Thailand: when Buddhism mixes with politics and gets ugly

[dyanaprajna2011]

Thai Buddhist monk vows to fight on even as protesters scale back

Question: where do we draw the line?

 

[Twilight Hue]

How would such a line be defined?

It's seems he overstepped his monastic vows, but not his own seemingly. I suppose would it be compassionate to regress or to continue his particular course to it's conclusion dependent upon how things are unfolding.

It's interesting in regards to what caused a senior monk to prusue in such a way that turned out as it did.

The violence is distressing and some see Thaksin as a hungry ghost wanting more.

Once this settles, I figure the people of Thailand will make a determination of his actions and tell if the karma that was generated will lead to reform or further chaos.

One thing, it's said it's odd for Thai monks to protest in light of their issues. Usually they remain quiet and not raising their voice for freedom and moral rights. Something happened.

However if a monks actions bring about great harm, then it's appropriate for the monk to avoid such harm and endeavor to seek another venue.

Perhaps that could be a line.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. The whole mixing Buddhism and politics thing has just gotten under my skin, and I've gotten to the point, even as an American where things aren't quite so confused, to just leave politics alone. However, I do want to address something you said:

Something happened.

It's also happened in Myanmar, and Sri Lanka, and will continue to happen elsewhere. I'm not sure what that 'something' is, but whatever it is, it's become big in the Theravadin world, and I'm worried it's going to spread into the Mahayana as well, if it hasn't already.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I see your point.

It would be difficult to picture a Soto monk pursuing an issue in the same vein.

While I feel Mayahana is becoming progressive in aspects, I don't feel it will reach a level of concern just by the very discipline it prescribes.
It will likely be the individual of their own volition of which seems to be reflected through the response made by The National Office of Buddhism in Thailand.

If Mayahana or any Buddhist tradition becomes "officially" clouded in such matters, including politics, it's imo time to drop those associations like a hot potato.

I don't think most anyone would like to see their religion become a political party.

A lot of us already know what that does.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I see your point.

It would be difficult to picture a Soto monk pursuing an issue in the same vein.

While I feel Mayahana is becoming progressive in aspects, I don't feel it will reach a level of concern just by the very discipline it prescribes.
It will likely be the individual of their own volition of which seems to be reflected through the response made by The National Office of Buddhism in Thailand.

If Mayahana or any Buddhist tradition becomes "officially" clouded in such matters, including politics, it's imo time to drop those associations like a hot potato.

I don't think most anyone would like to see their religion become a political party.

A lot of us already know what that does.

Yeah, I'd hate to see Buddhism, or any tradition within it, go through a "Dark Ages", like what happened in Europe. A sign of the times, maybe; I think it's time Buddhist monks everywhere had a good review of the Vinaya, as the Buddha prescribed that monks should not be politicians, or even politically active.

 

[von bek]

I too am concerned when monks become involved in politics. Some Zen Buddhist monks did participate in the Japanese war project. It is an unfortunate fact of history.

It takes more than wearing a robe to be a bhikkhu.

 

[DreadFish]

I think this problem arises, mainly, when the religion is connected with the state; then it inevitably gets involved in the politics. I dont think there is much need to be concerned about this happening in Mahayana where Mahayana is not connected to the state.

I think this kind of thing happened to Mahayana in Japan back when temples vied for political power and fought next to clan armies, as well as the zen monks being involved in Japanese nationalist war efforts (the Japanese have a very strong national identity), and I guess it's the same kind of thing that has happened in Tibet too. I think Tibetan Buddhism has been full of political motivations and corruption.

So, give to Caesar, I figure. Buddhism should probably be kept separate from state affairs. Politics will probably always have corruption.

EDIT: as far as the guy in the article, im not sure what I think. He seems to be passionate about the people, but I dont know enough to decide what I think about him.

 

[von bek]

I think this problem arises, mainly, when the religion is connected with the state; then it inevitably gets involved in the politics. I dont think there is much need to be concerned about this happening in Mahayana where Mahayana is not connected to the state.

I think this kind of thing happened to Mahayana in Japan back when temples vied for political power and fought next to clan armies, as well as the zen monks being involved in Japanese nationalist war efforts (the Japanese have a very strong national identity), and I guess it's the same kind of thing that has happened in Tibet too. I think Tibetan Buddhism has been full of political motivations and corruption.

So, give to Caesar, I figure. Buddhism should probably be kept separate from state affairs. Politics will probably always have corruption.

EDIT: as far as the guy in the article, im not sure what I think. He seems to be passionate about the people, but I dont know enough to decide what I think about him.

The Tokugawa shougun required all Japanese to be registered to a local Buddhist temple. This allowed for a system to control the movement of every person in Japan to an extent. Obviously information took longer to travel at this time. However, there existed lists for local authorities to know who all was supposed to be in their jurisdiction. Traveling outside your home village was an extremely restricted activity in Tokugawa Japan. Requiring everyone to be registered with their local Buddhist temple was a key component of this system of control.

After the Meiji Restoration in 1868, there was a bit of a backlash against some Buddhist temples in Japan because of the aforementioned temple system. (Obviously, as Buddhism is still a dominant religion in Japan, the hard feelings were neither deep nor long lasting.) Emperor Meiji established Shinto as preeminent in unifying the Japanese state. The Emperor is High Priest in Shinto.