The Conversion Of Thais Away From Buddhhism

[camerata]

Theravada Buddhism is known for being "as dry as dust." This means that if you are looking "excitement" in the form

of music, pageantry, etc., you would do better to look elsewhere. The Thai version of Theravada Buddhism emphasizes

1. generously supporting"monks" who are manifestly "unworthy of the yellow robe," and

I would say the opposite. Whereas doctrinal Buddhism can seem pretty dry (to those who don't see the beauty of it), the Thais are criticized for making it too much fun. For example, look at an ordination ceremony or Kathin ceremony - not to mention a "temple fair." And your comment about monks is the usual over-generalization. There are plenty of good monks in Thailand.

2. competion in the construction of extravagant gingerbread palaces for the same.

For all intents and purposes the preaching of Buddhadhamma by monks or the

study of dhamma by laypeople is virtually unknown.

Nonsense. I personally know lots of Thais who study and practise Dhamma and I've heard some good Dhamma talks by monks. There may be a majority of monks in Thailand who are just religious functionaries, but that doesn't mean the Dhamma is on its deathbed. It's there for whoever is interested.

Any person of even modest intelligence and sensitivity would, in observing

things as they are here, be susceptible to a missionary touting "morality" and "family values."

Add to this a lively social scene, and they are sold on the product.

They cannot understand that the missionary is not their friend, but a salesman

who once he gets their signature on the dotted line, plans to control every aspect

of their lives and (in the case of Mormons in particular) every moment of their

time, with absolutely endless church obligations.

Well, you've got a good point here but the wrong conclusion. I think it's because Christianity is generally so "serious" and controlling that the number of converts in Thailand is miniscule. Clearly, what Thais want and don't get from the mainstream Sangha is monks who follow the Vinaya and the feeling of being part of something bigger than themselves. Hence the runaway success of the Dhammakaya sect.

There are cultures, their problems not withstanding, that give birth to

noble philosophies, religious sentiments, and numerous individuals of

world-renowned genius, and there are other cultures where people sit in the mud

[crass comment deleted], thinking "We are sooooo special!"

Ah... unabashed Western cultural superiority. I wonder how many arahants the West has given us?

[kapasao]

Ah... unabashed Western cultural superiority. I wonder how many arahants the West has given us?

My reference was very broad and general, and not specific to the West. In fact, to be precise,

I was thinking about CHINA and INDIA as great contributors to human (self-)knowledge! Sorry

for my failure to be more clear earlier.

[camerata]

My reference was very broad and general, and not specific to the West. In fact, to be precise,

I was thinking about CHINA and INDIA as great contributors to human (self-)knowledge! Sorry

for my failure to be more clear earlier.

Fair enough. But China and India are large and ancient civilizations. The history of recent nation-states like Thailand, Laos and Burma is very different.

[appleman]

"Meanwhile, in June 1972, an SDA missionary was photographed sitting on the neck of a Buddha image in Sukhothai by another missionary. The photograph came into the hands of the Thai press, and a national scandal occurred, which proved to be a disaster for the SDA in Thailand. The two missionaries were jailed and then deported, and all hope for the SDA becoming officially registered with the government was lost."

I knew the two SDA missionaries who were jailed. Here is a little true story about them:

I was asked by these missionaries if I would join them in a friendly basketball game against the Chiang Mai basketball team. We set up a game right in the center of town. These 18 year old guys from Utah were huge by Thai standards, a couple over 6'5". I myself had played a year of college basketball. When the game began the boys from Utah started doing something strange. Every time a Thai player would shoot the ball they would jump up, put their hand trough the basket and knock the ball away. A clear "goal tending" infraction. But the amateur Thai referees had never seen anyone be able to do this before so they didn't realize that this was a no no.

After they did this a few times I called a time out and told them that this just wasn't right. They had to stop it. They said that as long as the refs didn't call goal tending that it was OK. I quit right then and there and walked off the court.

I was not surprised when I saw their pictures in the paper after they were arrested. The Thai papers said that a lynch mob had formed around the police station and the police had saved their lives.

[camerata]

I was not surprised when I saw their pictures in the paper after they were arrested. The Thai papers said that a lynch mob had formed around the police station and the police had saved their lives.

It's always depressing to hear that Thais would do violence to someone for disrespect to an image. But respect for religious images is part of the national culture/identity.

[toptuan]

Young Joseph Smith visited the Sacred Grove in a forested area just over the hill from my childhood home. The famous Golden Plates were buried on Hill Cumorah about 3 miles south of my home. Although the birthplace of Mormonism, Joseph Smith was driven out of town as a horse thief, although I am convinced that was simply religious bigotry...although that belief persisted for well over a century.

In other words, you bought their (Mormon's) line?

Edited August 24, 2009 by toptuan

[phetaroi]

The Thai papers said that a lynch mob had formed around the police station and the police had saved their lives.

Hey...watch it...my last name is Lynch!

[phetaroi]

In other words, you bought their (Mormon's) line?

I'm as open-minded about Mormonism as I am with any other religion. They lack an awfully lot of evidence for some of their claims (such as ancient civilizations).

On the other hand, I can stick up for them a bit on some issues. For example, a friend who is born-again Christian once criticized one major belief -- the Golden Plates given to Joseph Smith by the Angel Moroni. She said, "If there are Golden Plates, let them show them and prove it." To which I replied, "If there are 10 Commandments Engraved On Stone, show them to me and prove it." It was at that point I was struck by lightning and went bald.

[Xangsamhua]

So, as we can see, Pattani has never really been its own country.

I don't think that's how the people down there see it. They remember a 1000-year sultanate and the glory days under the Pattani queens. Pattani was a pawn in British and Siamese diplomacy as late as 1909. The sultanate was split by the Siamese into three provinces, Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani. Serious resistance in the 20th century only began when Jompon Por (Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram), the Thai PM, tried to "Siamize" the Malays of Pattani in the 40s.

A very readable and short book on this (from the Pattani Malay perspective) is Ibrahim Syukri's The Malay Kingdom of Patani, written in the late 40s and published recently (2005) by Silkworm. Publisher's blurb is at http://www.silkwormbooks.com/each_titles/e...land/patani.htm

[dave_boo]

Thanks at least for the first half of your thread...you really got into the historical aspect. I have had somewhat similar discussions with a very dear friend of mine who is Cambodian who feels that Cambodia should be able to reclaim all lands that were once under Khmer control. My point to her is always that who is going to be the person who decides when to "stop the clock", so to speak. Boundaries in the world have been in a state of flux since the beginning of governments.

As to your comments about Muslim attitudes in the second half of your post, I come at this from a different perspective. My son is a Pakistani Muslim (it's a long story) and in the States I was the principal of a school that had a small but significant number of Muslim families who seemed to enjoy the fact that I was Buddhist in a predominantly Christian nation. After 9/11 I had a number of Muslim parents who came to me to apologize for the terrorism. When invited to Muslim events by the son, I was treated with extreme kindness and as "one of the family", so to speak. Some of the conversations were, however, bizarre (for example, 9/11 was of course perpetrated by the Jews...didn't I agree?). But I never was told by any Pakistani Muslim I met that they endorsed 9/11. Of course, that's not going as far as condemning it, either. I think the problems are compounded by different views of life by Christians, Muslims, and Buddhists.

Thanks for an interesting post.

I agree with you about when do you stop the clock. However, in this supposedly enlightened era, why the need to resort to violence? Does cutting off the heads of other people promote the idea that your country is civilised and ready to rule itself?

I'm glad that you've had good experiences with Muslims. Look into Taqiyaa as to a possible motive of why they neither condemned nor condoned the attack.

I don't think that's how the people down there see it. They remember a 1000-year sultanate and the glory days under the Pattani queens. Pattani was a pawn in British and Siamese diplomacy as late as 1909. The sultanate was split by the Siamese into three provinces, Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani. Serious resistance in the 20th century only began when Jompon Por (Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram), the Thai PM, tried to "Siamize" the Malays of Pattani in the 40s.

A very readable and short book on this (from the Pattani Malay perspective) is Ibrahim Syukri's The Malay Kingdom of Patani, written in the late 40s and published recently (2005) by Silkworm. Publisher's blurb is at http://www.silkwormbooks.com/each_titles/e...land/patani.htm

Man ging dabei von dem sehr richtigen Grundsatze aus, dass in der Groesse der Luege immer ein gewisser Faktor des Geglaubtwerdens liegt, da die breite Masse eines Volkes im tiefsten Grunde ihres Herzens leichter verdorben als bewusst und absichtlich schlecht sein wird, mithin bei der primitiven Einfalt ihres Gemuetes einer grossen Luege leichter zum Opfer faellt als einer kleinen.

All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie,

Mein Kampf

I'm sorry to have to use a quote from such a despicable book, but it definitely fits this situation. Note that I'm not claiming that this attitude is endemic to that region; look at the white man bringing order to the savage or the mythos, in the States, of a noble native living in harmony with nature and each other.

The fact that a Sultanate is supposed to be an independant State directly flies in the face of those claims of a 1000 years. Pattani queens had a short run, allowed to rule by the Thais due to problems with the Burmese. After that was resolved the Thais reasserted their authority. The payment of tithes and heavy involvment of Thais in the local politics is further proof that this claim is, well, absurd.

I'm not on either side because frankly in the grand scheme of things nothing you or I say (assuming that you're falang same-same me) means anything. I do not, however, appreciate falsehoods being spread and taken as truth. Even less palatable to me than that is the violence that is committed in the name of religion and justified over assumed slights that are plucked out of thin air.

[Xangsamhua]

I don't think that's how the people down there see it. They remember a 1000-year sultanate and the glory days under the Pattani queens. Pattani was a pawn in British and Siamese diplomacy as late as 1909. The sultanate was split by the Siamese into three provinces, Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani. Serious resistance in the 20th century only began when Jompon Por (Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram), the Thai PM, tried to "Siamize" the Malays of Pattani in the 40s.

A very readable and short book on this (from the Pattani Malay perspective) is Ibrahim Syukri's The Malay Kingdom of Patani, written in the late 40s and published recently (2005) by Silkworm. Publisher's blurb is at http://www.silkwormbooks.com/each_titles/e...land/patani.htm

Man ging dabei von dem sehr richtigen Grundsatze aus, dass in der Groesse der Luege immer ein gewisser Faktor des Geglaubtwerdens liegt, da die breite Masse eines Volkes im tiefsten Grunde ihres Herzens leichter verdorben als bewusst und absichtlich schlecht sein wird, mithin bei der primitiven Einfalt ihres Gemuetes einer grossen Luege leichter zum Opfer faellt als einer kleinen.

All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie,

Mein Kampf

I'm sorry to have to use a quote from such a despicable book, but it definitely fits this situation. Note that I'm not claiming that this attitude is endemic to that region; look at the white man bringing order to the savage or the mythos, in the States, of a noble native living in harmony with nature and each other.

The fact that a Sultanate is supposed to be an independant State directly flies in the face of those claims of a 1000 years. Pattani queens had a short run, allowed to rule by the Thais due to problems with the Burmese. After that was resolved the Thais reasserted their authority. The payment of tithes and heavy involvment of Thais in the local politics is further proof that this claim is, well, absurd.

I'm not on either side because frankly in the grand scheme of things nothing you or I say (assuming that you're falang same-same me) means anything. I do not, however, appreciate falsehoods being spread and taken as truth. Even less palatable to me than that is the violence that is committed in the name of religion and justified over assumed slights that are plucked out of thin air.

You seem very knowledgeable and I can't challenge your view of what occurred over a long time. However, whether they are the victims of their own myth-making or not, is it unreasonable to assume that the way the Malays of Pattani see their situation and its historical background is the way it's been portrayed in the book I cited? And if that is so, one can understand their resentment. Although I am not knowledgeable (I've just read the book, and found it persuasive), I have heard from other quarters that the insensitive campaign to impose Thai culture and language during Jompon Por's time was deeply resented and, if so, could still be feeding other grievances down there.

To try and sort of reorientate the issue towards the topic, I don't think we can resolve the Southern situation by telling people their view of the world is twisted (even if we think it is) any more than we can tell Thai Buddhists that they aren't really "Buddhists" or their understanding of Thai/Siamese history is twisted. They'll just say "you don't understand", because you're not standing in their shoes and can't get inside their head; so from their emic perspective, you can't, can you? Truth may not be relative, but our perceptions of it are.

PS Thank you for the reference to Taqiyya.

[camerata]

No doubt a fascinating discussion, but until Mormons start beheading Buddhists in the South of Thailand it's pretty far off topic.