Converting To Buddhism

[keestha]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange. An exception would be westerners who made it very high up in the clerical hierarchy, became abbott of a temple for instance. Mostly I believe they are Americans, and a few Germans.

Buddism is not a profilerating religion like Christianity or Islam, though it does accept converts, unlike for instance Jewism.

During my 18 years in Thailand, it hardly ever happened that anybody suggested that I should become a Buddhist.

Your thoughts on this?

[MiG16]

Im moving this to the Buddhism sub forum

[mizzi39]

Thai Buddhism is just a hybrid of Animism with a sprinkle of Buddhism for flavor. Why anyone would want to "convert" to Thai Buddhism is beyond me, but hey to each is own. If you are going to be a follower stick with Islam or Christianity.

Don't know about the claim that mostly converts are American or German. The 2 "converts" I know are Brits, and I thing that Phra Farang (great book by the way) is a Brit. too.

Edited April 11, 2009 by mizzi39

[AjarnChan]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange. An exception would be westerners who made it very high up in the clerical hierarchy, became abbott of a temple for instance. Mostly I believe they are Americans, and a few Germans.

Buddism is not a profilerating religion like Christianity or Islam, though it does accept converts, unlike for instance Jewism.

During my 18 years in Thailand, it hardly ever happened that anybody suggested that I should become a Buddhist.

Your thoughts on this?

Judaism DOES accept converts, provide they can 'prove' they are sincere ! Once 'converted' you could go to live in the 'promised land' with all the rest ;} Good Luck

[Brucenkhamen]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange. An exception would be westerners who made it very high up in the clerical hierarchy, became abbott of a temple for instance. Mostly I believe they are Americans, and a few Germans.

Buddism is not a profilerating religion like Christianity or Islam, though it does accept converts, unlike for instance Jewism.

During my 18 years in Thailand, it hardly ever happened that anybody suggested that I should become a Buddhist.

Your thoughts on this?

I've had nothing but respect and admiration from Thai people regarding my interest in Buddhism, as a result I've had nothing like the problems dealing with Thai people that many other foreigners have, in fact I often find Thai people are very generous towards me.

Though it's fair to say they chuckle about me spending too much time on it which is understandable as in their culture anyone spending that much time would be a monk.

[samuibeachcomber]

what ever gives someone peace is ok with me.

[Samuian]

It's like re-labeling a bottle of wine, whiskey - name it!

the label won' change the contends!

a saffron robe, shaved head and eyebrows and prostrating

again and again in front of some buddha or whatever image

won't catapult you one day into nirvana!

[camerata]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange.

Farang monks are treated with the same respect as Thai monks and are more serious about their practice and the monastic code than many Thai monks (according to Ajahn Chah). A good many of the farang monks follow the ascetic Thai Forest Tradition, which is more difficult than staying at a mainstream monastery. Some of them have set up and become abbots of Thai Forest Tradition monasteries in the West: Ajahn Brahm in Australia, Ajahn Sumedho in the UK, Ajahn Thanissaro in the USA, for example.

[camerata]

Thai Buddhism is just a hybrid of Animism with a sprinkle of Buddhism for flavor.

Buddhism is Buddhism, animism is animism, Brahmanism is Brahmanism. It's all part of Thai sacred belief, but it isn't all Buddhism. Typically, foreigners who adopt Buddhism focus on the doctrinal Buddhism of the Pali Canon and ignore the rest.

[SeerObserver]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange. An exception would be westerners who made it very high up in the clerical hierarchy, became abbott of a temple for instance. Mostly I believe they are Americans, and a few Germans.

Buddism is not a profilerating religion like Christianity or Islam, though it does accept converts, unlike for instance Jewism.

During my 18 years in Thailand, it hardly ever happened that anybody suggested that I should become a Buddhist.

Your thoughts on this?

Buddhism is a proliferating religion, meaning it is growing. For example it is the fastest growing religion in Australia and continues to grow steadily although religion is said in a general decline there.

What you probably meant to say is that Buddhism is not a proselytizing religion, but that isn't completely true. Yes, the general ehipassiko come and examine for yourself practive is there, and Buddhism has not conducted any crusades nor is it quite as well known to set up various missions like Christianity may be. But proselytizing does occur. In Thailand, monks are known to go into the area of the hilltribes and teach them about Buddhism so that they may abandon their folk superstitions and ghost worship.

That is just one example. The reason you are of this opinion is because Buddhism really doesn't have overzealous and forceful evangelism. The reason for this is the ehipassiko practice.

As for your first point, I do not take that attitude. Whenever a farang "converts", I rejoice in their commitment and merit (if you will). Reason being, is that they either had done some merit or practice before in order to meet Buddhasāsana in this lifetime, especially if they have "no apparent reason" to do so. Phra farang isn't exactly uncommon these days anymore either.

[SeerObserver]

It's like re-labeling a bottle of wine, whiskey - name it!

the label won' change the contends!

a saffron robe, shaved head and eyebrows and prostrating

again and again in front of some buddha or whatever image

won't catapult you one day into nirvana!

So are you proposing they just stay put?

[phetaroi]

Always been wondering about farangs who convert to Buddhism. My impression is that Thai people tend to chuckle a bit about it, the thruth seeking farang wandering about in orange. ... Buddism is not a profilerating religion like Christianity or Islam, though it does accept converts, unlike for instance Jewism. During my 18 years in Thailand, it hardly ever happened that anybody suggested that I should become a Buddhist. Your thoughts on this?

1. When I have had discussions about it with Thai friends or Thais in a temple who are intrigued by me knowing at least some of the appropriate "behavior" (for wont of a better term), I have found them a bit surprised, but appreciative of my interest. Several times they have said, "Yes, you could be Thai."

2. A Westerner doesn't have to go as far as becoming a monk ("wandering about in orange") to be Buddhist. In one conversation with a monk, specifically when I asked how I convert to become a Buddhist he said, "If you think like a Buddhist, if you act like a Buddhist, then you are a Buddhist."

3. What is "profilerating"? Do you mean proselytizing? If so, yes...in fact proselytizing seems very un-Buddhist since you need to be seeking "truths", rather than have someone pushing them on you. If my friends ask me about various aspects of Buddhism, I will answer them to the extent of their questions and interest. I never bring it up independently.

[keestha]

3. What is "profilerating"? Do you mean proselytizing?

You are right, I used the wrong word.

And I appreciate your post, reading it helped me to put this thing into perspective. Thank you.

[Groongthep]

A Westerner doesn't have to go as far as becoming a monk ("wandering about in orange") to be Buddhist. In one conversation with a monk, specifically when I asked how I convert to become a Buddhist he said, "If you think like a Buddhist, if you act like a Buddhist, then you are a Buddhist."

Phetaroi is correct, in fact, to become a Buddhist there is no requirement to tell anyone at all. When I visit my elderly parents I still attend Catholic Mass with them because they like it when I do. I do this out of respect for them and their beliefs even though I myself quit believing in most Catholic teachings many years ago. Trying to explain my interest in Buddhism to them at their age would probably hurt them, so I don't. I think most Buddhists would agree that keeping ones beliefs to oneself is perfectly OK and doesn't make one any less Buddhist.

[SeerObserver]

Phetaroi is correct, in fact, to become a Buddhist there is no requirement to tell anyone at all. When I visit my elderly parents I still attend Catholic Mass with them because they like it when I do. I do this out of respect for them and their beliefs even though I myself quit believing in most Catholic teachings many years ago. Trying to explain my interest in Buddhism to them at their age would probably hurt them, so I don't. I think most Buddhists would agree that keeping ones beliefs to oneself is perfectly OK and doesn't make one any less Buddhist.

How do you feel about going through the motions? You stand, sit, etc. I'm assuming you also partake of the blood of Christ and what not. Isn't there is somewhat of an ethical issue here, from a Buddhist context or otherwise? I understand everything that you're saying though, and I agree with the synopsis by phetaroi to a degree.

If so, yes...in fact proselytizing seems very un-Buddhist since you need to be seeking "truths", rather than have someone pushing them on you. If my friends ask me about various aspects of Buddhism, I will answer them to the extent of their questions and interest. I never bring it up independently.

I agree with the latter part, but would like to hear your opinion on the former. What is your opinion of the missionary monks then who go into the areas of the hilltribes and others in order to teach Buddhism?

Edited April 12, 2009 by SeerObserver

[phetaroi]

Phetaroi is correct, in fact, to become a Buddhist there is no requirement to tell anyone at all. When I visit my elderly parents I still attend Catholic Mass with them because they like it when I do. I do this out of respect for them and their beliefs even though I myself quit believing in most Catholic teachings many years ago. Trying to explain my interest in Buddhism to them at their age would probably hurt them, so I don't. I think most Buddhists would agree that keeping ones beliefs to oneself is perfectly OK and doesn't make one any less Buddhist.

I think how you treat the situation with your parents is a very good example of "intent". Excellent!

[phetaroi]

How do you feel about going through the motions? You stand, sit, etc. I'm assuming you also partake of the blood of Christ and what not. Isn't there is somewhat of an ethical issue here, from a Buddhist context or otherwise? I understand everything that you're saying though, and I agree with the synopsis by phetaroi to a degree.

First, I have been taught that you can be Buddhist and Christian (etc.). For myself, I no longer believe in the "magic" aspects of Christianity (for example, the miracles allegedly performed by Christ), yet I still believe he was a teacher sent by God (yes, I do believe in God, and that is another whole conversation). There is no part of the Catholic mass I would really have a problem participating in except, as you mention, taking communion, since that involves the "magic". And, I wouldn't say the...well, I've forgotten the name of the one long "I believe in one God..." pledge one makes. Communion, of course, can easily be skipped...you just say you haven't been to confession lately...which would be true. ;-)

If so, yes...in fact proselytizing seems very un-Buddhist since you need to be seeking "truths", rather than have someone pushing them on you. If my friends ask me about various aspects of Buddhism, I will answer them to the extent of their questions and interest. I never bring it up independently.

I agree with the latter part, but would like to hear your opinion on the former. What is your opinion of the missionary monks then who go into the areas of the hilltribes and others in order to teach Buddhism?

I must admit I wasn't aware they did that. It would depend on exactly what they do. If they go to a village and make themselves available to talk, fine. If they go to a village and work around the community, and then make themselves available to talk, still fine. If they go an initiate unwanted talk, I would be opposed to it.

I think back to my first direct experience with Buddhism. I was visiting the family of my roommate in Chiang Mai, and as a rather large group they took me to the temple on Doi Suthep and bought me flowers, incense, and a candle and taught me what they do when they go to temple. I participated simply to show respect to them and to Buddhism, although at the time I was still Catholic. There was no effort on their part to "get me to believe". In fact, when I went back to visit them 3 years later, they were astonished that I had actually become a Buddhist.

It's very much like two of my retired friends who just came back from Thailand and Burma. While in Bangkok I had them spend one day with my significant other (SO) who is Thai and, of course, Buddhist. Although I was here in the States, I orchestrated the whole day. And, my most important instruction to my SO was to teach them what Thais do when they go to temple. Not try to convert them, but make the experience more of a learning situation than simply looking at a building. When they returned, both the husband and wife said they appreciated the personalization of the temple visit and that they now wanted to learn more about Buddhism...not with the intent of converting, but simply to learn (they happen to be teachers).

[Groongthep]

Phetaroi is correct, in fact, to become a Buddhist there is no requirement to tell anyone at all. When I visit my elderly parents I still attend Catholic Mass with them because they like it when I do. I do this out of respect for them and their beliefs even though I myself quit believing in most Catholic teachings many years ago. Trying to explain my interest in Buddhism to them at their age would probably hurt them, so I don't. I think most Buddhists would agree that keeping ones beliefs to oneself is perfectly OK and doesn't make one any less Buddhist.

How do you feel about going through the motions? You stand, sit, etc. I'm assuming you also partake of the blood of Christ and what not. Isn't there is somewhat of an ethical issue here, from a Buddhist context or otherwise?

No, I see no ethical issue here at all. I don't take communion but even if I did, I don't see how going through the motions would do anyone any harm or disrespect.

[SeerObserver]

Phetaroi is correct, in fact, to become a Buddhist there is no requirement to tell anyone at all. When I visit my elderly parents I still attend Catholic Mass with them because they like it when I do. I do this out of respect for them and their beliefs even though I myself quit believing in most Catholic teachings many years ago. Trying to explain my interest in Buddhism to them at their age would probably hurt them, so I don't. I think most Buddhists would agree that keeping ones beliefs to oneself is perfectly OK and doesn't make one any less Buddhist.

How do you feel about going through the motions? You stand, sit, etc. I'm assuming you also partake of the blood of Christ and what not. Isn't there is somewhat of an ethical issue here, from a Buddhist context or otherwise?

No, I see no ethical issue here at all. I don't take communion but even if I did, I don't see how going through the motions would do anyone any harm or disrespect.

I'm just interested to hear anyone's opinion on this with respect to the 4th precept.

[Groongthep]

No, I see no ethical issue here at all. I don't take communion but even if I did, I don't see how going through the motions would do anyone any harm or disrespect.

I'm just interested to hear anyone's opinion on this with respect to the 4th precept.

I think it is important that we try not to interpret the precepts in the same rigid manner as some Christian evangelicals interpret the 10 Commandments or how Muslim fundamentalists interpret the Koran. I believe the guiding principle here should be the eightfold path i.e.) right view, right intention, right thought, right intention etc. etc.

I'm not sure how the 4th precept "refraining from incorrect or faulty speech" would apply in this situation but I too would be interested in hearing other's views on this as well.

[camerata]

How do you feel about going through the motions? You stand, sit, etc. I'm assuming you also partake of the blood of Christ and what not. Isn't there is somewhat of an ethical issue here, from a Buddhist context or otherwise?

Personally, I feel this kind of thing is only a problem for Westerners obsessed with notions of "hypocrisy" when doing something symbolic that one doesn't believe in. I don't feel it is "lying by action." I wouldn't go to church just to make my family happy, and they wouldn't expect me to. I wouldn't have any problem going to a Christian wedding or funeral, or singing hymns.

Similarly, I don't believe that monks giving blessings is supported by the Buddha's teachings, so I don't present myself for them at temples. But I also don't refuse them when given (this issue is mentioned in Phra Farang). A couple of years ago some Thais gave me a lift home from a dharma talk. After buckling up seat belts they prayed (presumably for a safe trip). I put my hands together but didn't pray since I don't believe praying invokes any external protection or generates any good kamma. However, it wasn't a problem for me. To a large extent this kind of thing is just fitting in with friends and society.

I think my guiding principle is not to do things that are unskillful. To me, requesting external help from any supernatural entity is very unskillful. So I definitely would not pray to God or the Buddha, but I don't care if other people think I do.

[bina]

here is my personal observation in regards to my husband (he was a monk for about a year, and doesnt go for most of the

'abracadabra' parts of buddhism that his mother and sisters go for ....

my kibbutz has a regulation that anyone to become a member (a process of voting by all other members in an open assembly with regulations/rules that are legally binding) must be jewish. they can be converted, but must be jewish. so, in conversation with the 'puu yai baan' (the kibbutz very similar equivalent) i was informed that anon, my husband could apply for membership like any one else as he still meets other criteria (sound of mind and body, within age limits, etc) but he should then start the process of conversion. my husband refused on grounds that he was not willing to lie about his beliefs, and what he was born as *buddhist*, and so remains as a 'resident' (less priveleges paid for by kibbutz, not covered by kibbutz insurance and other legal stuff). the puu yai baan's comment was: alls fair in love and war, in this case why not lie, go thru the motions, he should 'do it for you', etc. that way he is bound in to the community with financial and legal security even if i were to die. anon heard, understood, and still refused, repeating his reasoning.

he doesnt believe in god, and has no understanding, nor want to understand, let alone go thru the lenghthy and difficult process of conversion , to judaism. he finds it a constrictive religioun.

and i personally have been buddhist since a small child, (i just was and am, a decision i made entirely on my own from my own reading and understanding) and am jewish by nationality and tradition (and genetics). it never bothered my parents, and doesnt bother my children, one of whom has a more religious jewish leaning these past few years (a phase?) . i find no problem with my identity as both. anon has no problem with that either.

bina

israel

[Groongthep]

I think my guiding principle is not to do things that are unskillful. To me, requesting external help from any supernatural entity is very unskillful. So I definitely would not pray to God or the Buddha, but I don't care if other people think I do.

I agree with camerata's statement and feel that it expresses my own feelings much better than I had wrote in my above post. I must admit however that I do go to church with my elderly parents to please them but only for the reason that I was estranged from them for many years and I now somehow feel that by attending mass with them I may be making up for passed conflicts we had between us years ago and also perhaps to alleviate some of the guilt I feel for not spending more time with them when I was younger. I was never around to have an in depth conversation with them about Christianity, Buddhism and spirituality when we were all younger and less set in our ways. They are devout Catholics and believe that as their son they are helping me by sharing their firmly held beliefs with me. It would be both disrespectful and unkind of me if I refused.

Like camerata who folded hands and faked praying before the car ride home I go through the motions at mass with my parents in order to both maintain a happy familial relationship and as I said before out of simple respect for their beliefs and their position as my elders. They are well into their 80s now and probably won't be around for too many more years. I know that even after the many problems we had in the past they still love me and I still love them. I am also aware that praying to God or Buddha does me no real good but if going along and appearing to be genuine makes my folk's lives any more at ease in their later years how could that possibly be bad.

[rockyysdt]

Personally, I feel this kind of thing is only a problem for Westerners obsessed with notions of "hypocrisy" when doing something symbolic that one doesn't believe in. I don't feel it is "lying by action." I wouldn't go to church just to make my family happy, and they wouldn't expect me to.

A couple of years ago some Thais gave me a lift home from a dharma talk. After buckling up seat belts they prayed (presumably for a safe trip). I put my hands together but didn't pray since I don't believe praying invokes any external protection or generates any good kamma. However, it wasn't a problem for me. To a large extent this kind of thing is just fitting in with friends and society.

Perhaps hypocrisy isn't the overriding issue.

We've written in a number of threads the prevalence of Buddhism being practiced as a superstitious religion by the majority in Thailand.

Although one "may not go along with it", but "gives the illusion" that they did, doesn't this reinforce superstition in Buddhism and also reinforce customs which the Buddha never taught?

Isn't this even more so if the person "giving the illusion" is highly regarded?

I write this mainly due to my concern that the majority of Buddhists in Thailand actually practice the very opposite of what the Buddha taught.

Edited April 13, 2009 by rockyysdt

[BigSnake]

My opinion it brings a little of both, depend on who your friends are. If you convert make it away of life.

[camerata]

We've written in a number of threads the prevalence of Buddhism being practiced as a superstitious religion by the majority in Thailand.

And of course we farang Buddhists know for sure that we are doing it "right" and they are doing it "wrong."

Although one "may not go along with it", but "gives the illusion" that they did, doesn't this reinforce superstition in Buddhism and also reinforce customs which the Buddha never taught?

I don't think this matters much. Thais are not looking to farang to show them how to practise Buddhism. When Phra Peter (author of Phra Farang) refused to give blessings, he thought it made him a better monk but the Thais thought it made him a worse monk.

Also, a lot of the less-than-authentic practices (bowing to Buddha images, making offerings, etc) can be justified as having some symbolic value, being inspirational or contributing to mental cultivation in some small way. Personally, I recite the three refuges in front of some Mahayana buddhas and bodhisattvas in old Japanese temples because they all represent qualities of the Buddha and there is an authentic Theravada practice of reflecting on the qualities of the Buddha.

I write this mainly due to my concern that the majority of Buddhists in Thailand actually practice the very opposite of what the Buddha taught.

I wouldn't be as harsh as that. They practise "popular Buddhism" because that's what gives them comfort. Part of it is based on the Pali Canon, part of it isn't. I don't see why that should concern us, really. Those who want to follow the Buddha's authentic teachings can find them as easily as we can. It seems to be mainly our problem that we can't accept popular Buddhism (not to mention animism and Brahmanism!) and its place in Thai life and culture.

[rockyysdt]

And of course we farang Buddhists know for sure that we are doing it "right" and they are doing it "wrong."

Well covered camerata.

I suppose as Farangs any lead one may make would be most likely ignored.

And yes, none of us can be sure our practices are correct.

It's just that the animism & superstition which many focus on, and which seems to be condoned by the hierarchy appears very wrong.

Edited April 13, 2009 by rockyysdt

[phetaroi]

And of course we farang Buddhists know for sure that we are doing it "right" and they are doing it "wrong."

Also, a lot of the less-than-authentic practices (bowing to Buddha images, making offerings, etc) can be justified as having some symbolic value, being inspirational or contributing to mental cultivation in some small way. Personally, I recite the three refuges in front of some Mahayana buddhas and bodhisattvas in old Japanese temples because they all represent qualities of the Buddha and there is an authentic Theravada practice of reflecting on the qualities of the Buddha.

I write this mainly due to my concern that the majority of Buddhists in Thailand actually practice the very opposite of what the Buddha taught.

I wouldn't be as harsh as that. They practise "popular Buddhism" because that's what gives them comfort. Part of it is based on the Pali Canon, part of it isn't. I don't see why that should concern us, really. Those who want to follow the Buddha's authentic teachings can find them as easily as we can. It seems to be mainly our problem that we can't accept popular Buddhism (not to mention animism and Brahmanism!) and its place in Thai life and culture.

A very good summary! I might additionally add that in regard to the practice of "popular Buddhism", the vast majority of people IN THE WORLD practice what they learned as a child.

I am also reminded of the "Jefferson Bible". Thomas Jefferson though that much of what was in traditional Bibles was not authentic. So he sought to filter down all but the essentials that were "valid" (from his point of view, of course). The resulting book is a tiny little thing.

[SeerObserver]

Also, a lot of the less-than-authentic practices (bowing to Buddha images, making offerings, etc) can be justified as having some symbolic value, being inspirational or contributing to mental cultivation in some small way. Personally, I recite the three refuges in front of some Mahayana buddhas and bodhisattvas in old Japanese temples because they all represent qualities of the Buddha and there is an authentic Theravada practice of reflecting on the qualities of the Buddha.

It contributes to mental cultivation and also serves as a reminder of the ideal to which Buddhists aspire. The common chants, arahan samma sambuddho bhagava and nammo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhasa serve that purpose. Similar to the function of the abhinasutta in order to remind us of subjects that warrant recollection.

We've written in a number of threads the prevalence of Buddhism being practiced as a superstitious religion by the majority in Thailand.

And of course we farang Buddhists know for sure that we are doing it "right" and they are doing it "wrong."

They practise "popular Buddhism" because that's what gives them comfort. Part of it is based on the Pali Canon, part of it isn't. I don't see why that should concern us, really. Those who want to follow the Buddha's authentic teachings can find them as easily as we can. It seems to be mainly our problem that we can't accept popular Buddhism (not to mention animism and Brahmanism!) and its place in Thai life and culture.

Excellent point. It will help us if we are aware of this distinction, as many of us are "guilty" of what is described in this context.

[camerata]

And yes, none of us can be sure our practices are correct.

I think we farang have to bear in mind that well known saying, "There are none so righteous as the newly converted."

It's just that the animism & superstition which many focus on, and which seems to be condoned by the hierarchy appears very wrong.

But Buddhism never tried to eradicate rival systems (like Christianity eradicated paganism), instead it absorbed them. As a result, it seems that popular Thai Buddhism embraces the Buddha's teaching as a means of salvation in the next life, but Thais look to animism/Brahmanism/astrology for help (i.e. psychological security) in the present life.

If you were in a group suddenly transported to foxholes in Afghanistan and the Taliban were coming to kill you (or worse), who do you think would have the easier death - you, the atheist, the Christian evangelist or the Thai with a bunch of amulets round his neck? Makes you think, doesn't it?