- Email: [email protected]
Thai Buddhism in transition
THAI BUDDHISM David
IN TRANSITION
L. Gosling
Between 1970 and 1973 an investigation was conducted into the religious beliefs of a sample of Indian scientists, and it was concluded that reincarnation is increasingly tending to be regarded by educated Hindus as a weak hypothesis (1). During the summer of 1975 an S.S.R.C. award made it possible to carry out a similar study of the religious beliefs of Thai scientists with particular reference to their attitudes to the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. The conclusions of the Thai investigation are of interest in themselves and will be summarized in this article. But there are other aspects of the two programmes which, taken together, raise major theoretical considerations and underline the importance of an interdisciplinary religious studies approach when dealing with the contemporary religious scene. In this article an account will be given of the social anthropological background to the Thai investigation and attention will be drawn to some important theoretical links between social research in Thailand and in India. The data obtained during the Thai programme will then be summarized and an attempt will be made to evaluate the very briefly, results from a philosophical standpoint. It will be seen that traditional Buddhist orthodoxy is increasingly being challenged, and an account of a particularly influential attempt to reinterpret it in a manner acceptable to scientifically educated Thais will be given. The juxtaposition of philosophy and social research may appear somewhat bizarre in such a short article, and it could perhaps be argued with some justification that neither has been dealt with adequately. But it is hoped that at the very least the impression will be conveyed that the subject is 18
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
19
a highly complex one which needs to be viewed from the perspective of several academic disciplines. And of these philosophy and social anthropology were felt to have more to contribute than most others.
THE SOCIAL
ANTHROPOLOGICAL
BACKGROUND
Previous research into the religious beliefs of Asian scientists was undertaken in India during the period 1970-73. A sample of young Indian scientists at four major centres completed questionnaires and were interviewed in order to probe their understanding of the relationship between science and religion. It was found that they could be divided roughly into three categories dependent on whether they rejected religion in the name of science, adapted it with insights drawn mainly from science and technology, or simply reasserted it. The doctrine of reincarnation was central to all three types of response to secularization and many of those who rejected Hinduism in toto maintained that they did so because they felt that belief in reincarnation was not scientifically tenable. In some cases this rejection could be attributed to 'scientism' - that is, a false conception of the scope and limitations of science frequently subsumed under the notion of rationality - but more thoughtful objections were also voiced. These included the lack of evidence for belief in a transmigrating soul and the sufficiency of biological and genetic explanations of all life forms (2). In view of the particular nature of the scientific objections raised by predominantly Hindu scientists to reincarnation, it was felt that a similar study should be undertaken among a comparable group of Theravada Buddhists. It was anticipated that the no-soul (am&) doctrine would make it comparatively easy for Buddhist scientists to believe in rebirth, and it was felt that the religious apologetics of K. N. Jayatilleke and other Buddhist scholars were on the whole more profound from a scientific point of view than those of most Hindu writers (3). For reasons which will be given presently these expectations turned out to be largely incorrect. The seemingly innocent conjecture that scientific objections to Hindu belief in a reincarnating soul would vanish in a Buddhist situation where the anatta doctrine is of paramount importance failed to take into account the social context of both Hinduism and Buddhism, and should have been scrutinized more carefully in
20
David
L.
Gosling
the
light
of
current
social
research
in
India
and
S.E.
Asia.
A major concern among social anthropologists in recent years has been the question of how anthropological research data should be related to religious traditions represented in classical texts. The question has been formulated primarily with reference to India, but it is equally important elsewhere. One type of answer has been given by M. Marriott who has made a distinction between the 'little tradition' of village India which is the contemporary concern of the anthropologist, and the 'great tradition' of the larger unit of Indian society as a whole, which is reflected in the classical texts. Marriott has subsequently modified his early ideas, but his approach continues to reflect the thinking of a group of anthropologists whose ranks include M. N. Srinivas, Redfield and the Chicago School (4). On the other hand, Dumont and Pocock maintain that India is one and that the unity is based upon a reiterated relationship which can be traced in different areas of Indian life. Thus, while it may sometimes be legitimate to distinguish between popular Hinduism and the traditional higher Sanskritic civilisation, it needs to be remembered that much of what properly belongs to the literary texts has been lost or omitted (5) . Without proceeding further with this particular debate, it will be clear that Dumont and Pocock's popular and Sanskritic levels of Hinduism can readily be paralleled with similar notions relating to Thai Buddhism. In Buddhism and the spirit cults in North-East Thailand S. J. 'Tambiah develops these ideas and applies them to his own anthropological studies Tambiah criticises the carried out in the early 1960s (6). notion of two levels in religion - the higher literary and - on the grounds that it is 'in some respects the lower popular In actual fact, most static and profoundly a - historical'. religions are constantly changing both their beliefs and structures, and the classical texts, whether in Sanskrit or in Pali, 'range over long periods of time and show shifts in principles and ideas' (7). It is surprising with Thai Buddhism both its classical fault seems particularly Society, and among and Persistence in Kirsch) (8) . Despite dealing with social
how many recent publications dealing to recognise the dynamic nature of This contemporary manifestations. in evidence in Spiro's Buddhism and several of the contributions to Change Thai Society (edited by Skinner and the fact that the latter is specifically change, the religious terminology is too
fail and
Thai
Buddhism
in
21
transition
wooden and static to convey the subtle changes over a period of time in classical Pali concepts and also in the same notions as understood by modern Buddhists. This weakness in several publications on Thai Buddhism was sensed before the present research project was undertaken and confirmed in the course of
From the point of view of the academic background to the research data to be described, a further aspect of Tambiah's study is particularly signifbcant. This is his redesignation of the higher and lower levels of religion as historical religion and contemporary religion: In the study of religion in societies like Thailand, I would make a distinction between historical religion without treating them as and contemporary religion, exclusive levels. Historical Buddhism would comprise not only the range of religious texts written in the past, but also the changes in the institutional form of Buddhism over the ages. Contemporary religion would simply mean the religion as it is practised today and should include those texts written in the past that are used today and those customs sanctified in the past that persist today, and are integral parts of the ongoing religion. Thus, if the question of the relation between historical and contemporary religion interests us, we should look for two kinds of links, namely, continuities and transformations (9). In religious identify may have ideas on
relation to interactions between the scientific beliefs of Thai scientists it will be important such links and to consider any transformations been produced by the impact of modern scientific contemporary religion.
and to which
Other scholars whose publications on Theravada Buddhism were felt to be important include K. N. Jayatilleke, K. E. Wells, Donald Sweare, Jane Bunnag and several British scholars. Jayatilleke, writing with particular reference to Buddhism in Sri Lanka, has provided the Theravada with a brilliant philosophical rationale (10). Wells' Thai Buddhism, first published in 1939 and recently revised, continues to be one of the most careful accounts of Thai Buddhist rites and customs (11). Donald Swearer's Buddhism in Transition, though very brief, is on a par with Tambiah's treatment of Thai Buddhism, and his collection of sermons and articles by Buddhadasa (Putatat) is the only English version of the works of Thailand's most influential contemporary exponent of Buddhism (12).
22
David
L.
Gosling
The social matrices of Thai Buddhism have been carefully analysed by Jane Bunnag in Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman, in the course of which she draws attention to the striking fact that none of the Thai monks whom she interviewed 'appeared to consider Nirvana a relevant goal for which to strive' (13). In Man, State and Society in Contemporary South-east Asia R. 0. Tilman notes that the Thai interpretation of kamma and rebirth has a distinctive personal orientation, a theme taken up by many other scholars and not infrequently attributed to the individualistic natu:e of Theravada soteriology - a view which would appear to be linked to F. Embree's thesis that Thai society is loosely structured (14). In challenging these notions one suspects that Jane Bunnag is writing from the vantage point of someone with rather more firsthand experience of Thai society than her detractors (15). From what has been said so far it will be clear that an investigation of the religious beliefs of any section of Thai society touches upon a number of overlapping areas of anthropological and related academic interests. Before concluding this section the research will be considered from two further perspectives. These are the more generalised process of secularization and the narrower issues posed by psychological considerations. In relation to previous research on the impact of science on Indian society, M. N. Srinivas' definition of secularization was felt to be the most straightforward and According to Srinivas secularization implies that what useful. was previously regarded as religious ceases to be such; whenever secularization occurs a process of social, economic, political and other kinds of differentiation is usually in evidence, and the responses to secularization follow a similar pattern in which the religious tradition is either rejected, adapted or reasserted. The type of analysis proposed by Robert Bellah and his co-workers in Religion and Progress in Modern Asia was considered in relation to India, but was felt to be unsuitable (16). In particular, the reformist and neo-traditional responses to secularization could not be clearly distinguished - more generally there seemed to be far too many American 'isms'. Religion and Progress also tacitly assumes that the modernisation of Sri Lanka can be taken as a model for the modernisation of other Theravada Buddhist societies. Roland Robertson has reviewed some of the major contributions to the secularization literature in an interesting article 'Religious and Sociological Factors in the Analysis of Secularization' (17).
Thai
Buddhism
in transition
23
In recent years social anthropologists have increasingly recognised the importance of taking not only history but also psychology into careful consideration. In an introduction to the four Monographs stemming from the 1963 Conference on 'New Approaches in Social Anthropology' Gluckman and Eqqan underline Melford Spiro's insistence 'that to study religion, as against studying society, a psychological approach is as essential as a social anthropological one' (18). During the Indian research programme it was discovered that a significant proportion of scientists had suddenly renounced previously held religious beliefs on the grounds that they were incompatible with science. It was felt that the most probable interpretation of this phenomenon was in terms of cognitive dissonance, and it is hoped to document similar cases among Thai scientists at a later stage of the current research programme. In this section an attempt has been made to outline the academic background to the research and to demonstrate the extent to which it is related to concerns which social anthropologists currently consider to be of major importance. It has been explained how previous field work in India made extensive use of the notion of secularization, raised fundamental questions about the scientific credibility of Hindu belief in a reincarnating soul, and provided instances of individual scientists who had resolved conflicts between science and religion by rejecting religion outright. It has also been explained that, in addition to these factors, there are theoretical anthropological considerations which link India and Thailand but which have so far been centred mainly upon India. Thus Tambiah's Buddhism and the Spirit Cults is of seminal importance in that it both contributes to the debate between Dumont and Pocock on the one hand, and Marriott and his associates on the other, and also reinterprets the basic issues from a Thai perspective. Tambiah's approach to Buddhism not only recognises the dynamic nature of both its historical and contemporary manifestations, but is framed in cosmological terms which make it particularly significant for the natural sciences. And in so far as this whole discussion has been set against a background which includes both historical and psychological dimensions, it fulfils many of the criteria which social anthropologists increasingly feel to be desirable. THE RESULTS AND THEIR INTERPRETATION Approximately
three
hundred
Thai
scientists
at seven
24
David
L.
Gosling
different universities completed a short questionnaire seventy-eight interviews were personally conducted. questionnaire data was coded and analysed using the tical Package for the Social Sciences Programme.
and The Statis-
Attitudes to rebirth were probed with a number of questions which were posed on the questionnaire and amplified during the interviews. One such question invited respondents to indicate which of five suggested relationships between their religion and science seemed most appropriate in the case of particular Buddhist doctrines. The list of doctrines included impermanence (anicca), Nibbana, kamma, rebirth and rationality, and each was to be marked according to whether Buddhism and science were in complete agreement (option l), very similar (option 2), Buddhism was beyond the scope of science (option 3), in disagreement with science (option 4), or Buddhism and science were so dissimilar that there could be no overlap (option 5). The percentage results were as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Type of Relationships and Science
Anicca Nibbana Kamma Rebirth Rationality
between 1 % 28 3 12 3 38
Buddhist
particular 2 % 21 7 16 6 19
3 % 7 32 23 21 2
Doctrines 4 % 4 6 6 13 1
5 % 4 11 9 10 3
From the responses to this and similar questions it was apparent that whereas a_nicca and several other doctrines such as paticca samuppada (dependent origination) were considered to be quite scientific, kamma, Nibbana and any belief associated with rebirth tended to be rejected in the name of science. More than 60% of the entire sample maintained that they did not believe that either they or anyone else would be reborn in any shape or form after death. The reasons for this pattern of questionnaire responses According to the Head of the were given in the interviews. Marine Biology Department at Chulalongkorn University: Buddhism, with its belief in anatta maintains that there is no soul and thus tends to be mechanistic . . . First Rebirth can be understood in several ways. according to the genetic view my children carry some a deformity can be transof my characteristics - thus They also take up mitted from me to my children.
Thai
Buddhism
in
2
transition
parts of my person in other ways so that I live on in them . . . . Then there is Putatat's view that we are reborn every moment. His ideas are very scientific But I believe particularly in the field of biology. that there is no rebirth of the same person apart from this life. The many respondents who maintained that they would not be reborn were echoing an increasingly popular belief among educated Thais that there is no life other than the present one. But some still wanted to give some meaning to the doctrine of rebirth and were therefore obliged to adopt a symbolic or metaphysical interpretation. By far the most popular was that of Buddhadasa (Putatat), a much revered and somewhat unorthodox bhikkhu currently living at Suan Mok near Chaiya in southern Thailand. According to Putatat life is made up of a sequence of momentary experiences each of which is determined by past actions (i.e. kamma) but which is also in some respects a new beginning. The person who lives unselfishly, i.e. without regard for the self and thus in recognition of the truth of anatta is potentially capable of being reborn in th$s existence to 'Nibbanic' life: The Buddha . . . said that one who does not know that this existence is like dying is suffering. . . . What happened in the past was death, suffering and dying, because of the 'I' and 'my'. Now we are reborn anew into eternal life, 'Nibbanic' life, the deathless life, the deathless state, the deathless - whatever you care to call it. 'I' and 'mine' cease. The word 'reborn' comes to mean a life with no ego, no 'I', a life that cannot die (19).
most
This way scientific
of understanding objections and
Nibbana was very
and rebirth avoids often mentioned.
Other objections to rebirth were that it couldn't be proved and hence should not be believed, some fairly technical genetic arguments, and the claim that rebirth need not be believed because it is a Hindu doctrine. According to Professor Rawi Bhavilai, Head of the Physics Department at Chulalongkorn University: can be verified by observation. . . . Actually there are controversies as to whether or not Buddhism is really based on the idea of reincarnation (20). Arguments for rebirth corded instances of memories existence of a soul or spirit of spiritualism (21).
were based either of previous lives as evidenced by
upon reor upon the the practice
26
David
up with following
L.
Gosling
The manner in which spiritualism seemed to be bound a number of popular beliefs may be illustrated by the comment by a junior lecturer at Thammasat University: The spirit or soul is a force for good or bad; a spirit is not in a human shape, it is a force, very fine. Self or at& is tuaton. A lot of people in Bangkok call spirits - my sister is a Brahms-Buddhist and she asks the spirits to enter her body; once she went unconscious. Two spirits lived in our house, one was a spirit from the time of Rama I and had not been given a spirit house. Another was a spirit from Chiengmai passing through Bangkok. At home we have a room for the gods - there is Brahms, a Mahayana god, and Dhammayut.
The worship of Brahms is associated with popular belief spirits, but these are usually referred to by the term winjan, which Tambiah defines as a spiritual essence which continues to exist after death (22). The Mahayana god may be attributed to the fact that the respondent's parents came originally from south China, but the presence of Dhammayut as the third member of the domestic trinity is unusual as is also the degree of secularization implied by the Chiengmai spirit en route through Bangkok. in
Popular belief in spirits had the overall effect of complicating attempts to discuss rebirth in relation to science. Dr. Kloom Vajropala, Emeritus Professor in Biology at Chulalongkorn University, produced photographs of a recent manifestation of his dead son as evidence of reincarnation. A newly ordained monk at the Wat Tathon became quite angry when it was put to him that the Buddha had preached the anatta doctrine. It could not be true, he argued, since everyone knew that there were souls, and if it were not true then the Buddha could not have taught it. In contrast to rebirth, which was for the most part either rejected as non-scientific, non-Buddhist, or in need of reinterpretation along the lines suggested by PutatZt, the doctrine of impermanence (anicca) was felt to be very scientific. (See Table 1.)
M.Sc.
According to an organic chemist studying for her at Mahidol University: Anicca means that everything is uncertain. It is the same with some compounds. For example aldehyde compounds can become oxidised to become acids. This is a case in chemistry. But really the Buddha said that life is not certain.
Thai
Buddhism
taken
Many from
in
27
transition
respondents used either chemistry
similar illustrations or biology.
for
anicca
Very few respondents (2.7% of the total) had any desire to reject Buddhism in toto, and as has already been pointed out, the rejection of rebirth as a literal statement of what happens at and beyond death often went hand in hand with a dynamic this-worldly reinterpretation of cardinal Buddhist doctrines. Most responses to secularization were therefore of the type where the tradition is either adapted Seventy-three per cent of the questionnaire or reasserted. respondents maintained that religion was important 'at all times', but many of them knew so little about it that it seemed pointless to classify them as 'adapters' or 'reasserters' of religion. There was within this group, however, a fairly clear distinction between those who felt that Buddhism was perfectly adequate as it stood, and those who had been influenced by the kind of reinterpretation advocated by Putatat. Bhikkhu Pa?i?i&anda and Pin Mutuqan, the highest ranking official in the Department of Religion of the Ministry of Education, were often mentioned, usually with reference to adaptations of Buddhism in the direction of social involvement, and articles by Luanq Prinyayogavipulya purporting to explain rebirth mathematically were in circulation at the Philosophy Department at Chulalonqkorn University. Books and articles by K. N. Jayatilleke and other Sinqhalese scholars were conspicuous by their absence.
REINTERPRETING
THE TRADITION
The opinion voiced by several respondents that rebirth was never seriously believed or taught by the Buddha can be rejected with a fair degree of certainty. Despite Conze's view that 'no sane man can, in fact, say anything conclusive about the doctrine of the Buddha himself', there are fairly substantial grounds for maintaining that rebirth has always been a cardinal Buddhist belief (23). According to Jayatilleke: The Buddhist theory of survival has its origin in the enlightenment of the Buddha and not in any traditional Indian belief. It is said that on the night of his enlightenment that he acquired the capacity to know his previous lives. . . . It is not correct to say (as many scholars have done) that the Buddha took for granted the belief in rebirth current in society at the time (24). But
even
if
the
Buddha
did
teach
rebirth
in
a form
28
David
L. Gosling
which must now be regarded as scientifically and philosophically untenable - and Jayatilleke has gone a long way towards showing that this is not so - there is no reason why his doctrines should not be reinterpreted. The Buddha encouraged a critical approach to his own teaching, and the history of Buddhism subsequent to his Nibbana has included a vast range of sectarian interpretations. Among these that of the Madhyamikas is generally agreed to have been one of the most important, and it is a variant of this school of thought which seems to be currently gaining ground under the influence of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa (Putatat). Putatat's understanding of 'Nibbanic life' has already been alluded to. His interpretation of rebirth is based upon two statements attributed to the Buddha, viz.: Birth is perpetual suffering (Dukkha jati punap-punam). True happiness consists in eliminating the false idea of 'I' (Asmimanassa vinayo eta& ve paramam sukhani) (25). This first statement, taken at its face value, means that each and every person is subject to suffering, and the second implies that release from suffering can only be achieved by recognizing the truth of anatta and acting accordingly. But such an interpretation, though essentially correct, fails to recognize the double nature of Buddha's teaching. At this point Putatat employs an approach which seems similar to S/ankara's two levels of truth: It has to be borne in mind that in general a word can have several different meanings according to the Two principal cases can be recognized: context. (1) language referring to physical things, which is and (2) language respoken by the average person; ferring to mental things, psychological language, which is spoken by people who know Dharma language, Dharma. . . . The ordinary person speaks as he has learnt to speak, and when he uses the word 'birth' he means physical birth, birth from a mother's body; however in Dharma language, the language used by a person who knows Dharma, 'birth' refers to the arising If at some moment there arises in of the idea 'I am'. the mind the false idea 'I am', then at that moment the 'I' has been born. When this false idea ceases, there is no longer any 'I', the 'I' has momentarily When the 'I' idea again arises in the ceased to exist. mind, the 'I' has been reborn (26). worldly anatta,
Such an interpretation meaning to rebirth, anicca and dukkha,
gives a clear, unambiguous thisand places it, together with firmly at the centre of religious
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
29
concern. Anatta is safe-guarded from the point of view of the higher level of truth (Dharnma-language), anicca is related to the notion of successive instantaneous rebirths, and dukkha is apparent in so far as the false idea of a self or ego is in evidence. The Abhidharmnist emphasis of the Theravada is Furthermore Putatat's therefore preserved to a large extent. interpretation is ethically orientated in that bad 'I' thoughts worthy of, say, an animal, lead to immediate mental rebirth to an appropriate mental state, and the problems raised by physical rebirth after death and the existence (or reality) of winjans, khwans and all the other members of Thai pre-Buddhist spiritism, are neatly sidestepped (27). Putatat also employs the notion of two levels in rel ation to NibbZna and &inyatZ, and at the same time seems to move away from Theravadin orthodoxy: Similarly with the word 'nirvana' (nibbana). In everyday language this word refers to the cooling of a hot object. . . . In Dharma language 'nirvana' refers to the kind of coolness that results from eliminating mental defilements. . . . So 'nirvhna' or 'coolness' has two meanings, according to whether the speaker is using everyday language or Dharma language. Another important word is 'emptiness' (&nyatZ, suiiiiat5). In everyday language, the language of physical things, 'emptiness' means total absence of any object; in Dharma language it means absence of the idea 'I', 'mine'. When the mind is not grasping or clinging to anything whatever as 'I' or 'mine', it is in a state of 'emptiness'. The word 'empty' has these two levels of meaning, one referring to physical things, the other referring to mental things, one in everyday language, the other in Dharma language (28). At first sight Putatat's emphasis upon the correct use language, two levels of meaning, and the association of anatta and .&nyata suggests that he has moved into the area of Mahayana thought. This is true enough provided it is accepted that no sharp dividing line can be drawn between Theravada and Mahayana thought, and Donald Swearer is partially justified in classifying Putatat as an exponent of M%Yhyamika philosophy. And yet on close inspection Putatht's ideas are not really in agreement with the classical Mhdhyamika position. Before concluding this brief summary of Putatat's thought some of the similarities and differences between his beliefs and Madhyamika philosophy will be noted. of
tenet
The view that all things of Mahayana ontology and
are empty is a fundamental in some repects is a logical
30
David
L.
Gosling
corollary of the doctrine of anatta. According to Conze the Mahasanghikas held that all empirical knowledge is unreliable and that only that which transcends worldly things is real (29). This view was maintained together with the somewhat incompatible notion that all thought is perfectly and it is therefore not surprising to find two separate pure, schools ultimately taking up the different lines of approach. As with the terms Mahayana and Theravada there is a danger of exaggerating the differences between the Vijiianavadin Idealism and the 6iinyavadin Voidism which stemmed from the inability of the Mahasarighikas to hold together different aspects of their original philosophy. Idealists believe that the Absolute is constituted by pure consciousness whereas Voidists maintain that its essential nature is emptiness. Both treat phenomena as illusory and doubt the usefulness of language, though the former stress Yoga and the latter have tended to lay more emphasis upon wisdom and insight. Ironically, as Ninian Smart has pointed out, Voidism, in spite of its tendency to linguistic nihilism, has often turned out to be intellectually elitist: The Voidist dialectic sets great emphasis, paradoxically, on intellectual processes as a means of spiritua enlightenment. For the process of the dialectic, whereby through intellectual operations we come to see the bankruptcy of reason, prepares the way for the non-dual experience of the Void (30). In passing, it is perhaps worth drawing attention to the fact that Putatat's followers, for the most part, seem to be confined to the highly educated and economically important elite sections of Thai society. How does Putatat's reinterpretation compare with the lines of thought which developed during the first few Firstly, as has centuries following the Buddha's NibbZna? been pointed out, his teaching is couched in terms which are largely, but not exclusively suggestive of M&hyamika philosophy - not exclusively because Madhyamika thought overlapped at a number of points with the positions of other schools. And yet Putatat's two levels of meaning, while similar to both iankara's higher and lower levels of truth and the two ways in which the Absolute manifests itself in the Mahayana, are not really the same as either. The Madhyamikas believed that only emptiness truly exists, everything else having a qualified reality for practical purposes. As against the Sarvastivadins they seem to have argued that the whole chain of existence is composed of transitory events Emptiness, which, being impermanent, can have no reality.
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
however, never changes, and is Absolute Truth and Being, Nibbana, and the Body of Essence (Dharmakaya) of the Buddha. The Absolute phenomenalizes itself both as the celestial Lord and as the historical Buddha. Putatat's everyday and Dharma language, his ontology, and, in particular, his use of the concept of emptiness, do not really approach the fully developed Madhyamika position. His stress upon successive rebirth seems to attribute much more reality to the chain of existence that would have been acknowledged by the Madhyamikas, and would tend to place him nearer to Sarvastivadin and Sautrantika positions which the MZdhyamikas expressly repudiated. Moreover, in denying the absence of a self the Madhyamikas stressed not so much the absence of atta (which was emphasised by the Theravadins and Sarvastivadins) , but rather the absence of svabhava or 'own being'. This is not to deny the logic of progressing from anatt2 to .GnyaG - the point is simply that whereas the Madhyamikas in practice tended to deny svabhava, Putatat only refers to the denial of at&. In spite of his suggestive use of two levels of meaning, the notion of emptiness, and several other terms suggestive of Mahayana ontology, Putatat ultimately seems to fall back But his position on the three 'marks' of the Abhidhamma. none the less represents an imaginative reinterpretation of basic Theravada beliefs, and it is easy to appreciate why his this-worldly presentation of Buddhism is so appealing to scientifically educated Thais. Finally a few general observations will be offered about the contemporary role of Buddhism in Thailand. It was apparent in the course of this investigation that Thai Buddhism is in the process of undergoing some fairly radical transformations. Whether or not the interpretations which have been described will eventually spread from the educated elite to the rank and file of Buddhist monks and laymen remains to be seen. The social prestige enjoyed by Thai universities is considerable and there is a constant if sometimes superficial exchange between the university population and many of the Wats. The Sangha as a whole may be slow to accept the need for change, but the influence of Putatat and a number of young and gifted monks will be hard to resist in the long term - and all the harder because many of the most ardent reformers are within the Sangha itself. The approach religion.
overall situation clearly requires a dynamic to both the social and doctrinal aspects of Thai An increasing desire on the part of university
32
David
L. Gosling
students and faculty members for scientifically based Buddhist teaching and instruction in vipassanFi may well shift the emphasis of many wats away from their traditional roles, and there are already definite indications that many monks would like to be more involved in social welfare than in the past. Parallel with such tendencies towards new patterns of social involvement go doctrinal changes which seem to underline a pronounced this-worldly emphasis. It is therefore not surprising to discover that other-worldly notions such as rebirth, Nibbana, and to a lesser extent, kamma, are no longer taken very seriously. It is tempting to argue that one has only to spend forty minutes on a Bangkok bus to sense that the whole mood of Thai Buddhism is this-worldly, and therefore that not even the most passionate and scholarly attempts to buttress traditional belief in rebirth will be taken seriously. Tambiah's distinction between historical and contemporary religion and his stress upon the importance of recognising continuities and transformations is relevant at this point. Historical Buddhism needs to be interpreted not only in the light of the religious texts but against the background of its interactions with other traditions and structural changes brought about in a wide variety of social and cultural situations. Little can be said with certainty about the original teaching of the Buddha, and it is therefore open to his followers to speculate about the extent to which his message is necessarily tied to Hindu beliefs such as reincarnation. The Buddha, moreover, seemed to encourage such speculation by insistinq that beliefs and practices should be adopted only in so far as they were useful and could be proved. Thus, although a sound textual case can be made out for the view that rebirth was central to the Buddha's message, it can still be argued that he only believed it because, to use the kind of justification often resorted to by Christian theologians, he was 'a man of his generation', and also because he appears to have encouraged a critical approach to his own teaching. It is important to distinguish what is happening here from the kind of nationalistic attempts to rewrite religious history which have prevailed elsewhere. Secularization, the impact of scientific ideas, and the need for a religious rationale for purpositive activity have collectively sown serious doubts as to the truth and viability of otherworldly religious doctrines such as rebirth, Nibbana and kamma. Consequently they are being either rejected as Hindu accretions which are no longer useful, or reinterpreted along
Thai
Buddhism
in transition
Thus the modern impact of the lines suggested by Putatat. science and technology can be seen as affecting both the contemporary and the historical aspects of the religious tradition. NOTES 1
For
further
details see The Impact of Science on Indian See also 'Scientists C.I.S.R.S., Bangalore 1976. in the South Asian Review, Vol. 7, in Indian Society', No. 4, July 1974, and 'The Impact of Science on Religion' in New Frontiers in Education, Vol. IV, No. 3, July 1974, p. 19. I have given specific examples of these objections in 'Scientific Perspectives on Rebirth' in Religion, Vol. IV, Part I, 1974, p. 47. of the Buddha, Allen & Jayatilleke, K.N., The Message Unwin 1975. Communities in an Indigenous Marriott, M., 'Little Civilization', in Village India, Studies in the Little Community, Chicago University Press 1955. Dumont, L. and Pocock, D., eds, Contributions to Indian Sociology. See especially No. 1 (1957), No. 3 (19591, and No. 4 (1960). Tambiah, S.J., Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in Northeast Thailand, Cambridge University Press 1970. Tambiah, S.J., Ibid., p. 370. and Society, Harper and Row Spiro, Melford E., Buddhism 1970. Skinner, G.W., and Kirsch, A-T., Change and Persistence in Thai Society, Cornell University Press Society,
2
3 4
5
6 7 8
1975. 9 10 11 12
13 14
I.5
Tambiah, S.J., op. cit. (6), p. 374. Jayatilleke, K.N., op.cit. (3). Wells, K-E., Thai Buddhism - Its Rites and Activities, Suriyabun, Bangkok 1975. Swearer, D-K., Buddhism in Transition, Westminster Press 1970. See also same author, Toward the Truth, Westminster Press 1971. Bunnag, J., Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman, Cambridge University Press 1973, p. 19. Tilman, R-O., Man, State and Society in Contemporary Southeast Asia, Pall Mall Press 1969, p. 544. Embree, F., 'Thailand: A Loosely Structured Social System', in the American Anthropologist 52, 1950, p.181. Bunnag, J., 'Loose Structure: Fact or Fancy? Thai Society Re-examined' in the Journal of the Siam Society, Vol. 59, Part I, January 1971, p. 1. See also same author op. cit. (131, p. 180.
33
34
David
16
Bellah, R.N., ed., Religion and Progress in Modern Asia, Free Press, New York 1965. Robertson, R., 'Religious and Sociological Factors in the Analysis of Secularization' in Eister, A.W., ed., Changing Perspectives in the Scientific Study of Religion, John Wiley 1974, p. 41. Gluckman, M. and Eggan, F., 'Introduction' in Banton, M., of Complex Societies, ed., The Social Anthropology Tavistock 1966, p. xxx. Putatat in Swearer, D.K ., ed., Toward the Truth, Westminster Press 1971, p. 104. and a Modern See also Bhavilai, R., Buddhism in Thailand Thai's Interpretation of Buddhism, Bangkok n.d., p. 13. Instances of memories of previous lives were often quoted from Francis Story's The Case of Rebirth, Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy 1973. Tambiah, S.J., op. cit. (61, p. 58. The term tuaton refers to the existential self. Conze, E., Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassirer 1967, p. 10. Jayatilleke, K.N., op. cit. (3), p. 134. Putatat, Another Kind of Birth, Sublime Life Mission, Bangkok c. 1969, p. 2. Putat?it, ibid., p. 3. Tambiah, S.J., op.cit., (61, p. 57. Putatat, op. cit. (251, p. 5. Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Conze, E., Thirty Cassirer 1967, op. cit. (23), p. 76. and Argument in Indian Philosophy, Smart, N., Doctrine Allen & Unwin 1964, p. 56.
17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
L. Gosling
IN TRANSITION
L. Gosling
Between 1970 and 1973 an investigation was conducted into the religious beliefs of a sample of Indian scientists, and it was concluded that reincarnation is increasingly tending to be regarded by educated Hindus as a weak hypothesis (1). During the summer of 1975 an S.S.R.C. award made it possible to carry out a similar study of the religious beliefs of Thai scientists with particular reference to their attitudes to the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. The conclusions of the Thai investigation are of interest in themselves and will be summarized in this article. But there are other aspects of the two programmes which, taken together, raise major theoretical considerations and underline the importance of an interdisciplinary religious studies approach when dealing with the contemporary religious scene. In this article an account will be given of the social anthropological background to the Thai investigation and attention will be drawn to some important theoretical links between social research in Thailand and in India. The data obtained during the Thai programme will then be summarized and an attempt will be made to evaluate the very briefly, results from a philosophical standpoint. It will be seen that traditional Buddhist orthodoxy is increasingly being challenged, and an account of a particularly influential attempt to reinterpret it in a manner acceptable to scientifically educated Thais will be given. The juxtaposition of philosophy and social research may appear somewhat bizarre in such a short article, and it could perhaps be argued with some justification that neither has been dealt with adequately. But it is hoped that at the very least the impression will be conveyed that the subject is 18
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
19
a highly complex one which needs to be viewed from the perspective of several academic disciplines. And of these philosophy and social anthropology were felt to have more to contribute than most others.
THE SOCIAL
ANTHROPOLOGICAL
BACKGROUND
Previous research into the religious beliefs of Asian scientists was undertaken in India during the period 1970-73. A sample of young Indian scientists at four major centres completed questionnaires and were interviewed in order to probe their understanding of the relationship between science and religion. It was found that they could be divided roughly into three categories dependent on whether they rejected religion in the name of science, adapted it with insights drawn mainly from science and technology, or simply reasserted it. The doctrine of reincarnation was central to all three types of response to secularization and many of those who rejected Hinduism in toto maintained that they did so because they felt that belief in reincarnation was not scientifically tenable. In some cases this rejection could be attributed to 'scientism' - that is, a false conception of the scope and limitations of science frequently subsumed under the notion of rationality - but more thoughtful objections were also voiced. These included the lack of evidence for belief in a transmigrating soul and the sufficiency of biological and genetic explanations of all life forms (2). In view of the particular nature of the scientific objections raised by predominantly Hindu scientists to reincarnation, it was felt that a similar study should be undertaken among a comparable group of Theravada Buddhists. It was anticipated that the no-soul (am&) doctrine would make it comparatively easy for Buddhist scientists to believe in rebirth, and it was felt that the religious apologetics of K. N. Jayatilleke and other Buddhist scholars were on the whole more profound from a scientific point of view than those of most Hindu writers (3). For reasons which will be given presently these expectations turned out to be largely incorrect. The seemingly innocent conjecture that scientific objections to Hindu belief in a reincarnating soul would vanish in a Buddhist situation where the anatta doctrine is of paramount importance failed to take into account the social context of both Hinduism and Buddhism, and should have been scrutinized more carefully in
20
David
L.
Gosling
the
light
of
current
social
research
in
India
and
S.E.
Asia.
A major concern among social anthropologists in recent years has been the question of how anthropological research data should be related to religious traditions represented in classical texts. The question has been formulated primarily with reference to India, but it is equally important elsewhere. One type of answer has been given by M. Marriott who has made a distinction between the 'little tradition' of village India which is the contemporary concern of the anthropologist, and the 'great tradition' of the larger unit of Indian society as a whole, which is reflected in the classical texts. Marriott has subsequently modified his early ideas, but his approach continues to reflect the thinking of a group of anthropologists whose ranks include M. N. Srinivas, Redfield and the Chicago School (4). On the other hand, Dumont and Pocock maintain that India is one and that the unity is based upon a reiterated relationship which can be traced in different areas of Indian life. Thus, while it may sometimes be legitimate to distinguish between popular Hinduism and the traditional higher Sanskritic civilisation, it needs to be remembered that much of what properly belongs to the literary texts has been lost or omitted (5) . Without proceeding further with this particular debate, it will be clear that Dumont and Pocock's popular and Sanskritic levels of Hinduism can readily be paralleled with similar notions relating to Thai Buddhism. In Buddhism and the spirit cults in North-East Thailand S. J. 'Tambiah develops these ideas and applies them to his own anthropological studies Tambiah criticises the carried out in the early 1960s (6). notion of two levels in religion - the higher literary and - on the grounds that it is 'in some respects the lower popular In actual fact, most static and profoundly a - historical'. religions are constantly changing both their beliefs and structures, and the classical texts, whether in Sanskrit or in Pali, 'range over long periods of time and show shifts in principles and ideas' (7). It is surprising with Thai Buddhism both its classical fault seems particularly Society, and among and Persistence in Kirsch) (8) . Despite dealing with social
how many recent publications dealing to recognise the dynamic nature of This contemporary manifestations. in evidence in Spiro's Buddhism and several of the contributions to Change Thai Society (edited by Skinner and the fact that the latter is specifically change, the religious terminology is too
fail and
Thai
Buddhism
in
21
transition
wooden and static to convey the subtle changes over a period of time in classical Pali concepts and also in the same notions as understood by modern Buddhists. This weakness in several publications on Thai Buddhism was sensed before the present research project was undertaken and confirmed in the course of
From the point of view of the academic background to the research data to be described, a further aspect of Tambiah's study is particularly signifbcant. This is his redesignation of the higher and lower levels of religion as historical religion and contemporary religion: In the study of religion in societies like Thailand, I would make a distinction between historical religion without treating them as and contemporary religion, exclusive levels. Historical Buddhism would comprise not only the range of religious texts written in the past, but also the changes in the institutional form of Buddhism over the ages. Contemporary religion would simply mean the religion as it is practised today and should include those texts written in the past that are used today and those customs sanctified in the past that persist today, and are integral parts of the ongoing religion. Thus, if the question of the relation between historical and contemporary religion interests us, we should look for two kinds of links, namely, continuities and transformations (9). In religious identify may have ideas on
relation to interactions between the scientific beliefs of Thai scientists it will be important such links and to consider any transformations been produced by the impact of modern scientific contemporary religion.
and to which
Other scholars whose publications on Theravada Buddhism were felt to be important include K. N. Jayatilleke, K. E. Wells, Donald Sweare, Jane Bunnag and several British scholars. Jayatilleke, writing with particular reference to Buddhism in Sri Lanka, has provided the Theravada with a brilliant philosophical rationale (10). Wells' Thai Buddhism, first published in 1939 and recently revised, continues to be one of the most careful accounts of Thai Buddhist rites and customs (11). Donald Swearer's Buddhism in Transition, though very brief, is on a par with Tambiah's treatment of Thai Buddhism, and his collection of sermons and articles by Buddhadasa (Putatat) is the only English version of the works of Thailand's most influential contemporary exponent of Buddhism (12).
22
David
L.
Gosling
The social matrices of Thai Buddhism have been carefully analysed by Jane Bunnag in Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman, in the course of which she draws attention to the striking fact that none of the Thai monks whom she interviewed 'appeared to consider Nirvana a relevant goal for which to strive' (13). In Man, State and Society in Contemporary South-east Asia R. 0. Tilman notes that the Thai interpretation of kamma and rebirth has a distinctive personal orientation, a theme taken up by many other scholars and not infrequently attributed to the individualistic natu:e of Theravada soteriology - a view which would appear to be linked to F. Embree's thesis that Thai society is loosely structured (14). In challenging these notions one suspects that Jane Bunnag is writing from the vantage point of someone with rather more firsthand experience of Thai society than her detractors (15). From what has been said so far it will be clear that an investigation of the religious beliefs of any section of Thai society touches upon a number of overlapping areas of anthropological and related academic interests. Before concluding this section the research will be considered from two further perspectives. These are the more generalised process of secularization and the narrower issues posed by psychological considerations. In relation to previous research on the impact of science on Indian society, M. N. Srinivas' definition of secularization was felt to be the most straightforward and According to Srinivas secularization implies that what useful. was previously regarded as religious ceases to be such; whenever secularization occurs a process of social, economic, political and other kinds of differentiation is usually in evidence, and the responses to secularization follow a similar pattern in which the religious tradition is either rejected, adapted or reasserted. The type of analysis proposed by Robert Bellah and his co-workers in Religion and Progress in Modern Asia was considered in relation to India, but was felt to be unsuitable (16). In particular, the reformist and neo-traditional responses to secularization could not be clearly distinguished - more generally there seemed to be far too many American 'isms'. Religion and Progress also tacitly assumes that the modernisation of Sri Lanka can be taken as a model for the modernisation of other Theravada Buddhist societies. Roland Robertson has reviewed some of the major contributions to the secularization literature in an interesting article 'Religious and Sociological Factors in the Analysis of Secularization' (17).
Thai
Buddhism
in transition
23
In recent years social anthropologists have increasingly recognised the importance of taking not only history but also psychology into careful consideration. In an introduction to the four Monographs stemming from the 1963 Conference on 'New Approaches in Social Anthropology' Gluckman and Eqqan underline Melford Spiro's insistence 'that to study religion, as against studying society, a psychological approach is as essential as a social anthropological one' (18). During the Indian research programme it was discovered that a significant proportion of scientists had suddenly renounced previously held religious beliefs on the grounds that they were incompatible with science. It was felt that the most probable interpretation of this phenomenon was in terms of cognitive dissonance, and it is hoped to document similar cases among Thai scientists at a later stage of the current research programme. In this section an attempt has been made to outline the academic background to the research and to demonstrate the extent to which it is related to concerns which social anthropologists currently consider to be of major importance. It has been explained how previous field work in India made extensive use of the notion of secularization, raised fundamental questions about the scientific credibility of Hindu belief in a reincarnating soul, and provided instances of individual scientists who had resolved conflicts between science and religion by rejecting religion outright. It has also been explained that, in addition to these factors, there are theoretical anthropological considerations which link India and Thailand but which have so far been centred mainly upon India. Thus Tambiah's Buddhism and the Spirit Cults is of seminal importance in that it both contributes to the debate between Dumont and Pocock on the one hand, and Marriott and his associates on the other, and also reinterprets the basic issues from a Thai perspective. Tambiah's approach to Buddhism not only recognises the dynamic nature of both its historical and contemporary manifestations, but is framed in cosmological terms which make it particularly significant for the natural sciences. And in so far as this whole discussion has been set against a background which includes both historical and psychological dimensions, it fulfils many of the criteria which social anthropologists increasingly feel to be desirable. THE RESULTS AND THEIR INTERPRETATION Approximately
three
hundred
Thai
scientists
at seven
24
David
L.
Gosling
different universities completed a short questionnaire seventy-eight interviews were personally conducted. questionnaire data was coded and analysed using the tical Package for the Social Sciences Programme.
and The Statis-
Attitudes to rebirth were probed with a number of questions which were posed on the questionnaire and amplified during the interviews. One such question invited respondents to indicate which of five suggested relationships between their religion and science seemed most appropriate in the case of particular Buddhist doctrines. The list of doctrines included impermanence (anicca), Nibbana, kamma, rebirth and rationality, and each was to be marked according to whether Buddhism and science were in complete agreement (option l), very similar (option 2), Buddhism was beyond the scope of science (option 3), in disagreement with science (option 4), or Buddhism and science were so dissimilar that there could be no overlap (option 5). The percentage results were as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Type of Relationships and Science
Anicca Nibbana Kamma Rebirth Rationality
between 1 % 28 3 12 3 38
Buddhist
particular 2 % 21 7 16 6 19
3 % 7 32 23 21 2
Doctrines 4 % 4 6 6 13 1
5 % 4 11 9 10 3
From the responses to this and similar questions it was apparent that whereas a_nicca and several other doctrines such as paticca samuppada (dependent origination) were considered to be quite scientific, kamma, Nibbana and any belief associated with rebirth tended to be rejected in the name of science. More than 60% of the entire sample maintained that they did not believe that either they or anyone else would be reborn in any shape or form after death. The reasons for this pattern of questionnaire responses According to the Head of the were given in the interviews. Marine Biology Department at Chulalongkorn University: Buddhism, with its belief in anatta maintains that there is no soul and thus tends to be mechanistic . . . First Rebirth can be understood in several ways. according to the genetic view my children carry some a deformity can be transof my characteristics - thus They also take up mitted from me to my children.
Thai
Buddhism
in
2
transition
parts of my person in other ways so that I live on in them . . . . Then there is Putatat's view that we are reborn every moment. His ideas are very scientific But I believe particularly in the field of biology. that there is no rebirth of the same person apart from this life. The many respondents who maintained that they would not be reborn were echoing an increasingly popular belief among educated Thais that there is no life other than the present one. But some still wanted to give some meaning to the doctrine of rebirth and were therefore obliged to adopt a symbolic or metaphysical interpretation. By far the most popular was that of Buddhadasa (Putatat), a much revered and somewhat unorthodox bhikkhu currently living at Suan Mok near Chaiya in southern Thailand. According to Putatat life is made up of a sequence of momentary experiences each of which is determined by past actions (i.e. kamma) but which is also in some respects a new beginning. The person who lives unselfishly, i.e. without regard for the self and thus in recognition of the truth of anatta is potentially capable of being reborn in th$s existence to 'Nibbanic' life: The Buddha . . . said that one who does not know that this existence is like dying is suffering. . . . What happened in the past was death, suffering and dying, because of the 'I' and 'my'. Now we are reborn anew into eternal life, 'Nibbanic' life, the deathless life, the deathless state, the deathless - whatever you care to call it. 'I' and 'mine' cease. The word 'reborn' comes to mean a life with no ego, no 'I', a life that cannot die (19).
most
This way scientific
of understanding objections and
Nibbana was very
and rebirth avoids often mentioned.
Other objections to rebirth were that it couldn't be proved and hence should not be believed, some fairly technical genetic arguments, and the claim that rebirth need not be believed because it is a Hindu doctrine. According to Professor Rawi Bhavilai, Head of the Physics Department at Chulalongkorn University: can be verified by observation. . . . Actually there are controversies as to whether or not Buddhism is really based on the idea of reincarnation (20). Arguments for rebirth corded instances of memories existence of a soul or spirit of spiritualism (21).
were based either of previous lives as evidenced by
upon reor upon the the practice
26
David
up with following
L.
Gosling
The manner in which spiritualism seemed to be bound a number of popular beliefs may be illustrated by the comment by a junior lecturer at Thammasat University: The spirit or soul is a force for good or bad; a spirit is not in a human shape, it is a force, very fine. Self or at& is tuaton. A lot of people in Bangkok call spirits - my sister is a Brahms-Buddhist and she asks the spirits to enter her body; once she went unconscious. Two spirits lived in our house, one was a spirit from the time of Rama I and had not been given a spirit house. Another was a spirit from Chiengmai passing through Bangkok. At home we have a room for the gods - there is Brahms, a Mahayana god, and Dhammayut.
The worship of Brahms is associated with popular belief spirits, but these are usually referred to by the term winjan, which Tambiah defines as a spiritual essence which continues to exist after death (22). The Mahayana god may be attributed to the fact that the respondent's parents came originally from south China, but the presence of Dhammayut as the third member of the domestic trinity is unusual as is also the degree of secularization implied by the Chiengmai spirit en route through Bangkok. in
Popular belief in spirits had the overall effect of complicating attempts to discuss rebirth in relation to science. Dr. Kloom Vajropala, Emeritus Professor in Biology at Chulalongkorn University, produced photographs of a recent manifestation of his dead son as evidence of reincarnation. A newly ordained monk at the Wat Tathon became quite angry when it was put to him that the Buddha had preached the anatta doctrine. It could not be true, he argued, since everyone knew that there were souls, and if it were not true then the Buddha could not have taught it. In contrast to rebirth, which was for the most part either rejected as non-scientific, non-Buddhist, or in need of reinterpretation along the lines suggested by PutatZt, the doctrine of impermanence (anicca) was felt to be very scientific. (See Table 1.)
M.Sc.
According to an organic chemist studying for her at Mahidol University: Anicca means that everything is uncertain. It is the same with some compounds. For example aldehyde compounds can become oxidised to become acids. This is a case in chemistry. But really the Buddha said that life is not certain.
Thai
Buddhism
taken
Many from
in
27
transition
respondents used either chemistry
similar illustrations or biology.
for
anicca
Very few respondents (2.7% of the total) had any desire to reject Buddhism in toto, and as has already been pointed out, the rejection of rebirth as a literal statement of what happens at and beyond death often went hand in hand with a dynamic this-worldly reinterpretation of cardinal Buddhist doctrines. Most responses to secularization were therefore of the type where the tradition is either adapted Seventy-three per cent of the questionnaire or reasserted. respondents maintained that religion was important 'at all times', but many of them knew so little about it that it seemed pointless to classify them as 'adapters' or 'reasserters' of religion. There was within this group, however, a fairly clear distinction between those who felt that Buddhism was perfectly adequate as it stood, and those who had been influenced by the kind of reinterpretation advocated by Putatat. Bhikkhu Pa?i?i&anda and Pin Mutuqan, the highest ranking official in the Department of Religion of the Ministry of Education, were often mentioned, usually with reference to adaptations of Buddhism in the direction of social involvement, and articles by Luanq Prinyayogavipulya purporting to explain rebirth mathematically were in circulation at the Philosophy Department at Chulalonqkorn University. Books and articles by K. N. Jayatilleke and other Sinqhalese scholars were conspicuous by their absence.
REINTERPRETING
THE TRADITION
The opinion voiced by several respondents that rebirth was never seriously believed or taught by the Buddha can be rejected with a fair degree of certainty. Despite Conze's view that 'no sane man can, in fact, say anything conclusive about the doctrine of the Buddha himself', there are fairly substantial grounds for maintaining that rebirth has always been a cardinal Buddhist belief (23). According to Jayatilleke: The Buddhist theory of survival has its origin in the enlightenment of the Buddha and not in any traditional Indian belief. It is said that on the night of his enlightenment that he acquired the capacity to know his previous lives. . . . It is not correct to say (as many scholars have done) that the Buddha took for granted the belief in rebirth current in society at the time (24). But
even
if
the
Buddha
did
teach
rebirth
in
a form
28
David
L. Gosling
which must now be regarded as scientifically and philosophically untenable - and Jayatilleke has gone a long way towards showing that this is not so - there is no reason why his doctrines should not be reinterpreted. The Buddha encouraged a critical approach to his own teaching, and the history of Buddhism subsequent to his Nibbana has included a vast range of sectarian interpretations. Among these that of the Madhyamikas is generally agreed to have been one of the most important, and it is a variant of this school of thought which seems to be currently gaining ground under the influence of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa (Putatat). Putatat's understanding of 'Nibbanic life' has already been alluded to. His interpretation of rebirth is based upon two statements attributed to the Buddha, viz.: Birth is perpetual suffering (Dukkha jati punap-punam). True happiness consists in eliminating the false idea of 'I' (Asmimanassa vinayo eta& ve paramam sukhani) (25). This first statement, taken at its face value, means that each and every person is subject to suffering, and the second implies that release from suffering can only be achieved by recognizing the truth of anatta and acting accordingly. But such an interpretation, though essentially correct, fails to recognize the double nature of Buddha's teaching. At this point Putatat employs an approach which seems similar to S/ankara's two levels of truth: It has to be borne in mind that in general a word can have several different meanings according to the Two principal cases can be recognized: context. (1) language referring to physical things, which is and (2) language respoken by the average person; ferring to mental things, psychological language, which is spoken by people who know Dharma language, Dharma. . . . The ordinary person speaks as he has learnt to speak, and when he uses the word 'birth' he means physical birth, birth from a mother's body; however in Dharma language, the language used by a person who knows Dharma, 'birth' refers to the arising If at some moment there arises in of the idea 'I am'. the mind the false idea 'I am', then at that moment the 'I' has been born. When this false idea ceases, there is no longer any 'I', the 'I' has momentarily When the 'I' idea again arises in the ceased to exist. mind, the 'I' has been reborn (26). worldly anatta,
Such an interpretation meaning to rebirth, anicca and dukkha,
gives a clear, unambiguous thisand places it, together with firmly at the centre of religious
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
29
concern. Anatta is safe-guarded from the point of view of the higher level of truth (Dharnma-language), anicca is related to the notion of successive instantaneous rebirths, and dukkha is apparent in so far as the false idea of a self or ego is in evidence. The Abhidharmnist emphasis of the Theravada is Furthermore Putatat's therefore preserved to a large extent. interpretation is ethically orientated in that bad 'I' thoughts worthy of, say, an animal, lead to immediate mental rebirth to an appropriate mental state, and the problems raised by physical rebirth after death and the existence (or reality) of winjans, khwans and all the other members of Thai pre-Buddhist spiritism, are neatly sidestepped (27). Putatat also employs the notion of two levels in rel ation to NibbZna and &inyatZ, and at the same time seems to move away from Theravadin orthodoxy: Similarly with the word 'nirvana' (nibbana). In everyday language this word refers to the cooling of a hot object. . . . In Dharma language 'nirvana' refers to the kind of coolness that results from eliminating mental defilements. . . . So 'nirvhna' or 'coolness' has two meanings, according to whether the speaker is using everyday language or Dharma language. Another important word is 'emptiness' (&nyatZ, suiiiiat5). In everyday language, the language of physical things, 'emptiness' means total absence of any object; in Dharma language it means absence of the idea 'I', 'mine'. When the mind is not grasping or clinging to anything whatever as 'I' or 'mine', it is in a state of 'emptiness'. The word 'empty' has these two levels of meaning, one referring to physical things, the other referring to mental things, one in everyday language, the other in Dharma language (28). At first sight Putatat's emphasis upon the correct use language, two levels of meaning, and the association of anatta and .&nyata suggests that he has moved into the area of Mahayana thought. This is true enough provided it is accepted that no sharp dividing line can be drawn between Theravada and Mahayana thought, and Donald Swearer is partially justified in classifying Putatat as an exponent of M%Yhyamika philosophy. And yet on close inspection Putatht's ideas are not really in agreement with the classical Mhdhyamika position. Before concluding this brief summary of Putatat's thought some of the similarities and differences between his beliefs and Madhyamika philosophy will be noted. of
tenet
The view that all things of Mahayana ontology and
are empty is a fundamental in some repects is a logical
30
David
L.
Gosling
corollary of the doctrine of anatta. According to Conze the Mahasanghikas held that all empirical knowledge is unreliable and that only that which transcends worldly things is real (29). This view was maintained together with the somewhat incompatible notion that all thought is perfectly and it is therefore not surprising to find two separate pure, schools ultimately taking up the different lines of approach. As with the terms Mahayana and Theravada there is a danger of exaggerating the differences between the Vijiianavadin Idealism and the 6iinyavadin Voidism which stemmed from the inability of the Mahasarighikas to hold together different aspects of their original philosophy. Idealists believe that the Absolute is constituted by pure consciousness whereas Voidists maintain that its essential nature is emptiness. Both treat phenomena as illusory and doubt the usefulness of language, though the former stress Yoga and the latter have tended to lay more emphasis upon wisdom and insight. Ironically, as Ninian Smart has pointed out, Voidism, in spite of its tendency to linguistic nihilism, has often turned out to be intellectually elitist: The Voidist dialectic sets great emphasis, paradoxically, on intellectual processes as a means of spiritua enlightenment. For the process of the dialectic, whereby through intellectual operations we come to see the bankruptcy of reason, prepares the way for the non-dual experience of the Void (30). In passing, it is perhaps worth drawing attention to the fact that Putatat's followers, for the most part, seem to be confined to the highly educated and economically important elite sections of Thai society. How does Putatat's reinterpretation compare with the lines of thought which developed during the first few Firstly, as has centuries following the Buddha's NibbZna? been pointed out, his teaching is couched in terms which are largely, but not exclusively suggestive of M&hyamika philosophy - not exclusively because Madhyamika thought overlapped at a number of points with the positions of other schools. And yet Putatat's two levels of meaning, while similar to both iankara's higher and lower levels of truth and the two ways in which the Absolute manifests itself in the Mahayana, are not really the same as either. The Madhyamikas believed that only emptiness truly exists, everything else having a qualified reality for practical purposes. As against the Sarvastivadins they seem to have argued that the whole chain of existence is composed of transitory events Emptiness, which, being impermanent, can have no reality.
Thai
Buddhism
in
transition
however, never changes, and is Absolute Truth and Being, Nibbana, and the Body of Essence (Dharmakaya) of the Buddha. The Absolute phenomenalizes itself both as the celestial Lord and as the historical Buddha. Putatat's everyday and Dharma language, his ontology, and, in particular, his use of the concept of emptiness, do not really approach the fully developed Madhyamika position. His stress upon successive rebirth seems to attribute much more reality to the chain of existence that would have been acknowledged by the Madhyamikas, and would tend to place him nearer to Sarvastivadin and Sautrantika positions which the MZdhyamikas expressly repudiated. Moreover, in denying the absence of a self the Madhyamikas stressed not so much the absence of atta (which was emphasised by the Theravadins and Sarvastivadins) , but rather the absence of svabhava or 'own being'. This is not to deny the logic of progressing from anatt2 to .GnyaG - the point is simply that whereas the Madhyamikas in practice tended to deny svabhava, Putatat only refers to the denial of at&. In spite of his suggestive use of two levels of meaning, the notion of emptiness, and several other terms suggestive of Mahayana ontology, Putatat ultimately seems to fall back But his position on the three 'marks' of the Abhidhamma. none the less represents an imaginative reinterpretation of basic Theravada beliefs, and it is easy to appreciate why his this-worldly presentation of Buddhism is so appealing to scientifically educated Thais. Finally a few general observations will be offered about the contemporary role of Buddhism in Thailand. It was apparent in the course of this investigation that Thai Buddhism is in the process of undergoing some fairly radical transformations. Whether or not the interpretations which have been described will eventually spread from the educated elite to the rank and file of Buddhist monks and laymen remains to be seen. The social prestige enjoyed by Thai universities is considerable and there is a constant if sometimes superficial exchange between the university population and many of the Wats. The Sangha as a whole may be slow to accept the need for change, but the influence of Putatat and a number of young and gifted monks will be hard to resist in the long term - and all the harder because many of the most ardent reformers are within the Sangha itself. The approach religion.
overall situation clearly requires a dynamic to both the social and doctrinal aspects of Thai An increasing desire on the part of university
32
David
L. Gosling
students and faculty members for scientifically based Buddhist teaching and instruction in vipassanFi may well shift the emphasis of many wats away from their traditional roles, and there are already definite indications that many monks would like to be more involved in social welfare than in the past. Parallel with such tendencies towards new patterns of social involvement go doctrinal changes which seem to underline a pronounced this-worldly emphasis. It is therefore not surprising to discover that other-worldly notions such as rebirth, Nibbana, and to a lesser extent, kamma, are no longer taken very seriously. It is tempting to argue that one has only to spend forty minutes on a Bangkok bus to sense that the whole mood of Thai Buddhism is this-worldly, and therefore that not even the most passionate and scholarly attempts to buttress traditional belief in rebirth will be taken seriously. Tambiah's distinction between historical and contemporary religion and his stress upon the importance of recognising continuities and transformations is relevant at this point. Historical Buddhism needs to be interpreted not only in the light of the religious texts but against the background of its interactions with other traditions and structural changes brought about in a wide variety of social and cultural situations. Little can be said with certainty about the original teaching of the Buddha, and it is therefore open to his followers to speculate about the extent to which his message is necessarily tied to Hindu beliefs such as reincarnation. The Buddha, moreover, seemed to encourage such speculation by insistinq that beliefs and practices should be adopted only in so far as they were useful and could be proved. Thus, although a sound textual case can be made out for the view that rebirth was central to the Buddha's message, it can still be argued that he only believed it because, to use the kind of justification often resorted to by Christian theologians, he was 'a man of his generation', and also because he appears to have encouraged a critical approach to his own teaching. It is important to distinguish what is happening here from the kind of nationalistic attempts to rewrite religious history which have prevailed elsewhere. Secularization, the impact of scientific ideas, and the need for a religious rationale for purpositive activity have collectively sown serious doubts as to the truth and viability of otherworldly religious doctrines such as rebirth, Nibbana and kamma. Consequently they are being either rejected as Hindu accretions which are no longer useful, or reinterpreted along
Thai
Buddhism
in transition
Thus the modern impact of the lines suggested by Putatat. science and technology can be seen as affecting both the contemporary and the historical aspects of the religious tradition. NOTES 1
For
further
details see The Impact of Science on Indian See also 'Scientists C.I.S.R.S., Bangalore 1976. in the South Asian Review, Vol. 7, in Indian Society', No. 4, July 1974, and 'The Impact of Science on Religion' in New Frontiers in Education, Vol. IV, No. 3, July 1974, p. 19. I have given specific examples of these objections in 'Scientific Perspectives on Rebirth' in Religion, Vol. IV, Part I, 1974, p. 47. of the Buddha, Allen & Jayatilleke, K.N., The Message Unwin 1975. Communities in an Indigenous Marriott, M., 'Little Civilization', in Village India, Studies in the Little Community, Chicago University Press 1955. Dumont, L. and Pocock, D., eds, Contributions to Indian Sociology. See especially No. 1 (1957), No. 3 (19591, and No. 4 (1960). Tambiah, S.J., Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in Northeast Thailand, Cambridge University Press 1970. Tambiah, S.J., Ibid., p. 370. and Society, Harper and Row Spiro, Melford E., Buddhism 1970. Skinner, G.W., and Kirsch, A-T., Change and Persistence in Thai Society, Cornell University Press Society,
2
3 4
5
6 7 8
1975. 9 10 11 12
13 14
I.5
Tambiah, S.J., op. cit. (6), p. 374. Jayatilleke, K.N., op.cit. (3). Wells, K-E., Thai Buddhism - Its Rites and Activities, Suriyabun, Bangkok 1975. Swearer, D-K., Buddhism in Transition, Westminster Press 1970. See also same author, Toward the Truth, Westminster Press 1971. Bunnag, J., Buddhist Monk, Buddhist Layman, Cambridge University Press 1973, p. 19. Tilman, R-O., Man, State and Society in Contemporary Southeast Asia, Pall Mall Press 1969, p. 544. Embree, F., 'Thailand: A Loosely Structured Social System', in the American Anthropologist 52, 1950, p.181. Bunnag, J., 'Loose Structure: Fact or Fancy? Thai Society Re-examined' in the Journal of the Siam Society, Vol. 59, Part I, January 1971, p. 1. See also same author op. cit. (131, p. 180.
33
34
David
16
Bellah, R.N., ed., Religion and Progress in Modern Asia, Free Press, New York 1965. Robertson, R., 'Religious and Sociological Factors in the Analysis of Secularization' in Eister, A.W., ed., Changing Perspectives in the Scientific Study of Religion, John Wiley 1974, p. 41. Gluckman, M. and Eggan, F., 'Introduction' in Banton, M., of Complex Societies, ed., The Social Anthropology Tavistock 1966, p. xxx. Putatat in Swearer, D.K ., ed., Toward the Truth, Westminster Press 1971, p. 104. and a Modern See also Bhavilai, R., Buddhism in Thailand Thai's Interpretation of Buddhism, Bangkok n.d., p. 13. Instances of memories of previous lives were often quoted from Francis Story's The Case of Rebirth, Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy 1973. Tambiah, S.J., op. cit. (61, p. 58. The term tuaton refers to the existential self. Conze, E., Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Cassirer 1967, p. 10. Jayatilleke, K.N., op. cit. (3), p. 134. Putatat, Another Kind of Birth, Sublime Life Mission, Bangkok c. 1969, p. 2. Putat?it, ibid., p. 3. Tambiah, S.J., op.cit., (61, p. 57. Putatat, op. cit. (251, p. 5. Years of Buddhist Studies, Bruno Conze, E., Thirty Cassirer 1967, op. cit. (23), p. 76. and Argument in Indian Philosophy, Smart, N., Doctrine Allen & Unwin 1964, p. 56.
17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
L. Gosling