Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker have sent through a paper they presented at the Siam Society in December 2008. It deals with the same general set of magical themes as the article by Charles Keyes discussed in this recent New Mandala post. The text of the Pasuk and Baker presentation, plus a fascinating series of powerpoint slides, is available here. Their concluding paragraph deserves special attention:
In the end, the survival of these beliefs has a profoundly anti-democratic aspect. Generals who command a nation’s armed forces, and businessmen with assets in billions of dollars, are reluctant to accept that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people rather than the influences of the stars and spirits over which they can claim some special control.
In the context of my earlier question about the enduring role of spirits, stars and other rituals in the life of the Thai palace such issues are worthy of some further reflection. Thanks to Pasuk and Chris for sharing their illuminating analysis.
14 responses so far ↓
1 Sidh S // May 1, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Thanks for the link to the paper and presentation, Nich.
From my observation, Thais are much more Animists, believers in the supernatural, than Buddhists. We know that is a deep rooted cultural phenomenon pervasive at every level of society from the commoner to the elite. So is it a cultural specific Thai barrier to democracy? Do Thais have to reject their animistic beliefs, stop wearing the magical amulets in order to become a more democratic citizen? Are they totally incompatible?
I don’t know the answers – but as you said, it is worth a lot of deep reflections.
2 John Francis Lee // May 1, 2009 at 7:42 pm
‘First, announcing astrological predictions of coming events is a way of preparing people to accept them, and not to oppose them…’
And hasn’t that role been overtaken now by the pollsters in the West? The more things change…
3 david w // May 2, 2009 at 12:20 am
Dear Sidh,
What exactly does it mean to be a “Buddhist” rather than an “Animist”? Moreover, how does one segregate out the animist and Buddhist dimensions of the institution or any individual member of it?
The simple fact of the matter is that ever since the beginning of the historical record in India, there is irrefutable evidence that Buddhists – lay and monastic, elites and the masses – believed in, propitiated and sought the assistance of various supramundane agents and forces (local spirits, more august gods, sacrally infused statues and natural objects like mountains, etc) in the pursuit of both worldly benefits in this life and a better rebirth in future lives. And these actions found ample sanction and legitimation in scriptures, monastic norms and traditional practices. Is it any surprise then, that similar ideas and practices would be found across the Buddhist world, in Thailand just like elsewhere?
In this sense, there is nothing fundamentally unusual about the activities Pasuk and Baker describe. None the less, one could profitably carry out, although few ever have, an investigation of the rise and fall of the popularity and influence of particular beliefs, practices, and actors within this enduring set of concerns, with an eye to understanding how larger historical and political economic changes have shaped these changes.
The notion that there has ever existed a ‘pure’ Buddhism is a dream. And that sort of imagining simply betrays the influence of modernist Western (and Protestant) presumptions that ‘religion’ is sharply distinct from ‘economics’, ‘politics’ and the material world. These presumptions have been projected backwards repeatedly and produced considerable confusion about the historical character and heritage of Buddhism (and other religions) ever since the 19th century rise in the ’science of religion’.
For a nice, brief book that explores this and many other such fallacies with regards to Buddhism, I would suggest you look at “Unmasking Buddhism” by Bernard Faure. He presents quite concisely a diversity of ways in which contemporary academic scholarship on Buddhism undermines a range of common popular misperceptions of the religion.
PS – Do the majority of American Christians need to give up their belief in angels to become good democratic citizens?
4 maverick263 // May 2, 2009 at 1:09 am
dear Nick,
many thx for supplying this inspiring paper by Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker. i’d like to comment on their concluding statement that you quote as:
“… are reluctant to accept that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people rather than the influences of the stars and spirits over which they can claim some special control.”
0) before i begin, here’s a link to christopher kevill’s “modern vedic astrology blog” on apr 17, 2009, “thailand in crisis”, delineating stellar mind climate for the land of smiles.
http://modernvedicastrology.blogspot.com/2009/04/thailand-in-crisis.html
*…
1) i think i’d state that i do/work with astrology. i do not “believe” in astrology as neither i do “believe” in quantum physics or systems theory. i prefer astrological cosmology as a more holistic approach to “being” than what i call mere “base reductionist fundamentalism”.
*…
2) imho, astrology does not necessarily imply “fortune-telling”…, though it was & it is & it will be used that way: the very same as an ordinary calendar. as the authors point out “real” “fortune-telling” – “mostly” – require some “mediumistic” skills. that is, one can find a good astrologer who’s a bad fortune-teller & vice versa.
*…
3) these latter “mediumistic” or “psychic” skills can be trained; if there’s a potential. the authors speak about “saiyasat” – &, imho, they give it an excellent introductory overview. as they show, “saiyasat” is complex. here, i’d just like to comment that… these “psychic” skills had been called “siddhis” in many “eastern” traditions: so-called “super natural powers”. the authors say:
“Another old Indian belief was that mastery over the self – through ascetic practice
and self control – delivers mastery over nature—the ability to perform supernatural acts. According to some traditions, the Buddha practiced these methods to achieve
enlightenment, but outlawed them as general practice among his followers on grounds they were too dangerous. Yet some carried on this tradition, often in semi-secret sects.”
not only the buddha, other “spiritual” teachers too, condemned the “training of siddhis” as a trap… on the path for full liberation. let me put it this way: people are attracted to the extra-ordinary, the miraculous, power. in deep spirituality, life itself is extra-ordinary, being human among fellow humans is miraculous — & so-called “power” is a necessity for humiliation.
nonetheless…, agreed…, many had been the ones, many are the ones who train attainment of “supernatural powers”. maybe in a couple of years or decades humanity will recognize these potential powers as normal & natural aspects of mind na.
*…
4) having said all that, i’d like to comment on conclusion by pasuk and baker, as you quote it:
“In the end, the survival of these beliefs has a profoundly anti-democratic aspect. Generals who command a nation’s armed forces, and businessmen with assets in billions of dollars, are reluctant to accept that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people rather than the influences of the stars and spirits over which they can claim some special control.”
4a) no, to “the survival of these beliefs has a profoundly anti-democratic aspect.”
4a1) to call sth a “belief” in western mind hemisphere implies its inferiority.
4a2) so, _if_ you begin a sentence with calling something a “belief”… — i wonder where your judgement will lead you to? oooh, what a surprise… in this case to a “profoundly anti-democratic aspect”
4b) imho, the authors try — & fail — to mix different operating systems [no, not in strict technical terms] of mind & culture. i might speak of different categories. i might evoke “cultural diversity” but even this term has become shallow
*…
5) authors go on, saying “… are reluctant to accept that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people rather than the influences of the stars and spirits over which they can claim some special control.”
5a) well, this just shows that pasuk and baker made an inspiring examination, a “scientific” one, yes, but in the end they just proof their very own conceptual limitations. personally i call that “ignorance of cultural superiority complex” — but you don’t have to agree with me. that is, so-called “superior cultures [: "ruling" by economic & military force]” are handicapped by ignorance of the underlying assumptions of their specific “weltanschauung” na. ok?
5b) i just would like to point out saying “that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people” for authors seem to imply a contradicition to “the influences of the stars and spirits”. in astrological terms i’d say… — i’m sorry, you got causation wrong, it’s the other way. so-called “sentiments of the people” are indeed influenced — by the stars & the spirits. just go to your local hospital or police station & inquire some statistical data on “full moon” events. don’t believe me — just do it.
5c) a critical point is saying (people in power using astrology & magic) “claim some special control”.
5c1) well, first of all… it’s a rich & vital tradition that is deeply rooted in a holistic experience of being. it seems this very peculiar kind of holistic experience is common to so-called indigenous people all around the globe. there’s more, i stop.
5c2) again, i’m sorry, imho, authors got it wrong. nobody who’s advanced in “siddhi”-training, nobody who’s monk-like into purification of mind, nobody who’s offering herself/himself for “mediumistic encounters”, nobody who’s a decent fortune teller, nobody who’s skilled in astrology — would “claim some special control”. again, actually, it’s the other way round: one has to give up indulgence in motions of mind/heart na.
5c2I) well, of course, the so-called “black magic” guys do
5c3) as said before… _as it is_ a “vital” tradition, soil for heart/mind/culture, one should _not_ be surprised that “worldly leaders” now & then try to “gain” by accessing “specialized knowledge”. or “competitive intelligence”
5c3I) but, imho, it’s “funny” to see… that authors indeed fall into assumption that “access to specialized knowledge” implies an advantage in exercising some “special control”. ooh… it sounds like us military “C2I” [Command, Control, Intelligence].
5d) greek culture once termed a word: “hubris”
*…
6) pls allow me to _not_ argue “for” astrology. in 2007 richard tarnass published “cosmos & psyche”. that’s about 20 years work of research, doubt, validation. 500 pages, bibliography. i don’t want to call it a “masterpiece” in “astrological sciences” — but i guess it’s ok to call it a “milestone” in mapping emerging paradigm shift.
*…
pls excuse my limited english. thx 4 ur time & attention na.
5 Sansai04 // May 2, 2009 at 3:05 am
Since this is the second New Mandala posting on the subject I think readers may want to read Keyes more extended article on this topic available here:
http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps06_080.pdf
Keyes frames this class of phenomena in terms of legitimation.
Bob
6 nganadeeleg // May 2, 2009 at 12:45 pm
I’m interested if anyone can point to instances where Abhisit has turned to the supernatural?
I could imagine him watching the US TV series ‘Supernatural’, but cannot personally recall him publicly seeking out the mystics – that could be a factor in his eventual downfall!
(unless of course he has his own private super powerful mystic for guidance and even influence!)
7 jonfernquest // May 2, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Who is the politician most likely not to use astrology?
Abhisit.
Who is the politician that Isan folk seem not to be too impressed with nowadays?
Abhisit.
Who are the biggest devotees of astrology and magic?
The rural masses, the swing vote.
As for this quote:
“In the end, the survival of these beliefs has a profoundly anti-democratic aspect. Generals who command a nation’s armed forces, and businessmen with assets in billions of dollars, are reluctant to accept that politics are moved by the sentiments of the people rather than the influences of the stars and spirits over which they can claim some special control.”
Visualize 3000 extra-judicial executions.
Visualize a bunch of up-country taxi drivers nodding their head that this is effective policy.
Visualize that the rural masses are at once pleased with this policy and demand no accountability on the part of the government.
Multiply this over hundreds of completely untransparent rent-seeking siphonings off of government funds.
Throw in a leader who fashions transforming himself after a democratic election into some very undemocratic demagogue (cf. Mussolini or Lee Kuan Yew, Marcos, Park Chung Hee….etc etc).
The bottom line is what the “people” want is only part of the “democratic” problem, perhaps not even the biggest part.
8 maverick263 // May 3, 2009 at 5:07 am
@ nganadeeleg, c.6:
i like & enjoy ur blog, lots of thx 4 it.
u ask: “I’m interested if anyone can point to instances where Abhisit has turned to the supernatural?”
i doubt it’d fit his “mind set”; that’s traits & habits & training. a lot of people call it “education”, these days
i guess he’d “encountered” so-called “supernatural” the moments he experienced his very fragile life a human being when he was physically attacked in pattaya & in bkk.
& after that… “mind set” integrates experience into predominant patterns. people once called that “karma”
9 Frank G Anderson // May 3, 2009 at 9:57 am
Tht two writers presented this paper at the Siam Society, but if I recall correctly, unlike what the paper indicates, Thaksin did not complete that 99 wat tour. In fact, did he not complete very little of it?
As to ‘the people,’ they are victims of homage fraud on the part of the entire political process. While everything is for the people, nation, monarchy and religion, that is, during campaign promises, after election it’s all for number one.
The combination of what’s wrong politically in the country is indeed scary.
10 Ralph Kramden // May 3, 2009 at 4:29 pm
I recall that the Democrats changed the hair colour of their Mae Thorani statue outside their HQ on the advice of a mor doo – to red I think it was, The advice was that this would impact the election result. There was a picture in the Nation or the Post.
I also recall that the war on drugs was especially popular amongst Bangkok’s middle class. The idea that it was rural people and taxi drivers who were the main supporters of this policy is belied by the opinion polls of the time.
Any evidence for the claim that “the biggest devotees of astrology and magic” are “the rural masses”? I guess it depends on what “biggest” might mean. But the amulet markets and resort to big name and expensive astrologers and ceremonies appears to be the preserve of celebrities, the new rich and the middle class. And quite a few palace ceremonies have a lot to do with astrology and related beliefs.
11 Srithanonchai // May 3, 2009 at 5:03 pm
David #3 Sidh S.
On the issue of Animism and Buddhism, here is a small anecdote.
About two decades ago, the group pf students of which I was a member, was taught by Niels Mulder. He had come to Thailand in the 60ies with the aim of explaining the behavior of Thai people by reference to their Buddhist beliefs. After all, it was assumed that the Thais were Buddhists, and that religion had a substantial influence on shaping their behavior. The longer he studied the Buddhist scriptures, the bigger the gap between them and the Thais’ observable behavior became. In his following search for what really informed much of Thai behavior patterns, he came to the conclusion that Thais are animists at heart, and that Buddhism only covered a very thin upper layer on their syncretistic belief system.
Obviously, much more could be said about this issue, and there is a good measure of literature on it. Still, one might want to read what Mulder had to say.
Mulder, Niels (1996) Inside Thai Society: Interpretations of Everyday Life. Amsterdam and Kuala Lumpur: The Pepin Press.
12 Sidh S // May 4, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Thanks David w #3 and Srithanonchai #11 (and John Francis Lee #2 for a very insightful observation!)
Maybe AjarnChris’ and AjarnPasuk’s conclusion: “In the end, the survival of these beliefs has a profoundly anti-democratic aspect…” may be based on the assumption that modern democracy and its practices are, on the whole, rationale and scientific. Superstitions and religion has no role to play in this ‘reality’ (a view rigorously promoted by the atheist, Richard Dawkins).
I find such views quite limiting when framed against Thai society’s/democracy’s ‘reality’ where such practices pervade everyday spaces, from the most traditional shrines to cyberspaces, where ‘celebrity-astrologers’ have a role to play for both popular soapstars and politicians alike. (Besides, how rationale is modern, capitalist economics that got us into this global gloom)
David w’s ending question “Do the majority of American Christians need to give up their belief in angels to become good democratic citizens?” also got me probing more into the American case – and I ask: Will a Muslim American be elected president? Or is it a matter of time and it should be ‘When’? (as a few years ago few would have thought a black president was even possible, not considering a black candidate with a Muslim middle name!)
Maybe this is merely the way democracy expresses itself in reality, with common people relating to some traits of their leaders – and someone like PMAbhisit would lack appeal for many voters compared to PMThaksin (Thailand’s one and only ‘celebrity prime minister’). Interestingly the opposite seems to hold true for ‘rationale’, ‘modern’ foreign media who seem to increasingly find PMAbhisit more trustworthy than PMThaksin… Or is it too hard for his Thai-based astrologers to calculate the opportune time for interviews with BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera without his precise geographical whereabouts?
13 Golek // May 5, 2009 at 4:58 am
I just noticed the additions to Thailand’s Political Prisoners’s commentary section. They’ve got a surprising piece on Rama IX, the survival of the Chakri dynasty and 6 oct. 1976 in their commentary\lese-majeste section: Phoo Phaakphoom, “The Last Thai King,” Southeast Asia Chronicle, No. 60, 1978, p. 6: se-asia-chronicle_1978
To what extent is the info in the article confirmed by other sources? Anyone has “”the present king and the coup d’Etat”?
14 Dang // May 6, 2009 at 7:49 pm
To simplify ..Thai people have to really be united and fight for Democracy not Demockcrazy.Thai army are greedy,self obsession,and corrupted.These kind of general army people should be wiped out.
They really retard the country
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.