Phra Phaisan Visalo and Modern Thai Buddhism
Phra Phaisan Visalo is one of the most important voices in Thai Buddhism today. Although he is not a meditation teacher, he still affects the ideas and possible changes of Thai Buddhism that international travelers could experience when visiting temples or going on retreat in Thailand. He is a reformist monk with many writings in both Thai and English. Some of his English articles are online at his website and his most important book in Thai is called The Future of Thai Buddhism. His most important writings on Thai Buddhist reform in English are titled Buddhism for the Next Century and Buddhism at a Crossroads. I will discuss here his ideas about reform, Thai Buddhism and modernity, as well as Phra Phaisans take on Thai Buddhist history and other reformers like himself including Buddhadasa Bhikkhu and P.A. Payutto.
Thai Buddhism and Reform
In order to understand Phra Phaisan Visalos ideas about Thai Buddhism today and his hopes for its future, a lesson in Thai Buddhist history is necessary. Basically beginning in the early 1900s the Thai sangha became centralized and standardized by the Thai government. Before this, as Phra Phaisan sees it, the sangha was more vibrant and dynamic, and certainly had more regional differences. Since these centralizing reforms until today, Phra Phaisan believes that the sangha has remained the same. Its system of education, its hierarchy and bureaucracy, administration were all modeled after the administration of the government which was influenced by colonial institutions, and there has been no reform since this time.
Therefore at the turn of the 20th century Phra Phaisan finds that the sangha is stagnating and hindering individual monks creativity. The only avenues for difference and reform are at the peripheries of the sangha and do not go further because of resistance at the center. For this reason, Phra ! Phaisan asserts that innovation of the system is only possible through individual monks, not a group or temple, or the sangha as a whole. Phra Phaisan favors a balance of responsibility within Thai Buddhism among the three aspects of government, sangha and lay community. When this happens the government and people supply monks with the necessities to maintain their practices and the sangha taught Buddhism and how to live ones life according to the dhamma.
Thai Buddhism lost this balance when these early reforms pulled the sangha and the state too closely together, and was out of touch with the lay communities. The government watching over the sangha was too strong and lay people had no chance or room to take care of the sangha. Therefore Phra Phaisan believes the role of the laity needs to be restored. Phra Phaisan also believes that Thai Buddhism is in need of reform because the sangha has failed as a moral force in society. Monks behavior is questioned by laypeople and the sangha has not set an example as crime rate and corruption in Thailand is on the rise. This is due to, Phra Phaisan argues, the centralization and reforms beginning in the early 1900s.
During the time of King Mongkut, leaders of the reform movement, Prince Wachirayan and King Mongkut, attempted to purify Buddhism and return to the original teachings of the Buddha. They rejected traditional Buddhism and anything to do with magic and superstition. But at the same time accepted Western approaches of empiricism and rationalism. These reforms also erased the goal of liberation from Buddhism. Nibbana as the highest achievement of Buddhist practice was overlooked during these reforms and centralization. The leaders of this movement placed the focus on practicing a code of morality, not meditation. This code of morality was introduced in schools through the governments Ministry of Education. Phra Phaisan believes that this produced an empty moralism and no liberation.
Phra Phaisan finds that traditional superstition might be bet! ter than modern and foreign superstition. He argues that this removal of traditional superstition is because Buddhism now lacks any sense of the sacred. Because nibbana and superstition were removed and Thai Buddhism was left with a rationalized moral code, there was no power of the sacred for people to connect with. Phra Phaisan finds that faith or fear of the sacred and a connection with or experience of inner peace through meditation are necessary to maintain ones morality. Because the traditional superstition has been displaced, lay Buddhists have introduced a less than sacred kind of superstition. So they look outside of Buddhism and go outside of the temples. This creates a degenerate form of superstition not based on morality. This is why traditional Buddhist superstition, Phra Phaisan, believes is good and necessary.
Another problem with the centralization of the sangha was the new hierarchy which held monks accountable to the state instead of their local communities. This created a lay community less interested in temples and taking care of monastics. Phra Phaisan finds that these results show the weaknessof King Monkgut and Prince Wachirayans reforms.
Modern Reforms
Phra Phaisan finds that the more modern reforms of famous scholar-monks Buddhadasa Bhikkhu and P.A. Payutto have done more to help Thai Buddhism. Phra Phaisan praises Buddhadasa Bhikkhu for being able to go beyond Prince Wachirayans rationalistic and scientific approach to Buddhism because Buddhadasa Bhikkhu recognized the need of the ultimate. He brought the goal of nibbana back to its place as the highest goal of Buddhism. He also tried to make his teachings accessible to ordinary people in ordinary daily life. He tried to replace superstition with nibbana in the present moment and bring the sacred closer to Thai Buddhists. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu also went beyond Prince Wachirayan by not defining Buddhism based on science but by giving a sense of the ultimate truth to his scientific Buddhism. Science conformed to Bu! ddhism i nstead of the other way around.
P.A. Payutto also tried to reintroduce nibbana into Thai Buddhism, and also its relevance for ordinary people in their lives today. P.A. Payutto urges people to attain the first level of enlightenment as stream-enterers are necessary in society today. Phra Phaisan argues that science and rationalism are not a problem for Buddhism until they come to define it, because this leads to rejecting Buddhist teachings that do not fit this other criteria. Phra Phaisan believes that Buddhism goes deeper and has access to truths that are inaccessible to science. Therefore Phra Phaisan asserts that for Thai Buddhism today nibbana and the sacred need to be brought back and integrated into the daily lives of Thai laity.
However these modern reformist monks, while popular with the Thai educated middle class, are not widely appreciated by the higher levels of the sangha hierarchy. Their writings have influenced regional individual monks and those on the periphery. Their works are not studied in monastic education but the curriculum designed by Prince Wachirayan is still widely used. These texts written eighty years ago, Phra Phaisan argues, should not be favored over modern writings.
Thai Buddhism and Modernity
Phra Phaisan writes that forms of the sacred such as amulets should be used skillfully in Buddhism and let Buddhist teachings guide how they are to be used. For people not interested in nibbana this can be helpful and temples that add a consumerist quality to their offerings are successful in attracting people to the temple. Therefore Phra Phaisan asserts that for Thai Buddhism today nibbana and the sacred need to be brought back and integrated into the daily lives of Thai laity. He wants Buddhism to adapt to modernity and use consumerism to bring people back to Buddhism. The prominence of consumerism in Thai society and Thai Buddhism show the weakness of the sangha. Phra Phaisan finds that many Thai Buddhist practices and beliefs are becoming more l! ike cons umerism and this is the latest force to mix with Buddhism adding to science and nationalism. Phra Phaisan therefore finds that Thai Buddhism is mixing with modernity in increasing and diverse ways.
He also finds the characteristic of individuality is now found in Buddhism as practices become more and more individualized. Thai laity now adapt the practices to what they believe is of benefit, and there is no interaction or intervention from the state, sangha or ones community, as previously this kept the practices more stable and firm. Now Phra Phaisan finds Buddhism is used for negative purposes to fill a specific desire and is not about concern for others or society, and not about spirituality. Therefore the eclecticism and pick-and-mix quality of modern religions is at work in Thai Buddhist society and Phra Phaisan would like the sangha to try and combat this. He finds the marketplace-consumer aspect of modern religiosity to be a problem as people do not have faith but would rather consume religion to satisfy their desire or for a taste of a religious experience.
Therefore Phra Phaisan argues that Thai Buddhism is returning to diversity again after the centralization reforms of the early 1900s. This could be a good sign that Buddhism is becoming independent of the state and is being controlled more by the will of the people. But this needs to be under the control of the sangha as Buddhist teachings are not being used for liberation, but more for self-delusion.
