Is my memory so bad? I thought a couple of months ago this was discussed. I wouldA swore the Idea was rejected? has this gone through?

Search of Buddhist and all Forums came up emply, but got this from 2007!!! over 3 years ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/world/asia/24iht-thai.1.5852389.html

<< There are a couple of glaring wrong statements in there but, oh well? There are some predictions that came true, though.

two part question?

1. who wants this and what forces don't? why/ why not? Does the philosophy of Buddhism correlate with being a State religion? I think not but I am UNeducated.

2. As maybe 27% of the necessary, VERY necessary for Equanamity, portions of the Discussion is allowed here and Censorship curtails the very important backbone points which could favor peoples' lives and livelyhoods by respectful knowledge, as I asked in another Topic, is there a Forum where Thais Buddhism and its interconnection with politics can be freely and openly discussed without suppression by FORCES, unBuddhalike?

If they have or are going to make Budhism the State Religion some wheels will really come off, more wheels that is, if you can imagine it could get worse.

It didn't happen. There is no established religion in Thailand. Though the king is constitutionally required to be Buddhist, he is the protector of all the main (registered) religions. I understand these to be Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism and Judaism.

There is a department of the Thai government to supervise and control the Sangha.

There is a department of the Thai government to supervise and control the Sangha.

Yes, that's interesting, isn't it. And there are Sangha Acts, but the religion as such is not established in the Constitution. That's why some monks and lay people were marching and rallying for it in 2007 and earlier (around 2003?)

So the religion is not a "state religion", but the Sangha is regulated by the State. I guess that's indicative of how embedded the monkhood is in the life and culture of Thai people, and how important it is that they be exemplars, at least in the formal and exclusive sense decreeable by the State. Hence we have such emphasis on Pali studies in a nation that does not study Pali at school, and a monastic rank structure that rewards success in Pali exams.

It's also interesting that the monks most revered by the Thai people - Ajarn Man, Ajarn Chah, Buddhadasa Bikkhu, Phra Panya, Luangpor Jaran, etc - were/are not noted for their academic ability, but for their meditation focus, their behavioural and ethical example and their common sense. Under the post-Rama IV Sangha Acts these qualities have been devalued in favour of academic ability and rigid adherence to the patimokkha, with its 227 precepts. There was more flexibility in discipline in the days of the great Buddhist masters of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The vocal minority who wanted Buddhism to be the state religion managed to get this ambiguous waffle added to the 2007 Constitution:

"Section 79. The State shall patronise and protect Buddhism as the religion observed by most Thais for a long period of time and other religions, promote good understanding and harmony among followers of all religions as well as encourage the application of religious principles to create virtue and develop the quality of life."

Source.

The vocal minority who wanted Buddhism to be the state religion managed to get this ambiguous waffle added to the 2007 Constitution:

"Section 79. The State shall patronise and protect Buddhism as the religion observed by most Thais for a long period of time and other religions, promote good understanding and harmony among followers of all religions as well as encourage the application of religious principles to create virtue and develop the quality of life."

Source.

Thanks Camerata. I didn't know about that.

There is a department of the Thai government to supervise and control the Sangha.

Yes, that's interesting, isn't it. And there are Sangha Acts, but the religion as such is not established in the Constitution. That's why some monks and lay people were marching and rallying for it in 2007 and earlier (around 2003?)

So the religion is not a "state religion", but the Sangha is regulated by the State. I guess that's indicative of how embedded the monkhood is in the life and culture of Thai people, and how important it is that they be exemplars, at least in the formal and exclusive sense decreeable by the State. Hence we have such emphasis on Pali studies in a nation that does not study Pali at school, and a monastic rank structure that rewards success in Pali exams.

It's also interesting that the monks most revered by the Thai people - Ajarn Man, Ajarn Chah, Buddhadasa Bikkhu, Phra Panya, Luangpor Jaran, etc - were/are not noted for their academic ability, but for their meditation focus, their behavioural and ethical example and their common sense. Under the post-Rama IV Sangha Acts these qualities have been devalued in favour of academic ability and rigid adherence to the patimokkha, with its 227 precepts. There was more flexibility in discipline in the days of the great Buddhist masters of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

You forget Tan Dhammapitaka (P.A. Payutto). His Pali-English dictionary is worldwide a standard. But it is International Pali, a concentrate of the pali dictionary of the Pali Text Society, not the adapted Thai version. Many Thai Buddhist scholars studied and study Pali in Germany, France, UK and US.

Here's an 11-page thread on the campaign to make Buddhism the state religion, plus an editorial.

Pressure Mounts To Make Buddhism State Religion yes or no for next thai charter?

The State And Buddhism In Thailand

Here's an 11-page thread on the campaign to make Buddhism the state religion, plus an editorial.

Pressure Mounts To Make Buddhism State Religion yes or no for next thai charter?

http://www.thaivisa...._1#entry1391253

The State And Buddhism In Thailand

http://www.thaivisa...._1#entry1479897

thag u berry mulch - the thread did not come up in a search =

the 1rst page was enough to answer 1 of my questions,,,

iee;; several Posted on the incroguity of legilslating the philosphy of Buddism as a state religion DUH

that iS what musims do, not that there's anything wrong with it eh

as for Section 79, it don't make sense!, is it a good translation?

is the Thai version of 79 coherent maybe?

am I?