Pressure Mounts To Make Buddhism State Religion

[lannarebirth]

In my opinion this talk about naming Buddhism as the national religion has practically nothing to do with the wishes of Buddhists, and everything to do with the wishes of those who control government. Unpopular juntas stand much to gain by gaining the stamp of approval from the clergy, disreputable as they are. The hierarchal administrative structure of the Thai sangha is in such disarray and so weak it is easy picking for being co-opted by the strongmen of the moment. The junta will believe (probably rightly) that whatever change or restrictions the junta wishes to impose will be more readily accepted with the imprimateur of some stooges (who are not hard to find) from the clergy.

[Plus]

... I think you are concerned about the organisation called a religion and I am concerned about the spiritual practice called a religion.

That is correct. Organised religion is necessary for millions of people to gain access to the spiritual practice as it provides essential infrastructure.

Education is also an individual process but you still need schools, curriculums and bureaucrats to run it.

PB, I subscribe to the opinion that the great success story that is the US was built on strong protestant values.

What would it be if it has always run by Mexicans?

>>>>

Office of Chula Rathamontri, Thailand's muslim leader, has its roots in Iranian Sufi Islam while the southerners pracice their own variations of Sunni. Ethnic and historical causes of the conflict have no relation to this thread.

Religios affiliation of Gen Sonthi has no impact on the insurgency whatsoever.

[sabaijai]

In my opinion this talk about naming Buddhism as the national religion has practically nothing to do with the wishes of Buddhists, and everything to do with the wishes of those who control government. Unpopular juntas stand much to gain by gaining the stamp of approval from the clergy, disreputable as they are. The hierarchal administrative structure of the Thai sangha is in such disarray and so weak it is easy picking for being co-opted by the strongmen of the moment. The junta will believe (probably rightly) that whatever change or restrictions the junta wishes to impose will be more readily accepted with the imprimateur of some stooges (who are not hard to find) from the clergy.

Except that the junta is opposed to the notion of enshrining Buddhism in the constitution.

[chownah]

PB, I subscribe to the opinion that the great success story that is the US was built on strong protestant values.

And the strong protestant values were there even though there is no state religion and there is a legal seperation of religion and gov't. Again you have made a good arguement showing the benefits of seperation of religion and gov't and against recognising a state religion....keep up the good work.

[chownah]

That is correct. Organised religion is necessary for millions of people to gain access to the spiritual practice as it provides essential infrastructure.

I disagree completely. I have access to spiritual practice and it has nothing to do with any infrastructure built by any gov't specifically for the purpose of spreading religion. On the contrary, I really see little value in what the gov't of Thailand has done for Buddhism and most of the good I do see is because of the local people freely giving of themselves and their resources to build the temples etc. The people in my neighborhood financed and built the local temple....the gov't provides nothing.

Chownah

[lannarebirth]

In my opinion this talk about naming Buddhism as the national religion has practically nothing to do with the wishes of Buddhists, and everything to do with the wishes of those who control government. Unpopular juntas stand much to gain by gaining the stamp of approval from the clergy, disreputable as they are. The hierarchal administrative structure of the Thai sangha is in such disarray and so weak it is easy picking for being co-opted by the strongmen of the moment. The junta will believe (probably rightly) that whatever change or restrictions the junta wishes to impose will be more readily accepted with the imprimateur of some stooges (who are not hard to find) from the clergy.

Except that the junta is opposed to the notion of enshrining Buddhism in the constitution.

From the articles I've read, the government of Surayud is against the idea, but individual generals (including Sonthi) have spoken in favor of the idea. The constitution drafters did not include it, but I'm not sure whose pocket they are in.

[lannarebirth]

That is correct. Organised religion is necessary for millions of people to gain access to the spiritual practice as it provides essential infrastructure.

I disagree completely. I have access to spiritual practice and it has nothing to do with any infrastructure built by any gov't specifically for the purpose of spreading religion. On the contrary, I really see little value in what the gov't of Thailand has done for Buddhism and most of the good I do see is because of the local people freely giving of themselves and their resources to build the temples etc. The people in my neighborhood financed and built the local temple....the gov't provides nothing.

Chownah

I believe the government provides a picture of the King, to put in the temple amongst the Buddha images.

[Plus]

That is correct. Organised religion is necessary for millions of people to gain access to the spiritual practice as it provides essential infrastructure.

I disagree completely. I have access to spiritual practice and it has nothing to do with any infrastructure built by any gov't specifically for the purpose of spreading religion. On the contrary, I really see little value in what the gov't of Thailand has done for Buddhism and most of the good I do see is because of the local people freely giving of themselves and their resources to build the temples etc. The people in my neighborhood financed and built the local temple....the gov't provides nothing.

Chownah

Well, I don't have access to spiritual practice as there are no temples in my neighbourhood and sure as hel_l the govt won't build one. So what happens is that thousands of households here are getting gradually separated from their religion (not that they care, mind you) and consulting monks or making merit, or giving alms is not practiced anymore.

Basically it's like retail - if you don't build stores, people won't come and buy anything.

I agree that government has done little for Buddhism and that generally it's not competent enough, but I don't see it as a reason for complete separation. It would rather speed up the demise.

And the strong protestant values were there even though there is no state religion and there is a legal seperation of religion and gov't. Again you have made a good arguement showing the benefits of seperation of religion and gov't and against recognising a state religion....keep up the good work.

Yeah, except that these protestant values are eroding very fast and the Christians can't do anything about it, not legally anyway. In only about fifty years it was gone, nothing left, nada.

[cdnvic]

Yeah, except that these protestant values are eroding very fast and the Christians can't do anything about it, not legally anyway. In only about fifty years it was gone, nothing left, nada.

So you want a government to be able to force these values on people?

There's been so much discrimination against minorities that was justified from the pulpit. Had the church been forced upon people or controlled by the government then the civil rights movements that originated from southern baptists may never have come to being.

[egeefay]

The beauty of Buddishm is that it teaches us that the desire to make Buddhism a state religion causes suffering.

Eliminate the desire the make Buddhism a state relgion and you will be on your way to Enlightenment.

I should think those monks protesting in the streets should know this one by heart.

Edited May 6, 2007 by egeefay

[DragonQuest]

The country is already 90+% buddist so majority wins, it already is a buddist country, just needs to be on a piece a paper now....

[cdnvic]

The country is already 90+% buddist so majority wins, it already is a buddist country, just needs to be on a piece a paper now....

All the more reason why it doesn't need to be on a piece of paper actually.

[sabaijai]

Buddhism as national religion' demonstrators end protest

BANGKOK, May 7 (TNA) - Demonstrators who have been rallying in front of Parliament demanding that the drafters of the new constitution recognise Buddhism as Thailand's religion in the charter on Monday

announced they would end their marathon protest.

Gen. Thongchai Kuasakul, a core leader of the Buddhist Network of Thailand, said demonstrators, including Buddhist monks and laypersons, would end their protest at Parliament, which began two weeks ago, after it was learned that some 'ill-intentioned persons' who were not members of the Network had used the rally for political gains.

However, members of the Buddhist activist network would continue to pressure the Constitution Drafting Assembly to intervene during the scrutiny process of the rewritten Constitution to declare Buddhism in a clause of the charter as national religion, he said.

Thanking Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkalin, chairman of the Council for National Security and also army chief, for his support on the issue, Gen. Thongchai said he wanted Prime Minister Gen. Surayud Chulanont to also openly support on recognising the faith as the national religion in the charter.

Meanwhile, Charan Pakdithanakul, deputy chairman of the draft charter committee, told journalists that his committee was finding a solution which could be acceptable to those pro and against on the issue.

However, Mr. Charan said he personally believed the new charter should not as yet specify Buddhism as national religion because it might aggravate conflicts with people worshipping other religions in the country. It is, therefore, necessary for every party concerned to seek a common solution.

The demonstrators earlier vowed that to rally there until their religious demands had been met.

A senior monk earlier explained that those concerned about the status of Buddhism, including those drafting the charter, may have confused the declaration of Buddhism as national religion with the official recognition of Buddhism.

Not only Buddhism but also all other religions in Thailand have already been recognised by the authorities, he noted. (TNA)-E111

[camerata]

Have the demonstrators ever given a coherent reason as to why they want Buddhism to be included in the Constitution as the national religion? Have they specified what benefits will result and for whom?

[Plus]

The country is already 90+% buddist so majority wins, it already is a buddist country, just needs to be on a piece a paper now....

All the more reason why it doesn't need to be on a piece of paper actually.

The logic of this argument completely escapes me, unless of course you view Consitution as just a piece of paper with no relation to the reality on the grond.

In fact it's not so much Buddhism that has to be included in the constitition but rather rights of other religions in relation to it, they might really need this legal protection.

Is it ok to include Islam but not a word about Buddhism? Is it ok to give equal rights to Buddhism and some unknown Christian church that puts missionaries soliciting converts on the streets? They would argue that converting infidels is an integral part of their religious practice and so is protected by Constitution while the government would simply say - not in my province/city/village.

I don't understand why people refuse to define these rights in the Consitution and chose to deal with problems in extrajudicial way.

>>>>

While the Church has screwed lives of many people and even countries over the centuries, the fact remains - when it's not protected, it dies. Same will happen with Buddhism.

"To kill a mocking bird" was written only fifty years ago yet that society, deeply religious, where no one questioned supremacy of Christianity just like no one questions supremacy of Buddhism in Thailand, is gone. Fifty years - that's all it takes, and the process is irreversible.

If some Buddhists here sense the danger - more power to them. I personally don't think that it would survive much longer anyway.

[cdnvic]

If it needs to be kept alive by law (which I don't believe) then it's not meant to live. Trying to force it to stay alive is about as un-Buddhist as you can get.

Buddhism was doing fine long before Thailand existed, and I believe it will long outlive Thailand in the future.

[sabaijai]

NLA panel opposes enshrining Buddhism

MONGKOL BANGPRAPA & PRADIT RUANGDIT

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) political reform committee voiced disagreement yesterday with the proposed establishment of a National Crisis Council and Buddhism being declared as the national religion. The committee, assigned by the NLA to study the first draft charter, failed to see any benefit in enshrining Buddhism as the official state religion.

Since the constitution deals with the country's administration, it should be kept separate from ''affairs of the temple'', said committee spokesman Khamnoon Sitthisamarn.

cont'd at Bangkok Post

[Plus]

If it needs to be kept alive by law (which I don't believe) then it's not meant to live. Trying to force it to stay alive is about as un-Buddhist as you can get.

Buddhism was doing fine long before Thailand existed, and I believe it will long outlive Thailand in the future.

But is has always been protected by the law! For thousands of years upholding the religion was the prime duty of the kings. See what happened to it since Thailand got a secular government - it won't last very long, a couple more generations and it will be over.

[cdnvic]

it won't last very long, a couple more generations and it will be over.

So then it wasn't meant to be. Buddhism is based on the belief that all things are impermanent.

I personally think that Buddhism will live on for many generations yet. Forcing it upon people just negates it's message.

[sabaijai]

it won't last very long, a couple more generations and it will be over.

So then it wasn't meant to be. Buddhism is based on the belief that all things are impermanent.

I personally think that Buddhism will live on for many generations yet. Forcing it upon people just negates it's message.

[NaiGreg]

If it needs to be kept alive by law (which I don't believe) then it's not meant to live. Trying to force it to stay alive is about as un-Buddhist as you can get.

Buddhism was doing fine long before Thailand existed, and I believe it will long outlive Thailand in the future.

But is has always been protected by the law! For thousands of years upholding the religion was the prime duty of the kings. See what happened to it since Thailand got a secular government - it won't last very long, a couple more generations and it will be over.

This is historically incorrect. In the Ayutthaya period Brahminism/Hinduism was preferred by the royal court & noble classes, but Buddhism become tremendously popular at the grass roots level and later officially adopted/protected by the royal court and the later by Thaksin and then the Chakri dynasty.

Buddhism will be here (in it's various forms) for a long, long time. However, the Sanha will continue to see declines in ordinations, as it has since the emergence of the market economy.

With that said, I think one has to venture pretty far from the middle path to suggest politicizing Buddhism in any country.

[ColPyat]

With that said, I think one has to venture pretty far from the middle path to suggest politicizing Buddhism in any country.

I believe that the support of many people for installing Buddhism as a state religion comes from a somewhat engineered paranoia resulting from a deep insecurity of a collapsing social and political system.

Many supporters i spoke with have expressed fears that Islam is subverting Buddhism here. Many rumors are flying around here now, such as with Gen. Sonthi being Muslim, there is a conspiracy of making Thailand Islamic within a few generations, with financial incentives for conversions backed by foreign countries.

[Jai Dee]

Buddhist monks and organizations to have a meeting on national religion this afternoon

A group of Buddhist monks and Buddhist organizations in Chiang Mai province will organize a meeting on the declaration of Buddhism as a national religion of Thailand in the new constitution this afternoon (May 14).

About a thousand of abbots and monks from Buddhist temples in Chiang Mai and representatives from Buddhist organizations will attend the meeting today. At the meeting, participants will jointly pray for His Majesty the King on the auspicious occasion of His 80th birthday on December 5th this year.

However, the meeting today will be held without any political intention, and the participants believe that by declaring Buddhism as a national religion will provide more stability for Buddhism in the country.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 14 May 2007

[jumnien]

Many Muslim men are marrying and converting buddhist women, very little the other way.

[Plus]

If it needs to be kept alive by law (which I don't believe) then it's not meant to live. Trying to force it to stay alive is about as un-Buddhist as you can get.

Buddhism was doing fine long before Thailand existed, and I believe it will long outlive Thailand in the future.

But is has always been protected by the law! For thousands of years upholding the religion was the prime duty of the kings. See what happened to it since Thailand got a secular government - it won't last very long, a couple more generations and it will be over.

This is historically incorrect. In the Ayutthaya period Brahminism/Hinduism was preferred by the royal court & noble classes, but Buddhism become tremendously popular at the grass roots level and later officially adopted/protected by the royal court and the later by Thaksin and then the Chakri dynasty.

Buddhism will be here (in it's various forms) for a long, long time. However, the Sanha will continue to see declines in ordinations, as it has since the emergence of the market economy.

With that said, I think one has to venture pretty far from the middle path to suggest politicizing Buddhism in any country.

Upholding and protecting religions by Kings of Thailand (Siam or Ayutthaya, if you wish) is also originally a Hindu/Brahmanic principle that predates Buddhism, that doesn't make it less protected, though.

Sangha will definitely take a hit, and if the market economy continues its "shock and awe" march across the globe, even the philosophy will become irrelevant.

Also, if the country goes through a social transformation (to keep up with the Joneses in the West), Buddhisms will be viewed as an obstacle to progress.

From a historical perspective, SE Asia is filled with ruins of empires that disappeared like dinosauras, along with their religions. It's against all odds that Buddhism will survive here, I don't see the source of optimism.

[chownah]

From a historical perspective, SE Asia is filled with ruins of empires that disappeared like dinosauras, along with their religions. It's against all odds that Buddhism will survive here, I don't see the source of optimism.

I guess when a religion is attached to an empire then it seems inevitable that it will disappear....maybe this is because a religion that exists too closely linked with a gov't loses its vitalitiy and relevance and so it can only exist through the gov't's graces....perhaps a religion that has lost its vitality and relevance is nothing to mourne if lost. On the other hand a religion that is not tainted by gov't connections might be practiced more for its own sake and thus maintain its vitality and relevance...I don't know....but what you have posted once again makes a good case for the seperation of religion and gov't since when the sponsoring gov't is gone then the religion is gone too it seems...by your estimation ...I guess.

Also, if you are so concerned about the disappearance of Buddhism then I suggest you get involved in practicing and propogating its teachings because really that is the only way any religion can survive long term...people teaching and practicing it.

Chownah

Edited May 14, 2007 by chownah

[Plus]

On the other hand a religion that is not tainted by gov't connections might be practiced more for its own sake and thus maintain its vitality and relevance

There are no precedents. It has never happened in history, so far. "Might be", "could be" - what makes you think that Thailand is so special as to deny the general course of history, because

when the sponsoring gov't is gone then the religion is gone too...

Exactly. Better yet if it's changed to "gov't sponsoring" to better reflect the current situation.

We might argue the value of organised religion at all but the whole idea of "organised" means it has to be sponsored, supported, and organised by some authoritative body. If that body is separated from the state it loses its authority. It gets excluded from education, for example. Where and when the next generation is going to learn about Buddhism? Three days in a temple once in a lifetime is not going to cut it.

[cdnvic]

What value is there to teaching them a fake corruption of Buddhism that ignores the very core philosophy of Buddhism?

All things are impermanent.

Suffering is caused by desire.

Everything else in Buddhism stems from those two core beliefs.

The way to defend Buddhism is to remember those two phrases, not by forcing it upon others.

I fail to see why you don't get the very basics of a philosophy you claim to be defending.

Edited May 15, 2007 by cdnvic

[Mid]

Gen. Thongchai Kuasakul, a core leader of the Buddhist Network of Thailand, said demonstrators, including Buddhist monks and laypersons, would end their protest at Parliament, which began two weeks ago, after it was learned that some 'ill-intentioned persons' who were not members of the Network had used the rally for political gains.

used the rally for political gains , just what were you doing General ...............

[chownah]

On the other hand a religion that is not tainted by gov't connections might be practiced more for its own sake and thus maintain its vitality and relevance

There are no precedents. It has never happened in history, so far.

The precedents are everywhere. Every major world religion extant today was started without gov't sponsorship and was not sponsored by a gov't until it got really big and popular...I think...but I'm not sure as I am not expert in the genesis and developmnet of organised religion....all the major religions thrived without gov't sponsorship in their early development I think....this is certainly true of Christianity which was persecuted by the authorities that be when it was developing...Judaism thrived way back when it was just some tribes that believed in it...Buddhism started in India and it was totally wiped out by a Muslim invasion but it did not stop Buddhism from growing and developing. Christianity is doing quite well in the US inspite of it having no gov't support there.

I don't see the validity of your assertion.

Chownah