 65, 67, 72, 122, 152-154, 163 as ideal, 45-46, 150-151 and Kathina ceremonies, 41 as legitimist of power, 163, 165 and legitimacy from Buddhism, .149152 monkhood of, 6 1 and royal monasteries, 41 as sacred entity, 152 and Sangha, 71-72, 75, 102 as subordinate to Buddha, 61 as symbol of state, 165 kingship Buddhism as legitimating, 44—46,149152 and Khmer influence, 151 ten rules of, 45-46, 150-151 L laity, and Sangha Act of 1902, 51, 77-78 lak that and Thai flag, 164-165 Phibun’s rejected by Sarit, 116 ofSarit, 164-165 ofWachirawut, 164-165

Index Lankawong Buddhism, 60 as state Buddhism, 62 Lao, in Thailand, 123-124 Laos, and Buddhism, 37—38 lay precepts, 50-5 1 lay society, 134 M magic, and Buddhism, 20-21,29 Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University, 135 and thammathut,136—140 Mahamakut Academy, 87 Mahamakut Buddhist University, 135 and thammathut,136—140 Mahamakut system, 87-88 Mahanikai and Thammayut sects factionalism of, 107, 109, 113, 166 membership compared, 106-107 Mahanikai sect and Mahachulalongkon Buddhist University, 135 petition to Phibun, 109-113 and Thammayut discord, 106—107, 109-113, 166 material culture and moral culture, Western, 148 medical missionaries and doctors, 158-159 merit making categories of, 18 and Sangha as field for, 13-14, 18, 49 messianic concept, and noncanonical literature, 182-183 Military Service Act, 88—90 millenarian Buddhist, 171, 182, 184 millenarian movement and Lao areas, 181 and phi bun tradition, 179, 185 in Northeast Thailand, 179-180, 183185 millenarism in Burma, 171 features of, 172-174, 179-184 modernization and monarchy, 67—68 and ruling class, 149 as Sarit’s goal, 164 monarchical protection and control, 65, 73 monasteries, 40

Index commoner, 131 importance and functions of, 25-27 royal, 131 and sima, 104 types of, 104 Mongkut and Bowring Treaty, 155 and Buddhism, 73, 152, 155, 158-159 and Ghakri Reformation, 148—149 and Christianity, 157—161 and Jesse Caswell, 159 Mon influence on, 155 and Pallegoix, 157-158 as protonationalistic, 149, 156-157 strategy against Western influence, 158— 159 and Thammayut movement, 65, 86-87, 155 and Western science and knowledge, 149, 159 Mon influence, 150-151, 155 monkhood, as traditional, 26 monk-officials, 62, 75 monks, 8, 18, 42, 76, 91, 135 unfrocking of, 65 and Sangha Act of 1902, 51 and secular law, 70 mutual-benefit association, Sangha as, 6, 12 Muslims government attitude toward, 127-128 language and Islam, 124 N nd bun (field for merit), 13 nak tham curricula, 92 nak tham examinations, 93—94 nam mon (holy water), 22 national integration and king and Buddhism, 1 22 Sant’s, 119, 134 nationalism, 147-149 and communalism, 121 national unity, and traditional values, 113, 134 Nawakowat, 76—77, 89-90 Nibbana, 134 nibbanic Buddhism, 29 See also Buddhism 1902 Sangha Act, 69-72, 74, 78

191

Ninth Great Buddhist Council, 64, 83-84 Noble Eightfold Path, 4-5 noncanonical literature, and messanic concept, 182-183 noncolonial nationalism, 147 Northeast Thailand, and phi bun rebellion, 179-182, 184 O Ong Man Rebellion, as, phi bun, 174—179 opium cultivation, 125—126,129—130 oral examinations, 84-85, 91-92 See also Written examinations ordination ceremony, and making merit, 133-134 See also Merit making; Tham bun orthodox doctrine, 76-77 P Pali (language) studies, 76-77, 83, 90 examinations, 77, 84-87 and Mongkut, 155 rites conducted in, 50 at Wat Bowonniwet, 86 Pali canon, 10-1 1 as elitist, 87 Pali Vinaya, 73 Pallegoix (Catholic priest), and Mongkut, 157-158 parian examinations, 84-86, 91-92, 94-96 parit, 21 Patimokkha,6, 8 People’s Party, 163 and legitimacy from king, 149, 153— 154, 163 Phattalung Documents, 53 n.30 Phibun, Prime Minister and petition from Mahanikai sect, 109113 reconciliation of sectarianism, 107-108 phi bun rebellion, 172 Ong Man Rebellion as, 174-179 phra’khruang (amulet of Buddha image), 22-24 Phra Mdlai, 183-184 Phra STwichai, 73-74, 77-78 Phra Thammasat, 44—46 Phra Yanrakkit, 181 Phutthasatsanasuphasit,89 prayok, grades of, 84-85, 91-92, 95-96

192 preceptor, qualifications for, 73 protonationalism, 146—150 and Thammayut movement, 156 Protestant missionaries, 157-158 See alsoJesse Caswell; Pallegoix R Rama I intervention in Sangha, 64-65 support of Buddhism, 64 See also Ratanakosin dynasty Ratanakosin dynasty, reigns of, 83—85, 149 reactionary Buddhist reformism, 182— 183 recruitment, to Sangha, 29 regional sectarianism, and national ecclesia, 74 royal children, and monastery education, 63 royal support, of Sangha, 60-61 See also Sangha royal monasteries, 18, 71-72 See also Monasteries ruling elites, and European impact, 147 rural Thailand, as Buddhist, 131 S sakdina, grades of, 82 salvation, as this-worldly, 49 Sangha basic schism of, xiv ceremonies of, 7 in Ceylon, 35 democratization of, 101-102, 115-116 as field for merit, 13-14, 17, 154 as formal organization, 5-6, 7, 10, 7374 hierarchy and bureaucracy of, 74-76, 103-104 as intellectual elite, 12, 19-20, 25-27, 29, 133-134 and layity, 49, 134-135 and merit making, 14-20 and monasteries and monks, 8, 131 as mutual-benefit organization, 6, 12 and 1902 Sangha Act, 51-52, 68-70 and 1941 Sangha Act, 102-104, 115116 and 1962 Sangha Act,, 92, 116-119

Index and orthodox doctrine, 14, 76-77, 152— 153 and Pali canon, 10-11 rules of, 6 as sacred entity, 21, 23, 29 and secular authority, 34, 51—52, 68, 71-72, 101-102, 104, 116, 135, 153 secular functions of, 24-27, 134 sectarianism of, 104-113 and thammacharik program, 141 Sangha Act of 1902, 51-52, 68-70 Sangha Act of 1941, 102-104 democratic features of, 115-116 compared with 1962 act, 117-119 Sangha Act of 1962, 92, 116-117 compared with 1941 act, 117-119 Sangha administration, and sectarian discord, 104-113 and Sangha Act of 1962, 116-119 See also Mahanikai sect; Thammayut sect Sangha Assembly, abolition of, 92 Sangha, and state. See Sangha, secular authority sanctity, and king and Buddhism, 154 Sarit, Prime Minister cabinet of, 134 and economic development, 164 and lak that, 165 and modernization, 164 and new Sangha act, 167 science and religion, as separate, 159 secular authority in Ayutthayan Sangha, 61—62 and Mahanikai sect, 113 and monk-officials, 62 and Sangha, 34, 51-52, 68, 71-72, 101-102, 104, 116, 135, 153 secularization, mechanisms for, 10 secular society, and Sangha, 8 See also Sangha, secular authority self-effort, and salvation, 3, 12-13, 16 self-emancipation movement, 147 sima (boundary), and ordination ceremony, 74, 104 soteriology, ofTheravada, 3—4,12 “state Buddhism” 59-60 Lankawong as, 62 state religion, Buddhism as in Burma, 35-36, 39, 122

Index in Cambodia, 37, 39 in Ceylon, 35 in Laos, 37-38, 39 in Thailand, 40 See also Buddhism, as state religion state (doctrinal) examinations, 81 See also Doctrinal examinations; Ecclestical examinations supreme patriarch appointments of, 103 powers of, 102-103 and Sangha Act of 1962, 116, 118 T ten rules, of kingship, 45—46,150—151 ten theses, xiv Thai Buddhism and Catholicism, 76 and magic, 20-24 and 1902 Sangha Act, 68—69 See also Buddhism; Theravada Buddhism Thai flag, 142-143 n.4, 148, 164-165 “Thai-ization,” and hill tribes, 140 Thailand, as politically independent, 34, 38, 67 Thai principles (lak ihai). See Lak thai lham bun (to make merit), 15-16, 133-134 thammachdrik projects and missions, 140— 141 thammasuksa examinations, 92 Ihammathiit program, 135—138 Thammayut movement, 154-160 and Christianity, 159—160 as elitist, 87 and Mongkut, 65, 86, 159-160 Thammayut reform group, 155-156 Thammayut reforms, 182—183 Thammayut sect, 104 and Mahamakut Buddhist University, 135 and Mahanikai discord, 106-107, 109, 113, 166 and Sangha, 11, 107-108 and Wachirayan, 106 Thanarat, Sarit (Field Marshal) and national development, 115, 134

193

and new Sangha act, 113-119 and Sangha, 115-116, 119, 134 Theravada Buddhism, 3, 67, 154 and millenarism, 171 and noncanonical literature and messanic concept, 182-183 social structure of, 27-30 and way to salvation, 3, 4, 12-13 See also Buddhism; Thai Buddhism Three Gems, 43-44, 133 Tipitaka, 10, 64 See also Pali canon Traiphum, and ideal king, 183-184 U Uposatha ceremony, 6 V Vietnamese refugees, 122, 126, 128 Vinaya precepts, 6, 156 W Wachirawut and Buddhism, 161-162 and chat satsand,162-163, 164-165 English background of, 161 Thai values learned, 161 and tricolor, 164-165 Wachirayan, 86, 92 books authored, 76-77 and reformation, 68, 76, 87 as supreme patriarch, 88, 100 theology of, as orthodox doctrine, 77, 94 Wat Bowonniwet and Jesse Caswell, 159 and Pali studies, 86 and Thammayut movement and sect, 86-87, 156 and Wachirawut, 161-162 Wat Mahathat, and Mongkut, 155 Wat Samorai, and Mongkut, 155 wong dai sai sin (encircling with thread), 22 written examinations and Mahamakut system, 87-88, 91 and provincial monasteries, 91 See also Oral examinations