Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The Most Buddhist Country Is Un-Buddhist
ThailandTom
Veteran
After spending several years now in Thailand, a counrty that has the highest ratio of 'Buddhists' I have come to see how far off the mark the vast majority of the people here are. A lot of them are decent people at least, but their concept of Buddhism is so warped and orientated around luck and fortune it is quite amazing.
I have tried explaining to my girlfriend some of the Buddhas teachings from time to time, more often than not they fly straight over her head. What we discuss here, the 4NTs, dependent origination etc, most of the Thai Buddhists have never heard of these things. I am refering to lay people of course, but they are still considered Buddhist.
Also the ever advancing western influence upon this country is moving the marker of what is important in life away from where it should be. I think my picture attached illustrates this.
I have tried explaining to my girlfriend some of the Buddhas teachings from time to time, more often than not they fly straight over her head. What we discuss here, the 4NTs, dependent origination etc, most of the Thai Buddhists have never heard of these things. I am refering to lay people of course, but they are still considered Buddhist.
Also the ever advancing western influence upon this country is moving the marker of what is important in life away from where it should be. I think my picture attached illustrates this.
0
Comments
But if you express Buddha's teachings through your actions, she will understand.
What you see in Thailand today is really your basic form of Buddhist practice as it developed in India and spread. Throughout history, Buddhist practice was confined to the temples and monks. For the masses, Buddhism was a blend of local beliefs and superstitions and the idea of gaining merit by donating to the temple. That's what ThailandTom is observing. In that culture, his level of interest should mean he puts on a robe and becomes a monk.
For all I love and cherish the Sangha, in all honesty monastic Buddhism is a flawed model when faced with an educated lay population with time on their hands and modern communication and mobile populations. That's why where it's allowed, Christianity and other religions that engage the lay population directly have spread widely while the monks stayed hid behind the walls. Muslim religion is so effective because it's extremely focused on the lay population with compulsory religious education and practice.
In Thailand and some other Buddhist cultures, they do go on periodic campaigns that try to shove children into the monk's robe in an effort to keep the population engaged. That's ignoring the larger issue and the typical conservative "more of the same" solution to any problem. Buddhism is changing around the world to engage the lay population, but it's doing a better job in cultures without an entrenched temple power structure tied to political power that resists change.
But I do have one caution: There's an unintended implication in this thread, and it is a very West-centric one -- that "we" do it better...just as "we" almost always think we do things better.
As flawed as Buddhist practice may be in Thailand and southeast Asia, if it were not for Buddhist practice in those countries, most of us might not even be aware of Buddhism today. And I think that we here in the West have put our own spin on Buddhism that may be just as far off base (although in different ways) than the spin Thais have put on Buddhism. For example, all you have to do is spend an hour walking around the main shopping district in "new Bangkok", and you will see the effect of Hinduism and animism as you watch the masses of Thai Buddhists worshiping in front of Hindu statues in front of Isetan department store and at the Erawan Shrine across the intersection. But here in the West, many (not all) practitioners are influenced in their Buddhist thinking by what has developed in their minds as an anti-Western-religion/their-previous-experience action/reaction frame of mind.
I am reminded also of the old adage that the most devout Catholic is the Catholic convert, and that over time that "devoutness" slowly fades. And we are converts (to one extent or another) to Buddhism, and I rather suspect that devoutness may erode somewhat.
We are in our own small cultural bubble where Western religion has evolved (for example) tremendously from just the founding of colonies in the western hemisphere until today. Meanwhile, the Thais are in their own huge cultural bubble. They have been taught Buddhism against a 2,000 year backdrop of a the Dhammaraja king (with -- perhaps -- a brief break in that concept from 1932 - 1946). It is the only Thailand/Buddhist experience that a Thai living today has ever experienced.
I want to emphasize that I am not disagreeing at all with Tom's original post here. Just trying to explore the reason why the Thais are "off base" in how they practice Buddhism.
Also, with @cinojer insinuated is likely true. If you put Maslows Hierarchy in place, in countries, and with people, where daily life is still a struggle, many of them are going to be farther removed from any religion they identify with. Because when you are preoccupied with how to feed, shelter and cloth yourself and your family, studying and practicing a religion is just not a need high on the list. For most people it is only until you have your basic needs met, that the desire for religion enters the picture as does the ability to study and practice it.
You clearly point out the gulf between the talk and the walk. Cultural buddhism is no more holy than any other cultural religon. Most folks are content with the tribal identity that it provides.
We are only where we are now because we were not content.
Cultural Buddhism is (9 times out of 10) very different than what Westerners believe a religious practice is, or should be when compared to the West's ways and practices.
I mean how do you know what goes on behind every closed door in Thailand and other "Buddhist cultures" around the world? How do you know who is or is not praying to their gods, maintaining an altar in their home, attending temple regularly, or living the precepts to the best of their ability?
Aren't such assumptions and generalizations a form of judgmental behavior on our part?
And honestly, what arrogance to assume because Westerners prefer their Buddhism wrapped up in formal meditation, cushion time competition, and that "I'm a better Buddhist than you are..." stuff, that those who have been Buddhist for thousands of years and raised with Buddhism already infused into their lives and ancestry, have somehow lost track of how to be 'good/real Buddhists'. :-/ Really?
Well, maybe they don't need the pomp and parades of outward appearances of devotion to do all that. Maybe after thousands of years of living it, they have evolved beyond that constant need for overt identification, judgment and competition.
Sorry if I sound angry. I'm not, really... I'm more surprised and a bit offended, I guess.
As for the western influence, that is something that cannot be ignored. It may not be so much intruding the religion but the culture for sure. Blinged out cars, people caring more about the shiny things and the self image rather than the sick person on the side of the road. Say what you will, but live it first.
I wouldn't call materialism the most important part of my life, but it's an aspect of it. I like to have nice things and I don't see that as something negative.
Spin it any way you like... you are judging others' religious practices based on how and what YOU believe is the 'right way' to be a Buddhist and follow the precepts, etc.
I know plenty of wonderful, giving, happy, peaceful and loving Christians who don't go to church. MANY people believe that going to church does not a "good Christian" make. So that analogy doesn't work for Christians - OR Buddhists who you believe are not following Buddha's words to the letter, as you think they should.
Just because you feel that the people in Thailand are becoming more and more 'materialistic' (and who knows, maybe they are! I can't argue with that either way), how does that automatically make them "bad" Buddhists? Because if merely having possessions, or providing comforts for your family and home makes one a "bad" Buddhist, then 99.9% of us Buddhists everywhere are bad Buddhists....
We can't all live in yurts or caves, eating only rice, wearing only robes while meditating all day and all night to be so-called "good" Buddhists.
"When we get to cessation of ignorance, then at that moment, all the rest of the sequence ceases. It is not like one ceases, then another ceases. When there is vijja, then the suffering ceases. In any moment, when there is true mindfulness and wisdom, there is no suffering. The suffering has ceased. Now when you contemplate the cessation of desire, cessation of rebirth of grasping, there is cessation of becoming, cessation of rebirth and suffering. When things cease, when everything ceases, then there's peace, isn't there? There is knowing serenity, emptiness, non-self. These are the words, the concepts describing cessation."
Also, if anyone decides they don't want their shiny things then send them this way.
can indeed be a learning experience.
But as soon as you become judge and jury of others' religious practices according to your interpretation of (religious) "LAWS," well, that is called being a Fundamentalist.
Fundamentalism is based in ego and judgmental attitudes.
And one other thing, how do you know that those people in Thailand with blinged out cars and lots of material possessions, etc are in fact Buddhist?
As you must know- there are many Christians in SE Asia as well. I've met/know several people from India, the Philippines, Japan and Malaysia who are all Christian - for at least a few generations or more....
I wouldn't want to accidentally take myself down that path of delusion rather than actual non attachment.
I can provide some notes from a conversation I had with a Head Monk at the Doi Suthep Temple in Chiang Mai - There is a major change required in the way Buddhism is practiced in Thailand. A shift needs to be made from the iconic imagery and back to root teachings. There are only 5 precepts that the lay person needs to follow compared to the over 200 that a monk follows. After all, the praying to the image of the Buddha will not make any changes in your life the real changes come from within, from your practice.
OK, you've explained things a bit further for us, and I appreciate the clarification, but now I will say three things:
1. A few people (that you know or not) doesn't justify generalizing or stereotyping an entire country, culture or region.
2. You are still judging people; people that you know. How does that affect how you relate to or think about these friends or acquaintances? If it does affect how you think or feel about them, it's judgment with reaction. If it doesn't affect how you feel or think about them - at all - then why bother judging them in the first place?
3. Speaking from my own very personal, very profound experiences I can tell you that to be "judgmental" is probably one of the worst ever failings or faults one can have. I have been struggling with this issue myself for the last 15 years or more.
It's not easy to do, hell, most of the time it's not even easy to recognize it for what it is (!) - but recognize it, and learn to let it go as soon as you do.
Then try your best to retrain your mind & your heart not to repeatedly go there again, for any reason, with anyone - friend, family, acquaintance, coworker, boss, anyone; particularly judging whole groups of people or religions!
It is a form of bigotry. It's caustic and damaging to everyone it touches, especially the person being judgmental.
True Compassion is the ceasing of judgment.
Samsara is hard and bloody. Everyone's doing what they can.
His wife (Indian) was also from a Christian family. My bother's partner is from Japan, and a Christian. His friends are from the Philippines, India and Malaysia and are Christian too. I was friends with another woman who was married to a man from India - Christian. My husband worked for two people from Turkey and Pakistan (? I think)- one Christian, one claimed no religion at all.
LOL Now that I mention it, I've never met a Buddhist from anywhere except Japan! (I never realized that before!)
As far as western Buddhists are concerned, they know very little about Buddhism. For example, the average Buddhist believes the Four Ariya Truths can be understood by non-ariyans who are those who have yet to enter the current (sotapatti). Ain't so. They also believe that monks and nuns make up the Triple Gem Sangha. The Triple Gem Sangha is only for ariya-puggala, those have at least entered the current.
Give me a Buddha and I will expect it to confer blessing, luck, merit and work magic, even though it is just a stone statue or some old Tibetan dude . . .
There may be no hope for me but I suppose we all start from where we are . . . :om:
If you probe even just slightly below the surface of people who consider themselves Christian (I'm not talking about the hard-core types), you can find the same mentality at work. We celebrate Christmas and Easter, and believe in being kind to people, so we're Christians, is the rationale.
If 500 whiskers make a beard, then
499 whiskers must also make up a beard.
498 whiskers must also make up a beard.
497 whiskers must also make up a beard.
...
3 whiskers must also make up a beard?
2 whiskers must also make up a beard?
1 whiskers must also make up a beard?
Words/labels are used to put a group of different "things" (those differences may be very subtle or gross depending on the scope of the word) into a collective bin. If objects or ideas fall within that bin, we accept those objects and ideas as that word (a poor assumption if we don't keep in mind that there are ALWAYS differences). It isn't perfect, but it helps us convey a general idea about life to another person that understands our words. Furthermore, language and culture are very much intertwined. They heavily influence each others' changes, and consequently the language speakers' perceptions. Like @vinlyn has mentioned in another thread, the boundaries of visible colors and the subsequent names we give them (language), depend on our culture.
If I call myself a geologist, but I know nothing about rocks aside from their color and shape, am I really a geologist? Am I an amateur geologist? To an expert, perhaps no. To a person who knows nothing about rock colors and shapes, perhaps yes.
Does the word Buddhism define a set of beliefs? Yes. Does it define a cultural outlook/attitude/perspective? Yes. Are they the same thing? No, not in my opinion. I can certainly call myself whatever I want, but it doesn't do me or anybody else any good if we don't/can't agree on what that word entails. In the end, this debate has its roots in semantics.
How do you define a buddhist? We have had this question posed many times on this forum, and the general consensus for our forum is the four noble truths and probably the eightfold noble path. Ask a Thai person what a buddhist is and you will generally get a different answer. That different answer is just a bigger bin that collects more objects and ideas. It's all about scope.
When I hear daily from loved ones who thought they would stop being bullied in high school, yet now they are 35+ and still being bullied under the guise of "caring Christians." I try hard to understand and to engage them in open communication to learn why they feel how they do, but they can never answer me beyond "This is Christian nation founded under God, poo poo to the rest of you." Like I said, it doesn't mean it's ok for me to turn around and judge them because I'm mad about their judging others, but it's a work in progress, and people who spread hate and bigotry under the name of God, I have the hardest time with.
At any rate, little kids in the States are sent to school without consideration of their interests or capabilities; that's the cruel but natural result of the power imbalance between parents and kids
I'm curious about the 10% figure; the monks and nuns I've met have quite frankly put me to shame, educationally, and I consider myself educated enough. Most Tibetans I know, monastic or lay, speak a minimum of two languages if they're from Tibet, and three if they're from India (four if you count home dialect) and are literate in most of those as well.
When times are tough, people want to believe in a benevolent god and good luck-- or even a malevolent god that can be placated/combated, and bad luck that can be avoided. It gives people hope and a feeling that they can control things. And anthropomorphism gives a feeling of understanding and clarity, rather than confusion.
"There are no atheists in foxholes," so the saying goes.
So in hard times, a religion like 4NT Buddhism wont be as appealing as other forms of Buddhism, or other religions, that give "answers" that are much more appealing and accessible (and don't involve years of meditation).
In my experience, 4NT teachers are constantly telling students to "investigate" something. But, in a way, people don't want to "investigate." They want answers.
From what I understand, the Buddhism of the Pali Cannon almost died out. I suspect it had something to do with the above points.
On the other hand, in times and places where life has been made easier (like Europe and the U.S. in the late 20th Century), there tends to be a rise in secularism and increasing interest in 4NT Buddhism. Perhaps both are a first-world luxury.
I'm sure if you searched around you'll find plenty of Buddhist groups, Buddhist studies, Buddhist schools etc. I'm sure they'll be more than glad to discuss the 4nt and 8fp with you.