Making thai buddhism work religious legitimacy and agency 1

MAKING THAI BUDDHISM “WORK”: RELIGIOUS LEGITIMACY AND AGENCY QUEK RI AN (BA, Hons) A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2015 Acknowledgements I will like to express my gratitude to the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) for granting me permission to conduct this research. Many thanks to the NRCT staff who processed my application with such efficiency. Without the kindness and friendship of so many of my research informants, this research would not have been possible. I believe that a few of them may eventually read this thesis. I humbly seek their forgiveness if I have written anything they may find disagreeable. Throughout this research, I had the good fortune of being supervised by a brilliant scholar, ethnographer and teacher. Without Professor Vineeta Sinha’s encouragement and guidance, I would not have come this far in articulating a research problem and experience the rigour of theorizing. I hope I did not let her down in my amateurish attempts at theorizing and writing ethnography. I am also indebted to Prof Pattana, whom Professor Vineeta introduced me to. It was Prof Pattana who referred me to the monastery and Aachaan Paisal. His battle with terminal illness was a living proof that peaceful dying is both desirable and possible. His life’s work continues to touch the hearts of his students and those who he has so unconditionally helped. In writing this thesis, thoughts, ideas, plans, drafts, time and even people have all been subjected to the three characteristics of impermanence, dissatisfaction and non-self. It was with great sadness when I received news of Luang Por Khamkhian’s passing away. Luang Por’s teachings and kindness is timeless and I am confident his legacy will continue to inspire the nurturing of kalyanamitta around the world. May practitioners who follow his teachings continue to strive hard in their dhamma journey and come to embody Luang Por’s indomitable spirit in dhamma practice. The body can be suffering but the mind can be free from suffering. I also want to express my deepest respect and gratitude to Phra Aachaan Pasial Visalo for his encouragement, kindness and guidance. I have learnt so much from a wonderful teacher in such a short time. I will never forget the time I spent at Pu-loong and Aachaan’s patience in responding to my complaints and seemingly endless questioning. There are so many teachers and friends at the monastery I stayed in whom I have learnt much from. I am thankful for all their mentoring and friendship. My family has been supportive of my academic endeavours (quite frankly, indulgence). I owe it to them for being there all the time. I hope they too can find peace of mind in their daily lives and one day come to experience what I did in the monastery. There are too many people I want to thank. While I will only mention a few names in this acknowledgement, there are certainly many more whom I am indebted to for their friendship, guidance, kindness, and support in our conversations, classes, meals, gatherings among so many other precious moments and memories. The one key lesson I learnt from my Masters programme is that all academic knowledge coproduction and co-construction truly stand on the shoulders of giants, and these giants are not just the canons and scholarly community. It includes all my colleagues, students, friends, teachers, and family. Without them, I would not have been able to complete this thesis. ~ May all beings be well and happy, with peaceful minds. ~ i Table of Contents Declaration Page Acknowledgements . i Table of Contents . ii Summary v List of Figures . vi Note on Transliteration and Translation vii Chapter 1. Religious Legitimacy and Legitimation in Thai Buddhism Understanding Thai Buddhism . Research Problem . Research Significance and Scope . Religious Legitimacy and Meditation Movements 15 Thesis Structure 23 Chapter 2. Methodological Considerations: Knowing How to Know . 25 Research Messiness and Reflexivity 29 Deciding on Ethnography . 31 Ethnography: Theory Through Methodology 33 The Field Site . 36 Experiencing Fieldwork Through a Reflexive Self 43 Generating Data 45 Key Informants . 49 Emic and Etic: “Going Native” 50 Making Sense of the Data Generated . 56 ii Chapter 3. A History of Thai Theravada Buddhism: Reforms and Transformations 58 History of Buddhism . 58 A very Short History of Thai Theravada Buddhism . 60 Enter Theravada Buddhism 62 General Taksin 62 Rama I 63 King Mongkut 64 Sangha Acts 65 Burmese Meditation Influence . 66 Meditation Movements in Thailand . 68 Resilience of Thai Popular Religion 71 Conclusion . 72 Chapter 4. The Practice of Meditation 74 Learning the Practice . 78 Embodying Mindfulness 82 Body Pedagogics, Religious Habitus, and “Meditators’ Habitus” 89 Wrapping Up: Technologies and Techne of the Self? . 92 Chapter 5. A Community of Practitioners: Reproducing Faith 96 A Community of Practitioners . 97 Watching Yourself and Being Watched . 100 Phra Farangs and Faith in the Teachings . 103 Learning from Nature . 109 Moving Home 111 Conclusion 113 Chapter 6. Religious Agency: Meditation Practice as Tool of Empowerment . 115 Going Against the Flow: Luang Por Teean’s Story . 118 Challenging Scriptural Authority . 122 Monks, Rituals and Merit Making . 127 Thai Buddhism as Religion and Spirituality 132 Strategies of Action: Religious Agency and Religion as a Tool Kit 140 Power, Social Structure and Human Agency . 144 iii Chapter 7. Concluding Thoughts: Religious Legitimation, Diversity and Change . 151 In Lieu of a Conclusion: The Struggles Continue 156 REFERENCES . 159 iv Summary Religious legitimation is an important process that validates the authority of religious institutions, groups or individuals to impose a preferred model for practicing, organizing, and interpreting teachings and beliefs. This is especially so for a Thai Buddhism perceived to be in a state of “crisis” and lacking the religious authority to provide moral and spiritual guidance in times of political and social turmoil. This thesis problematizes the process of religious legitimation within Thai Buddhism. Using an ethnographic field study of Buddhist meditation practitioners who follow Luang Por Teean’s teachings, this thesis explores the challenges to the religious legitimacy and authority of the traditional religious elites and institutions. The concept of “religious work” is developed to examine how practitioners use their bodies and other resources to formulate alternative religious expressions, interpretations and practices. The persistence of diversity in religious practices and expressions within Thai Buddhism makes it difficult for traditional religious elites to impose a uniform model without a response from other practitioners. This thesis argues that religious legitimation is a “workin-progress” which opens up possibilities for democratizing Thai Buddhism, in part through the weakening of a monastic institution. Practitioners can now validate their own experiences, interpretations, organization and attainment without the necessity of such validation from the traditional clergy. This has implications for understanding the dynamics in social relations of power between the state, religious institutions and practitioners. It also paves the way for continuing conversations about religious relevance, transformations and pluralism. v LIST OF FIGURES Figure Framework for understanding Buddhism according to my informants . 137 vi Note on Transliteration and Translation The transliteration of the many vowel sounds of the Thai and Pali language into Romanised characters follows that used by Peter A. Jackson (1989) in his work on Thai Buddhism. The transliteration system used in this study is simplified to present as accurate a phonetic rendering of both Thai and Pali terms. The diacritical marks of common pali terms has been removed for ease of phonetic pronunciation. vii Chapter Religious Legitimacy and Legitimation in Thai Buddhism In the past, uniform Buddhism was possible because of state and central Sangha control. [ .] [Today,] Buddhism is becoming independent of the state and the Sangha hierarchy, returning again to the hands of the people (Phra1 Aachaan Paisal Visalo 1999:10, emphasis mine). These are exciting times for Thai Buddhism as for Thai politics and society in general. Buddhism remains an important institution in Thailand alongside the monarchy and is intertwined with notions of Thai culture and identity. It continues to shape decisions and attitudes towards politics, economics and many other aspects of social life at both the individual and societal levels. In turn, Thai Buddhism is affected by wider socio-political conditions and transformations. The recent military coup2 has provided both hope and fear for Thais. There is a fear of falling back into dictatorial tyranny that will restrict individual freedom and impede economic progress. Parts of the population hope that the current military leadership can effectively “clean-house” and introduce reforms in preparation for a return to democratic rule. Among these hoped-for and some planned-for reforms, there are calls for Sangha reforms against the backdrop of long-standing discontentment with the questionable moral conduct of members of the clergy, including clear violations of the monastic code3. The Thai Sangha have been historically tasked as moral custodians of Thai society. Of late, high profile scandals involving Thai Monks are addressed with a Prefix / Title “Phra” which simply means monk or the noble one, and usually keep their lay first name with their Buddhist Pali name becoming the last name. The 22nd May 2014 military coup led by General Prayuth Chan-ocha, commander of the Royal Thai Army, is the 12th successful coup (in addition to other attempted coups) since the end of absolute monarchy in 1932. Journalists report and claim widespread sentiment and desire to replace the existing Sangha Bill which is still based on the last Sangha Act in 1962. Commentators wish to see more gender equality, less corruption, more financial accountability in monasteries’ administration among other issues. See Ekachai (2014a); Buddha Space (2013); Horn (1999); Khaikeaw (2000) among others. “national religion” follow? Institutionalising a “national religion” without considering this diversity will only further distance Thai Buddhists from their religion which has already been perceived to be lacking in social, moral and spiritual strength and relevance. What could be worse than simply distancing Thai Buddhists from an institutionalised national religion will be to produce the unintended consequence of resistance that takes on a violent nature. A Thai Buddhism that is institutionalised as a national religion will also be seen by observers as an attempt to further marginalize the non-Buddhist minority in Thailand, who have long struggled for recognition and rights. To avoid these potential, unwanted and unnecessary problems, the Thai Sangha and State authorities may find it useful to embrace the diversity within Thai Buddhism—answer the calls to reform Thai Buddhism by reflecting on the allegations of moral corruption and irrelevance, and allow more participation from an increasingly empowered lay populace in directing these reforms. Doing this for Thai Buddhism may then pave the way for a discussion and practice of religious pluralism in Thai society. 158 References Abend, Gabriel. 2008. “The Meaning of ‘Theory’.” Sociological Theory 26(2):173-199. Aldridge, Alan. 2013. Religion in the Contemporary World: a Sociological Introduction, Third Edition. Cambridge: Polity Press. Ammerman, Nancy T. 2007. “Introduction: Observing Religious Modern Lives.” Pp. 3-18 in Everyday Religion: Observing Modern Religious Lives, edited by Nancy T Ammerman. New York: Oxford University Press. Atkinson, Paul. 2013. “Ethnography and Craft Knowledge.” Qualitative Sociological Review 9(2):56-63. Baker, Chris and Pasuk Phongpaichit. 2009. A History of Thailand, Second Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press. Becker, Howard S. and Blanche Geer. 1957. “Participant Observation and Interviewing: A Comparison.” Human Organization 16(3):28-32. Bellah, Robert N. 1964. “Religious Evolution.” American Sociological Review 29(3):258-374. Berg, Marlene J. 2008. “Experiential Knowledge.” Pp. 322-323 in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, edited by Lisa M. Given. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday. 159 Berger, Peter L. 1974. “Some Second Thoughts on Substantive versus Functional Definitions of Religion.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 13(2):125-133. Berger, Peter L. [1967] 1990. The sacred canopy: elements of a sociological theory of religion. New York: Anchor Books. Berger, Peter L. 2012. “Further Thoughts on Religion and Modernity.” Society 49(4):313-316. Berlinerblau, Jacques. 2001. “Max Weber’s Useful Ambiguities and the Problem of Defining “Popular Religion”.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 69(3):605-626. Beyer, Peter. 2010. “‘Fundamentalism’ and the Pluralization of Value Orientations.” Pp. 37-50 in Religion in the 21st Century: Challenges and Transformations, edited by Lisbet Christoffersen, Hans Raun Iversen, Hanne Petersen and Margit Warburg. Surrey, England: Ashgate. Bhikku Ariyesako. 1998. The Bhikkus’ Rules A Guide for Laypeople: The Theravadin Buddhist Monk’s Rules. Australia: Wave Publications. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. “The Scholastic Point of View.” Cultural Anthropology 5(4):380-391. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1992. The Logic of Practice, translated by Richard Nice. Standford, CA: Standford University Press. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2003. “Participant Objectivation.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 9:281–294. 160 Bourdieu, Pierre and Löic Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bourricaud, François. 1987. “Legitimacy and Legitimization.” Current Sociology 35(2):57-67. Bruce, Steve. 2002. God is dead: Secularization in the West. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. Brunt, Lodewijk. 1999. “Thinking about Ethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 28(5):500-509. Buddha Space. 2013. “Thai Buddhism in Crisis.” Buddha Space: Readings, Reflections and Reviews. August 7, 2013. (http://buddhaspace.blogspot.sg/2013/08/thai-buddhism-incrisis.html). Burgess, Robert G. 2005. “Approaches to Field Research.” Pp. 13-32 in Fieldwork: Vol 1, Origins and Definitions of Fieldwork, edited by Christopher Pole. London: Sage Publications. Casanova, José. 2001. “Secularization.” Pp. 13786-13791 in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, edited by Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes. New York: Elsevier. Casanova, José. 2006. “Rethinking Secularization: A Global Comparative Perspective.” The Hedgehog Review 8(1-2):7-22. Channelnewsasia. 2014. “Bad monks beware - Thailand launches behaviour Hotline.” Channelnewsasia, June 18. Retrieved July (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/bad-monks-bewarethailand/1174820.html). 161 1, 2014 Charmaz, Kathy. 2008. “Reconstructing Grounded Theory.” Pp. 461-479 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods, edited by Pertti Alasuutari & Leonard Bickman & Julia Brannen. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Chuang Tzu. 2007. The Book of Chuang Tzu, translated by Martin Palmer and Elizabeth Breuilly. New York: Penguin. Coffey, Amanda. 1999. The Ethnographic Self: Fieldwork and the Representation of Identity. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Darlington, Susan M. 1998. “The Ordination of a Tree: The Buddhist Ecology Movement in Thailand.” Ethnology 37(1):1-15. Darlington, Susan M. 2012. The Ordination of a Tree: the Thai Buddhist Environmental Movement. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Day, Suzanne. 2012. “A Reflexive Lens: Exploring Dilemmas of Qualitative Methodology through the Concept of Reflexivity.” Qualitative Sociology Review 8(1):60-85. Denzin, Norman K. [1970] 2009. The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction. Devine, Joe and Séverine Deneulin. 2011. “Negotiating religion in everyday life: A critical exploration of the relationship between religion, choices and behaviour.” Culture and Religion 12(1):59-76. Edgell, Penny. 2012. “A Cultural Sociology of Religion: New Directions.” Annual Review of Sociology 38:247-265. 162 Ekachai, Sanitsuda. 2014a. “Cracking the Religious Wall of Prejudice.” Bangkok Post, June 4. Retrieved July 1, 2014 (http://bangkokpost.com/print/413466/). Ekachai, Sanitsuda. 2014b. “Ousting One Monk Won’t Save the Clergy.” Bangkok Post, August 20. Retrieved August 26, 2014. (http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/427672/). Eisenstadt, S. N. 2000. “Multiple Modernities.” Daedalus 129(1):1-29. Eliade, Mircea. 1959. The Sacred and the Profane: the nature of religion, translated by Willard R. Trask. New York: Harcourt, Brace. Ellingson, Laura L. 2008. “Embodied Knowledge.” Pp. 245-246 in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, edited by Lisa M. Given. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. Engelsrud, Gunn. 2005. “The Lived Body as Experience and Perspective: Methodological Challenges.” Qualitative Research 5(3):267-284. Flanagan, Kieran and Peter C. Jupp, eds. 2007. A Sociology of Spirituality. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate. Flick, U. 1992. “Triangulation revisited: strategy of validation or alternative?” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 22(2):175-197. Featherstone, Mike. [1991] 2007. Consumer Culture and Postmodernism, second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. 163 Foucault, Michel. 1988. “Technologies of the Self.” Pp. 16-49 in Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault, edited by Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman and Patrick H. Hutton. Amherst, USA: The University of Massachusetts Press. Geertz, Clifford. [1966] 2006. “Clifford Geertz: ‘Religion as a Cultural System’.” Pp. 207-228. In Theories of Religion: A Reader, edited by Seth D. Kunin with Jonathan Miles-Watson. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press. Gomrbich, Richard F. [1988] 2006. Theravada Buddhism: A Social History from Ancient Benares to modern Colombo, Second Edition. London and New York: Routledge. Green, Lelia R. 2003. “Attempting to ground ethnographic theory and practice.” Australian Journal of Communication 30(2):133-145. Gubrium, Jaber F. [1975] 1997. Living and Dying at Murray Manor. Charlotteville: University Press of Virginia. Hammersley, Martyn. 2006. “Ethnography: problems and prospects.” Ethnography and Education 1(1):3-14. Hammersley, Martyn and Paul Atkinson. [1983] 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd Edition. London: Routledge. Hayward, C. 2000. De-facing Power. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 164 Hayward, C. and Steven Lukes. 2008. “Nobody to Shoot? Power, Structure, and Agency: A Dialogue.” Journal of Power 1(1): 5-20. Heelas, Paul. 1996. The New Age movement: the celebration of the self and the sacralization of modernity. Cambridge, US: Blackwell. Heelas, Paul., Linda Woodhead., with Benjamin Seel, Bronislaw Szerszynski, and Karin Tusting. 2005. The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Heilman, Samuel. 2009. “The ethnography behind Defenders of the Faith.” Pp. 197-212 in Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, edited by Anthony Puddephatt, William Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht. London and New York: Routledge. Herbrechtsmeier, William. 1993. “Buddhism and the Definition of Religion: One More Time.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 32(1):1-18. High, Mette. 2013. “Cosmologies of Freedom and Buddhist Self-transformation in the Mongolian Gold Rush.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 19(4):753770. Horn, Robert. 1999. “Controversial temple exposes crisis in Thai Buddhism.” Associated Press, July 24. (Retrieved from FACTIVA on January 26, 2014.) Jackson, Peter A. 1989. Buddhism, Legitimation, and Conflict: The Political Functions of Urban Thai Buddhism. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS). Johnson, Cathryn, Timothy J. Dowd and Cecilia L. Ridgeway. 2006. “Legitimacy as a Social Process.” Annual Review of Sociology 32:53-78. 165 Jordt, Ingrid. 2006. “Defining a True Buddhist: Meditation and Knowledge Formation in Burma.” Ethnology 45(3):193-207. Jordt, Ingrid. 2007. Burma’s Mass Lay Meditation Movement: Buddhism and the Cultural Construction of Power. Athens: Ohio University Press. Keyes, Charles. 1989. “Buddhist Politics and Their Revolutionary Origins in Thailand.” International Political Science Review 10(2):121-142. Khaikaew, Thaksina. 2000. “Thai Buddhism faces crisis after monks caught in scandals.” Associated Press, October 27. (Retrieved from FACTIVA on January 26, 2014.) Kitiarsa, Pattana. 2005. “Beyond Syncretism: Hybridization of Popular Religion in Contemporary Thailand.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 36(3):461-487. Kitiarsa, Pattana. (ed.) 2008. Religious Commodifications in Asia: Marketing Gods. Londong and New York: Routledge. Kitiarsa, Pattana. 2014. The “Bare Life” of Thai Migrant Workmen in Singapore. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books. Laidlaw, James. 2002. “For An Anthropology of Ethics and Freedom.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 8(2):311-332. Lambek, Michael. (ed.) 2010. Ordinary Ethics: Anthropology, Language, and Action. New York: Fordham University Press. Leming, Laura M. 2007. “Sociological Explorations: What is Religious Agency?” The Sociological Quaterly 48:73-92. 166 Luang Por Teean. 2009. Normality, compiled and translated by Venerable Tone Jinavasmso. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Noland Thuss. Luckmann, Thomas. 1967. The Invisible Religion: the problem of religion in modern society. New York: Macmillian. Lukes, Steven. 2005. Power: A Radical View, second edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Mackenzie, Rory. 2007. New Buddhist movements in Thailand: towards an understanding of Wat Phra Dhammakāya and Santi Asoke. London and New York: Routledge. Martin, David. 2005. On secularization: Towards a Revised General Theory. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Mauss, Marcel. 1973. “Techniques of the body.” Economy and Society 2(1):70-88. Maxwell, Joseph A. 1992. “Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research.” Harvard Educational Review 62(3):279-300. McGuire, Meredith B. 2007. “Embodied Practices: Negotiation and Resistance.” Pp. 187-200 in Everyday Religion: Observing Modern Religious Lives, edited by Nancy T Ammerman. New York: Oxford University Press. McGuire, Meredith B. 2008. Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life. New York: Oxford University Press. Means, Richard L. 1970. “Methodology for the Sociology of Religion: An Historical and Theoretical Overview.” Sociological Analysis 31(4):180-196. 167 Mellor, Philip A., and Chris Shilling. 2010. “Body pedagogics and the religious habitus: A new direction for the sociological study of religion.” Religion 40(1):27-38. Nabhan-Warren, Kristy. 2011. “Embodied Research and Writing: A Case for Phenomenologically Oriented Religious Studies Ethnographies.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 79(2):378-407. Newell, Catherine S. 2008. “Monks, Meditation and Missing Links: Continuity, “Orthodoxy” and the vijjā dhammakāya in Thai Buddhism.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of the Study of Religions, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. Newell, Catherine S. 2008. “Monks, Meditation and Missing Links: Continuity, “Orthodoxy” and the vijjā dhammakāya in Thai Buddhism.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of the Study of Religions, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. Newell, Catherine. 2011. “Two Meditation Traditions from Contemporary Thailand: A Summary Overview.” Khian Thai: International Journal of Thai Studies 4:81-110. Ortner. Sherry B. 2005. “Subjectivity and Cultural Critique.” Anthropological Theory, 5(1):3152. Ortner, Sherry B. 2001. “SPECIFYING AGENCY: The Comaroffs and Their Critics, Interventions.” International Journal of Postcolonial Studies 3(1):76-84. Ottenburg, Simon. 1990. “Thirty Years of Fieldnotes: Changing Relationship to the text.” Pp. 139-160 in Fieldnotes: The Making of Anthropology, edited by Roger Sanjek. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. 168 Paisal Visalo, Phra. 1999. “Buddhism for the Next Century: Toward Renewing a Moral Thai Society,” pp. 235-252 in Socially Engaged Buddhism for the New Millennium: Essays in Honour of the Ven. Phra Dhammapitaka on his 60th Birthday Anniversary. Bangkok: The Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation. Pals, Daniel L. 2006. Eight Theories of Religion, Second Edition. New York: Oxford University Press. Parker, Cristián. 2006. “‘Magico-popular Religion’ in Contemporary Society: Towards a PostWestern Sociology of Religion,” pp. 60-74 in Theorizing Religion: Classical and Contemporary Debates, edited by James A. Beckford and John Wallis. Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Parnwell, Michael and Martin Seeger. 2008. “The Relocalization of Buddhism in Thailand.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 15(1):79-176. Pew Research Centre. 2012. “Global Religious Landscape, Table: Religious Composition by Country.” Retrieved October 11, 2014 (http://www.pewforum.org/files/2012/12/globalReligion-tables.pdf). Prapod Assavavirulhakarn. 2010. The Ascendency of Theravada Buddhism in Southeast Asia. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Silkworm Books. Puddephatt, Anthony., William Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht. (eds.) 2009. Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field. London and New York: Routledge. Pyysiäinen, Ilkka. 2003. “Buddhism, Religion and the Concept of “God”.” Numen. 50(2):147171. 169 Richardson, Laurel. 2000. “Evaluating Ethnography.” Qualitative Inquiry 6(2):253-255. Richardson, Laurel. 2009. “Writing theory in(to) Last Writes.” Pp. 307-317 in Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, edited by Anthony Puddephatt, William Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht. London and New York: Routledge. Roof, Wade Clarke. 1999. Spiritual Marketplace: Baby Boomers and the Remaking of American Religion. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press. Sanders, Clinton R. 2009. “Colorful writing: conducting and living with a tattoo ethnography.” Pp. 63-76 in Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, edited by Anthony Puddephatt, William Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht. London and New York: Routledge. Sharf, Robert H. 1995. “Buddhist Modernism and the Rhetoric of Meditative Experience.” Numen 42(3):228-283. Scheurich, James Joseph. 1995. “A postmodernist critique of research interviewing.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 8(3):239-252. Schutz, Alfred. 1967. Collected Papers. Vol. 1: The Problem of Social Reality. The Hague: Nijhoff. Shaffir, William. 1999. “Doing Ethnography: Reflections on Finding Your Way.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 28(6):676-686. Shaw, Sarah. 2006. Buddhist Meditation: An Anthology of Texts from the Pāli Canon. London and New York: Routledge. 170 Sinha, Vineeta. 2011. Religion and Commodification: “Merchandizing” Diasporic Hinduism. New York: Routledge. Smart, Ninian. 2006. “‘The Nature of a Religion’.” Pp. 154-162 in Theories of Religion: A Reader, editd by Seth D. Kunin. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Smith, Christian. 2008. “Future Directions in the Sociology of Religion.” Social Forces 86(4):1561-1589. Spickard, James V., J. Shawn Landres, and Meredith B. McGuire. Eds. 2002. Personal Knowledge and Beyond: Reshaping the Ethnography of Religion. New York: New York University Press. Spradley, James P. 1979. The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Southwold, Martin. 1978. “Buddhism and the Definition of Religion.” Man 13(3):362-379. Srichampa, Sophana. 2014. “Thai Amulets: Symbol of the Practice of Multi-faiths and Cultures,” pp. 49-64 in Contemporary Socio-Cultural and Political Perspectives in Thailand, edited by Pranee Liamputtong. London: Springer. Stark, Rodney and Roger Finke. 2000. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press. Stoller, Paul. 1997. Sensuous Scholarship. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Swidler, Ann. 1986. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.” American Sociological Review. 51(2):273-286. 171 Tambiah, Stanley J. 1976. World conqueror and world renouncer: a study of Buddhism and polity in Thailand against a historical background. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press. Tambiah, Stanley J. 1984. The Buddhist saints of the forest and the cult of amulets: a study in charisma, hagiography, sectarianism, and millennial Buddhism. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press. Turner, Bryan S. 2010. Secularization. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Tiyavanich, Kamala. 1997. Forest Recollections: Wandering Monks in Twentieth-Century Thailand. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Tourism Authority of Thailand. N.d. “About Thailand: Religion.” Retrieved October 11, 2014 (http://www.tourismthailand.org/Thailand/religion). Tylor, James. 2008. Buddhism and Postmodern Imaginings in Thailand: The Religiosity of Urban Space. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Wacquant, Löic. 2004. Body & Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. New York: Oxford University Press. Wacquant, Löic. 2009. “Habitus as topic and tool: reflections on becoming a prizefighter.” Pp. 137-151 in Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, edited by Anthony Puddephatt, William Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht. London and New York: Routledge. Weber, Max. 1958. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, translated, edited, and with an introduction by H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press. 172 Weber, M. [1978] 2013. Economy and Society, translated and edited by G. Roth & C. Wittich Berkeley: University of California Press. Weigert, Andrew J. 1974. “Functional, Substantive, or Political? A Comment on Berger's "Second Thoughts on Defining Religion".” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 13(4):483-486. Willis, Paul E. [1977] 2011. Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids get Working Class Jobs. Franham, England: Ashgate. Whyte, William Foote. [1943] 1993. Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum, fourth edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wilson, B. 1982. Religion in Sociological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wolcott, Harry F. 1999. Ethnography: a way of seeing. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Yinger, J. Milton. 1970. The Scientific Study of Religion. New York: Macmillan. Zimmerman, Michael E. 1990. Heidgger’s Confrontation with Modernity: Technology, Politics, and Art. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. 173 [...]... meditation to do work on their bodies, behaviour, speech, thoughts, and so on, they also do work on Thai Buddhism, challenging the traditional religious elites’ authority to interpret and prescribe Buddhist teachings and practices Practitioners make Thai Buddhism work again in infusing meaning and purpose to their lives Religious legitimacy in Thai Buddhism is then a contested work- in-progress”... religion relevant and practical This approach is also rooted in the conviction and argument that while practitioners may share similar doctrinal teachings and to an 14 extent, share a common set of “tools” and “resources” offered by Thai Buddhism1 3, there is diversity in the ways they use and interpret them RELIGIOUS LEGITIMACY AND MEDITATION MOVEMENTS Weber ( [19 78] 2 013 ) theorizes legitimacy as the... only the traditional religious elites Such “politics of religious legitimacy is not only enacted between leaders (religious elites, specifically members of the Thai Sangha in the case of Thai Buddhism) of religious organizations and traditions within Thai Buddhism but also involves laity asserting a variety of forms of religious authority of their own The challenge to religious legitimacy is understood... colonised during the 18 th and 19 th centuries on the basis of Thais and Thai society being superstitious and thus backwards A state-sponsored model of Thai Theravada Buddhism as a form of institutionalised religion receives patronage from the government and monarchy—complete with support in the form of financial and legal resources—to promote a rational, intellectual-oriented form of Thai Buddhism A centralised... movements, groups and practices enacting alternatives to state-sanctioned orthodox Thai Theravada Buddhism Different types of “Popular” Buddhism appeal to different bases of legitimacy and have different emphases Spirit-worship and other magical practices do not pose as much as threat to the religious authority and legitimacy of the orthodox Thai Theravada Buddhism The latter appeals to traditional and legal-rational... limit possibilities for Thai Buddhists to formulate and practice versions of Thai Buddhism This is especially so if these versions are deemed unacceptable or deviating too much from Thai Theravada Buddhism i.e challenging the legitimacy and authority of those traditional religious elites Traditional religious elites of the state-sponsored variant of Thai Buddhism have access to and also use experiential... Tripitaka18 after reforms which emphasises intellectual and canonical principles Thai Buddhism in crisis is at risk of losing relevance in times of rapid economic and social changes Thai society needs Thai Buddhism to possess the social and spiritual strength needed to provide guidance for individuals’ moral and spiritual health Possibilities are thus open for the reappraisal and restructuring of Thai Buddhism. .. demonstrate the complexity and dynamism of intra -religious diversity in Thai society This process involves searching for, establishing and sustaining religious legitimacy which results in tensions and sometimes conflict between sub-traditions and groups within Thai Buddhism But it is also these tensions that make it possible for a democratization of religious expressions; making it possible for the... reality and order In short, I seek to demonstrate how shared meanings of religious teachings are (re)appraised and deployed to serve practitioners Religious- based values shape and guide decisions, attitudes and behaviour of followers (Devine and Deneulin 2 011 ) Societal norms and practices are also shaped by religious- based values when religion is deeply intertwined with culture, national identity and state... Buddhist teachings) and to regulate or discipline the religious and social conduct of both lay and monastic practitioners Mainstream and state-sponsored Thai Theravada Buddhism emphasizes hierarchy and the rationalized aspects of Buddhist scriptural study as the “correct” way to practice Buddhism An emphasis on scriptures allow the state to centralize the religious elites and standardize practices . vii Chapter 1. Religious Legitimacy and Legitimation in Thai Buddhism 1 Understanding Thai Buddhism 2 Research Problem 6 Research Significance and Scope 7 Religious Legitimacy and Meditation. 97 Watching Yourself and Being Watched 10 0 Phra Farangs and Faith in the Teachings 10 3 Learning from Nature 10 9 Moving Home 11 1 Conclusion 11 3 Chapter 6. Religious Agency: Meditation Practice. Empowerment 11 5 Going Against the Flow: Luang Por Teean’s Story 11 8 Challenging Scriptural Authority 12 2 Monks, Rituals and Merit Making 12 7 Thai Buddhism as Religion and Spirituality 13 2 Strategies