Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:23:31.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BUDDHIST BUREAUCRACY AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN THAILAND

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2018

Tomas Larsson Open the ORCID record for Tomas Larsson [Opens in a new window]
Tomas Larsson*
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In accordance with Thai conceptions of Buddhist kingship, Thai rulers have felt obliged to devote considerable energies towards the promotion and protection of Buddhism. Over the past century (and more), state laws have been instituted and bureaucratic agencies established to regulate and implement such promotional and protective activities. This article outlines some broad trends and patterns in the bureaucratization of Buddhism in Thailand, and discusses their implications for religious freedom. It argues that although Buddhism has been extensively bureaucratized, the implications for religious freedom have been less severe than one might perhaps expect, owing not least to the fact that Buddhism is a monastic religion. However, recent developments—taking place in the wake of the 2014 military coup and the 2016 royal succession—suggest that the legal environment is changing in ways that may have negative implications for religious freedom in Thailand.

Keywords

Buddhismbureaucratizationreligious freedomThailand
Type
Article Symposium
Information
Journal of Law and Religion , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , August 2018 , pp. 197 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Winichakul, Thongchai, “Toppling Democracy,” Journal of Contemporary Asia 38, no. 1 (2008): 11–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Rick Noack, “Map: These Are the World's Least Religious Countries,” Washington Post, April 14, 2015.

3 Grzymala-Busse, Anna, “Weapons of the Meek: How Churches Influence Public Policy,” World Politics 68, no. 1 (2016): 1–36, at 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Grzymala-Busse, 3.

5 Kuru, Ahmet T., “Passive and Assertive Secularism: Historical Conditions, Ideological Struggles, and State Policies toward Religion,” World Politics 59, no. 4 (2007): 568–94, at 572CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Ishii, Yoneo, Sangha, State and Society: Thai Buddhism in History (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1986), 38Google Scholar.

7 Ishii, Sangha, State and Society, 46.

8 Gorski, Philip S., The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the State in Early Modern Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 165 (emphasis in original)Google Scholar.

9 Gorski, Philip S., “Calvinism and State Formation in Early Modern Europe,” in State/Culture: State Formation after the Cultural Turn, ed. Steinmetz, George (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999), 147–81, at 173, 174Google Scholar.

10 I borrow these categories from Evers, Hans-Dieter, “The Bureaucratization of Southeast Asia,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 29, no. 4 (1987): 666–85, at 667–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Gill, Anthony, The Political Origins of Religious Liberty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Gill, 12.

13 Vandergeest, Peter and Peluso, Nancy Lee, “Territorialization and State Power in Thailand,” Theory and Society 24, no. 3 (1995): 385–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Loos, Tamara, Subject Siam: Family, Law, and Colonial Modernity in Thailand (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006), 76Google Scholar.

15 Ishii, Sangha, State and Society, 74–77.

16 I use Sangha (upper case) to refer to the formal Buddhist hierarchy, and sangha (lower case) for the monkhood at large.

17 Jackson, Peter A., Buddhism, Legitimation, and Conflict: The Political Functions of Urban Thai Buddhism (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1989), 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar. It is an exaggeration because “Thai Buddhism” should not be reduced to and conflated with the Thai Sangha, which indeed has not had an independent existence apart from the Thai state.

18 Katewadee Kulabkaew, “In Defense of Buddhism: Thai Sangha's Social Movement in the Twenty-First Century” (PhD diss., Waseda University, 2013), 140–41.

19 Samnak ngoppraman [Bureau of the Budget], Ngoppraman raichai pracham pi ngoppraman pho so 2559 lem thi 11 [Budget expenditure for fiscal year 2016, volume 11], 20, accessed July 20, 2018, http://www.bb.go.th/topic-detail.php?id=6722&mid=545&catID=866 (in Thai).

20 Bureau of the Budget, 20.

21 “Chamnuan phiksu–samanen pracham pi 2557” [Number of monks and novices in 2014], accessed June 11, 2017, https://data.go.th/DatasetDetail.aspx?id=a6c4c012-f604-49c4-90da-8b7c94089024&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1 (in Thai).

22 Samnakngan khanakammakan kharatchakan phonlareuan [Office of the Civil Service Commission], Kamlangkhon phakrat nai fai phonlareuan 2558 [Manpower in the civil service 2015] (Nonthaburi: Office of the Civil Service Commission, 2016), 105, 110, accessed July 20, 2018, https://www.ocsc.go.th/sites/default/files/attachment/article/book-isbn-9786165481786-thai-gov-manpower-2558-p.pdf (in Thai).

23 The Department of Religious Affairs’ register of sponsors of such royally sponsored ceremonies can be found online. See http://sys.dra.go.th/dra_katin/. On kathin ceremonies, see Christine E. Gray, “Thailand: The Soteriological State in the 1970s” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 1986).

24 Tomas Larsson, “The Political Economy of State Patronage of Religion: Evidence from Thailand,” International Political Science Review, Online First, June 20, 2018, 11–12, https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512118770178.

25 Jackson, Buddhism, Legitimation, and Conflict, 13.

26 Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1991), 101Google Scholar.

27 Connors, Michael Kelly, “Ministering Culture: Hegemony and the Politics of Culture and Identity in Thailand,” Critical Asian Studies 37, no. 4 (2005): 523–51, at 524CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The religious bureaucracy is a key component of larger assemblage of state agencies whose primary function is to promote officially sanctioned forms of being Thai. Connors describes the role that the National Identity Board and similar state agencies have played in this endeavor, and notes the importance of religion (Buddhism) in the fashioning of Thai national identity, but he does not discuss the role of the religious bureaucracy as such.

28 Connors, 525.

29 See, for instance, Suksamran, Somboon, Buddhism and Politics in Thailand: A Study of Socio-Political Change and Political Activism of the Thai Sangha (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1982), 24–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jory, Patrick, “Thai and Western Buddhist Scholarship in the Age of Colonialism: King Chulalongkorn Redefines the Jatakas,” Journal of Asian Studies 61, no. 3 (2002): 891–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bowie, Katherine, “The Saint with Indra's Sword: Khruubaa Srivichai and Buddhist Millenarianism in Northern Thailand,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 56, no. 3 (2014): 681–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 See McDaniel, Justin Thomas, “Kings and Universities,” in Gathering Leaves and Lifting Words: Histories of Buddhist Monastic Education in Laos and Thailand (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2008), 92–116Google Scholar.

31 White, Erick, “The Cultural Politics of the Supernatural in Theravada Buddhist Thailand,” Anthropological Forum 13, no. 2 (2003): 205–12, at 208CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 White, 208. On Thailand's riotous religious cacophony, see Jackson, Peter A., “Royal Spirits, Chinese Gods, and Magic Monks: Thailand's Boom-Time Religions of Prosperity,” South East Asia Research 7, no. 3 (1999): 245–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kitiarsa, Pattana, “Buddha Phanit: Thailand's Prosperity Religion and Its Commodifying Tactics,” in Religious Commodifications in Asia: Marketing Gods, ed. Kitiarsa, Pattana (Abingdon: Routledge, 2007): 120–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McDaniel, Justin Thomas, The Lovelorn Ghost and the Magical Monk: Practicing Buddhism in Modern Thailand (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33 Julian Kusa, “Crisis Discourse, Response, and Structural Contradictions in Thai Buddhism, 1990–2003” (PhD diss., Australian National University, 2007), 224–25.

34 Slater, Dan and Kim, Diana, “Standoffish States: Nonliterate Leviathans in Southeast Asia,” in “Governing Southeast Asia,” special issue, TRaNS: Trans-Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia 3, no. 1 (2015): 25–44, at 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Scott, James C., Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

36 On the conceptualization of the Thai state as a Buddhist, Theravada “ritual purification state,” see Streckfuss, David, Truth on Trial in Thailand: Defamation, Treason, and Lèse-Majesté (London: Routledge, 2010), 58, 77–80Google Scholar. See generally Geertz, Clifford, “Centers, Kings, and Charisma: Reflections on the Symbolics of Power,” in Culture and Its Creators: Essays in Honor of Edward Shils, ed. Ben-David, Joseph and Nichols, Terry Clarke (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), 150–71Google Scholar; Bensel, Richard F., “Valor and Valkyries: Why the State Needs Valhalla,” Polity 40, no. 3 (2008): 386–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Eickelman, Dale F., “Mass Higher Education and the Religious Imagination in Contemporary Arab Societies,” American Ethnologist 19, no. 4 (1992): 643–55, at 643CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Kitiarsa, Pattana, “Beyond Syncretism: Hybridization of Popular Religion in Contemporary Thailand,” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 36, no. 3 (2005): 461–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 See Jackson, Buddhism, Legitimation, and Conflict; Swearer, Donald K., “Fundamentalistic Movements in Theravada Buddhism,” in Fundamentalisms Observed, ed. Marty, Martin E. and Appleby, R. Scott (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 628–690Google Scholar; Schober, Juliane, “The Theravāda Buddhist Engagement with Modernity in Southeast Asia: Wither the Social Paradigm of the Galactic Polity,” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 26, no. 2 (1995): 307–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Loveman, Mara, “The Modern State and the Primitive Accumulation of Symbolic Power,” American Journal of Sociology 110, no. 6 (2005): 1651–83, at 1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 See Winichakul, Thongchai, Siam Mapped: A History of the Geo-Body of a Nation (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1994), 97–112Google Scholar.

42 Bowie, “The Saint with Indra's Sword,” 683.

43 Keyes, Charles F., “Buddhism and National Integration in Thailand,” Journal of Asian Studies 30, no. 3 (1971): 551–67, at 557CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Keyes, 558.

45 Falk, Monica Lindberg, Making Fields of Merit: Buddhist Female Ascetics and Gendered Orders in Thailand (Copenhagen: NIAS Press, 2007), 237Google Scholar.

46 See Seeger, Martin, “The Bhikkhunī-Ordination Controversy in Thailand,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 29, no. 1 (2008): 155–83Google Scholar.

47 Lindberg Falk, Making Fields of Merit, 3–6.

48 Mae chi are not explicitly recognized in any Thai law. However, signaling the deep ambivalence with which these women are viewed by the Thai state, mae chi are considered religious persons for the purposes of voting, and as such denied the right to formally participate in electoral politics. See Larsson, Tomas, “Monkish Politics in Southeast Asia: Religious Disenfranchisement in Comparative and Theoretical Perspective,” Modern Asian Studies 49, no. 1 (2015): 40–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Larsson, Tomas, “Buddha or the Ballot: The Buddhist Exception to Universal Suffrage in Contemporary Asia,” in Buddhism and the Political Process, ed. Kawanami, Hiroko (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 78–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Lindberg Falk, Making Fields of Merit, 228–36.

50 Jackson, Buddhism, Legitimation, and Conflict, 178, 180.

51 See Marja-Leena Heikkilä-Horn, Santi Asoke Buddhism and Thai State Response (Åbo: Åbo Akademis Förlag, 1996).

52 On this point, see Reynolds, Frank E., “Dhamma in Dispute: The Interactions of Religion and Law in Thailand,” Law and Society Review 28, no. 3 (1994): 433–52, at 446–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 See Singsuriya, Pagorn, “Boonnoon's Critique of Thai Sangha,” Chulalongkorn Journal of Buddhist Studies 3, no. 2 (2004): 261–69Google Scholar.

54 See Kusa, “Crisis Discourse,” 43.

55 Important aspects of the logic behind such efforts are discussed in Larsson, Tomas, “Keeping Monks in Their Place?” Asian Journal of Law and Society 3, no. 1 (2016): 17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 Hongladarom, Soraj and Hongladarom, Krisadawan, “Cyber-Buddhism: Fundamentalism, the Internet and the Public Sphere in Thailand,” in Fundamentalism in the Modern World, vol. 2, Fundamentalism and Communication: Culture, Media and the Public Sphere, ed. Mårtensson, Ulrika et al. (London: I. B. Tauris, 2011), 216–36, at 226Google Scholar.

57 Mahatherasamakhom [Sangha Supreme Council], “Sarup kanprachum mahatherasamakhom khrang thi 27/2557 wan phareuhatsabodi thi 11 thanwakhom 2557” [Minutes of the 27/2014 meeting of the Sangha Supreme Council, Thursday, December 11, 2014], accessed June 12, 2017, http://mahathera.onab.go.th/index.php?url=matireport&id=144.

58 For a background on this long-standing controversy, see Scott, Rachelle M., Nirvana for Sale? Buddhism, Wealth, and the Dhammakaya Temple in Contemporary Thailand (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

59 Section 67 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (2017). Author's translation from Thai; emphasis added.

60 “Khamsang huana khanakammakan raksa khwam sangop haeng chat thi 49/2559 reuang matrakan kanupatham lae khumkhrong satsana tang tang nai prathet thai” [Order by the head of the National Council for Peace and Order No. 49/2016 on measures for the patronage and protection of different religions in Thailand], Ratchakitchanubeksa [Royal Gazette], August 22, 2016, http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2559/E/184/17.PDF.

61 Jeerapong Prasertponkrung and Praphasri Osathanon, “Uproar Over NRC Panel and Buddhist Reform,” Nation, February 25, 2015.

62 “NRC Axes Buddhism Panel,” Bangkok Post, March 6, 2015.

63 This highlights the geriatric character of the Sangha. For a fuller discussion of Sangha politics, see McCargo, Duncan, “The Changing Politics of Thailand's Buddhist Order,” Critical Asian Studies 44, no. 4 (2012): 627–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 Anapat Deechuay and Sakda Samerpop, “Prayut Refuses to Submit Nomination of Somdet Chuang as Supreme Patriarch,” Nation, July 12, 2016.

65 Mongkol Bangprapa, “NLA Passes Bill to Tweak Sangha Act,” Bangkok Post, December 20, 2016.