Couple agrees to remove Buddha images from fence at their Chiang Mai house

[Catoni]

19 minutes ago, jmccarty said:

Is there a difference between "Art" & "Decoration"  Can Buddha Art be displayed anywhere outside of a Wat?   If I am learning Buddhism, can I have a spirit house with a Buddha to pray to?

A spirit house is for spirits...  not for Buddha.   There is difference..   I have a Buddha shrine on my wall..    I don't have a spirit house.   Spirit houses are not part of Buddhism... they are part of Animism. In parts of south east Asia, you can often find Animism mixed with Buddhism and Hindusim to some extent..       But technically they are totally different things.. 

[jak2002003]

Buddhists getting outraged and demanding this couple remove the Buddha heads is very in Buddhist!  Buddhists are supposed to not get emotional or force people to do things... 

 

And what the heck is the difference in having the heads on a wall, a statue in the garden.. or inside a temple or on a painting in the living room, or a Buddha head in the house?

 

Stupid.

 

 

 

 

[Shaunduhpostman]

Someone sold them the  heads. So, apparently producing and selling them is OK. 

[AWillOz]

I bet the fella who sold the buddah heads to them didn't say, "now don't go putting them on your fence, coz that's disrespectful".  On another note there's a huge sign on the way to Survanabhumi airport which says something to the effect of "don't get buddah tattoos, and don't take buddah's out of the country, it's common sense", and i've thought to myself that i can see no common sense at all in such treatment of buddah, especially when i look at all the Thai's buying them and displaying them. But my Tw explains, "the foreigner doesn't know how to treat buddah properly or pray to them, so they should not have them on display." Go figure!

[Catoni]

3 hours ago, Tony125 said:

Not true , you can buy a Buddah figure or wear an amulet as religious practice but not as strictly a decoration

Photo below of foreigner who obviously has no knowledge of Buddism as she has the image on her foot--totally insulting as the foot is considered the lowest of body and towards hell. You can't even point with your foot here. 

  She better not go to Thailand and Cambodia wearing flip flops with that image showing on her foot.  What was she thinking ? ? ? 

[MeHere]

I can understand (to a point, although it is pretty ignorant) that the guy didn't know it was wrong, but it's amazing to me that the wife let him do this, let alone have a bunch of decapitated Buddhas on their property.

 

My girl would have flipped if I wanted to do this, and she's not even very religious.

[dunroaming]

6 minutes ago, Shaunduhpostman said:

Someone sold them the  heads. So, apparently producing and selling them is OK. 

To create a Buddha image is seen as a good thing and earns many brownie points.  It is true that you are not allowed to take a Buddha image out of the country, this is to stop the export of old and antique Buddha images.  However souvenirs tend to be exempt and if you are not sure then you can get an export certificate from the governments Art and Culture Department.

[holy cow cm]

3 hours ago, Tony125 said:

Not true , you can buy a Buddah figure or wear an amulet as religious practice but not as strictly a decoration

Photo below of foreigner who obviously has no knowledge of Buddism as she has the image on her foot--totally insulting as the foot is considered the lowest of body and towards hell. You can't even point with your foot here. 

Underlying is cannot be bought, but they sell it all of the time. Maybe to recoup manu costs only would be acceptable or the person makes a donation or the maker gives for free.

 

[owl sees all]

25 minutes ago, Catoni said:

Photo below of foreigner who obviously has no knowledge of Buddism as she has the image on her foot--totally insulting as the foot is considered the lowest of body and towards hell. You can't even point with your foot here. 

Is it not the sole of the foot that is insulting? Recall when that statue of Sadam Hussain was toppled and the people were hitting the statue with the soles of their shoes. "Have some of that you, you bad man." Whack, whack and another whack. Bet it hurt him!!

[Artisi]

47 minutes ago, jmccarty said:

Is there a difference between "Art" & "Decoration"  Can Buddha Art be displayed anywhere outside of a Wat?   If I am learning Buddhism, can I have a spirit house with a Buddha to pray to?

Learn a bit more, spirit houses have SFA to do with Buddhism, similar to having a grotto and a Mary dedicated to Buddha. 

[marquis22]

"Remove my mate??? You gotta be joking   :-(  "

[owl sees all]

17 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Learn a bit more, spirit houses have SFA to do with Buddhism, similar to having a grotto and a Mary dedicated to Buddha.

I think I understand the logic here.

 

When I return from Laos with a case of single malt our whole house becomes spiritual. 

 

I know that's not exactly the same but a glass or two I feel like I'm close to life itself.

[dunroaming]

10 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Is it not the sole of the foot that is insulting? Recall when that statue of Sadam Hussain was toppled and the people were hitting the statue with the soles of their shoes. "Have some of that you, you bad man." Whack, whack and another whack. Bet it hurt him!!

It is the sole of foot that is insulting but anything to do with the feet is considered unacceptable.  I tend to cross my legs when sitting and if opposite to other Thai people I am careful that my foot is not pointing towards them.  In contrast it is unacceptable to touch a Thai persons head although it is OK with children.  I guess everything in between is fair game!

[owl sees all]

7 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

It is the sole of foot that is insulting but anything to do with the feet is considered unacceptable.  I tend to cross my legs when sitting and if opposite to other Thai people I am careful that my foot is not pointing towards them.  In contrast it is unacceptable to touch a Thai persons head although it is OK with children.  I guess everything in between is fair game!

I can live with that but what about when people are sleeping on the floor?

[chrissables]

1 hour ago, Yann55 said:

 

LOL, Lumbini, where the Lord Buddha was born, is actually in Nepal, not India. But we get your point.

Just read this, which is interesting.

 

The best statement on the birthplace of Siddhartha Gautama is: “Buddha was born in Lumbini which is in Nepal at present”. Saying Buddha was born in Nepal is correct according to the current geopolitics but it's not the complete fact. Similarly saying Buddha was born in India maybe geographically correct but politically incorrect.

I think there is no doubt among the Indians on the above fact quoted in bold but I have seen arguments that say, “Siddhartha Gautam became Buddha at Gaya which is in India. Therefore, Buddha was born in India.”

 

The other argument I have seen is “Nepal was a part of India”. Geographically, this could be correct. Europeans labelled the whole Indian Sub-continent as India in the days of their glory. Geographically, it covered the enitre area from Burma (Myanmar) to the Eastern boundaries of Persia (Iran) south of Tibet. Politically, it is a bad argument. Nepal has had sovereign existence for millennia.

[Thingamabob]

Utterly crass display. Severed heads of Buddha are considered to be disrespectful to say the least.

[LolaS]

I am the only one who thinks (knows) that same situation would happened in Europe ( Germany, France etc) 

those heads on fence look so disgusting and repulsive, every community leader would immediately order a removal of them.

I dont understand point of it?

[owl sees all]

10 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Utterly crass display. Severed heads of Buddha are considered to be disrespectful to say the least.

They were not severed. They were cemented onto a wall!!

[jak2002003]

9 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Utterly crass display. Severed heads of Buddha are considered to be disrespectful to say the least.

 

I take it you are making a joke?

 

The sad thing is, as all the complaining and outraged Buddhist followers can't see.. is if Buddha actually came back and walked past that house... he would not care less about the golden heads displayed there..   as usual, religious stupid people doing things that are totally against the meaning of their religion..... they should not even have temples set up.. and those temple should never ask for money or material offerings!  It's all turned on its head and become worthless to most people.

[jak2002003]

2 minutes ago, LolaS said:

I am the only one who thinks (knows) that same situation would happened in Europe ( Germany, France etc) 

those heads on fence look so disgusting and repulsive, every community leader would immediately order a removal of them.

I dont understand point of it?

Are you saying the face of Buddha is disgusting and repulsive to look at?

[LolaS]

Just now, jak2002003 said:

Are you saying the face of Buddha is disgusting and repulsive to look at?

the one that are on fence in that couple case, YES;

kitsch

 

[LolaS]

 cheesiness or tackiness, is art or other objects that appeal to popular or uncultivated taste because they are garish or overly sentimental, which means that these objects are considered by other people to be ugly, without style, false, or in poor taste but enjoyed or appreciated by still other people in an ironic or knowing way or because it is funny.

[nickmondo]

I have an opinion, but will keep it to myself!  nuff said

[samsensam]

 

remove them for aesthetic reasons sure, but i see Buddha images used as adornments all over thailand, and you can buy ornaments, statues and pictures all over thailand, the facebook mob need to get going on those retail outlets!

 

some thais do love to occupy the moral high ground sitting on their high horses and tell other people what to do. it's almost a national pastime.

[owl sees all]

4 minutes ago, LolaS said:

cheesiness or tackiness, is art or other objects that appeal to popular or uncultivated taste because they are garish or overly sentimental, which means that these objects are considered by other people to be ugly, without style, false, or in poor taste but enjoyed or appreciated by still other people in an ironic or knowing way or because it is funny.

What is art for one is fart for another.

 

6 minutes ago, LolaS said:

kitsch

I don't know what you are talking about.

 

Please explain!!??

[owl sees all]

7 minutes ago, nickmondo said:

I have an opinion, but will keep it to myself!  nuff said

Go on Nick. Do tell!

[Muzarella]

Amaze me that most comments are critics of the Thailand culture and way of life.

If you decided to move here, the first thing that Thai people will expect will be for you to respect their traditions and culture, specially their religion.

Or you do enter a Buddhist temple with your shoes one??.... or a Chistian Church with your hat on?

Buddha images and statues are situated on highest places on temples and residences for a reason....and a good one....like all the simbols of most religions. To show respect looking up for Gods and Masters...... and monks, even if you are a non religious person. Thai people always seats on lower levels in front of a monk..... even if is just a statue.

In Buddhist culture it is unrespectful to place Buddha images in lower positions, and to people facing its feets to the images. That's the reason for the seating position of people inside the temples, with their feets facing the sides or rear side of their bodies. It is also no proper to use Buddha images just for decoration, and if you do, have to be situated on high places. That's why in most Thai homes its are situated over doors height. Unfortunately it is also the Thai tradition to avoid confrontations, and Thais never will directly advice a farang what to do or not, just commenting with others about the farang actions.

Do not take it personal. That is just "Thainess". If you decided to  live here, nothing better that gaining the respect of the community around you showing interest in its culture and traditions.

[ianto]

I was always taught to be respectful of other people’s culture however diverse they may seem. Most of the comments I see on this forum are from westerners either trying to impose their values , or just whinging about everything Thai. If things are so bad in Thailand you can always go home (maybej

[owl sees all]

Just now, Muzarella said:

Amaze me that most comments are critics of the Thailand culture and way of life.

<snip><snip>

That is just "Thainess". If you decided to  live here, nothing better that gaining the respect of the community around you showing interest of its culture and traditions.

I do live here. And I am trying to tread the path between respect for an absurd Thai form of religion and atheism. It's not easy as most here will know.

 

Before Darwin westerners had an excuse for religion. What else could explain the catatrophes of life? Now they are more educated they know differently. 

 

What I know about Thai buddha culture does not reflect on anything good in my book. It's more about greed, saving face, lies and ridiculous beliefs. 

[Kieran00001]

On 26/09/2017 at 5:06 PM, canuckamuck said:

Making and worshiping Buddha images is actually disrespectful to Buddha's teaching but that hasn't stopped anyone.

 

No, nothing wrong with making them or indeed looking at them while praying, but it must be kept in mind that you are only looking at a statue not Buddha, so absolutely no worship of the statue itself, but if you think it helps you to remember Buddhas teachings and to stay focussed then no problem in looking at his image.  A previous school I taught at had an interesting approach to teaching this, we had a large statue of Buddha in the grounds but when we prayed the children were instructed to always face away from the statue as to not confuse Buddha for this piece of concrete.