The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia

·期刊原文
The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia
Reviewed by Peter Skilling
The Journal of the American Oriental Society
Vol.117 No.3 (July-Sep 1997)
pp.579-580
COPYRIGHT 1997 American Oriental Society

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia is divided into three chapters.
The first, "The Popular Tradition: Inclusive Syncretism," describes
"ideal action"; a number of rituals, ceremonies, and festivals, such
as Kathina, the consecration of a Buddha image, Desana Mahajati, New
Year, Visakha Puja, and Loi Kratong; and rites of passage such as
ordination, weddings, and funeral rites. Since much of Swearer's
field-work over the years has been conducted in northern Thailand,
he is able to offer valuable descriptions of the contemporary
practice of Buddhism in that area. But since Northern Thai or Lanna
Buddhism is different from the other Buddhisms of the region, which
are described much more briefly, the chapter might have been more
felicitously organized as a presentation of Lanna Buddhism in
comparison with other Buddhisms. The Mon - who contributed
enormously to the cultures and Buddhisms of both the Burmese and the
Thai, and are still a living Buddhist community in both countries -
deserve more than the brief mentions they receive.(1)
The second chapter, "Buddhism as Civil Religion: Political
Legitimation and National Integration," looks at Buddhism in a
political context: both from an ideal and an historical perspective.
The most useful part comes at the end: the too brief overview of
"Modern Nationalism and Buddhism" (pp. 95-105). The rest of the
chapter sits awkwardly, with too much space given over to a
retelling of (mainly) Western accounts of the cosmic symbolism of
the stupa and kingship, from Mus to Heine-Geldern. One may search
traditional texts in vain for "galactic interpretations" (p. 82) and
"primordial oceans." The association of stupas with cosmic mountains
and with kingship is overstated. Dedicatory inscriptions reveal that
the earliest-known monumental Indian stupas and cave-temples were
communal projects, sponsored by monastic, kinship, and trade groups,
with, it seems, little participation of the ruling elite. Lesser
stupas simply enshrined the remains of dead monastics. The primary
acknowledged motive in the making of stupas has been, and is, to
preserve relics and to make merit, rather than to build cosmic
mountains or microcosms.(2) In Southeast Asia, every stupa is
specific, with its own legend and life, its own role in the local
sacred calendar and its own place on the local sacred map.
For the study of kingship in Southeast Asia we have access to a
considerable body of inscriptions, along with chronicles and records
such as the Royal Orders of Burma. These contemporary documents,
which provide a wealth of information about the polity of the day,
carry more weight and deserve more attention than the opinions of
our modern exegetes. (We may mention in passing that poor Asoka is
trotted out mechanically whenever kingship is discussed. There is no
denying his pervasive influence over the centuries, but is it not
time to consider the role of other rulers, such as Bimbisara,
Prasenajit, or Ajatasatru? We must also not forget that historical
rulers become quasi-legendary paradigms - the Chos rgyals in Tibet,
for example, or Anawratha and Bayinnaung in Burma, or "Phra Ruang"
in Siam - and exert their own influences on their successors.)
One feels that some space should have been devoted (whether here or
in chapter one) to the communal Theravadin monastery as a social
force, as the link between the monastic and lay worlds, rather than
to the elite "temple-mountains" of Angkor or Pagan. How and by whom
is the temple built, administered, and maintained? What are its
functions - religious, social, educational, economic? What are the
roles of the abbot and the community, and what is their relationship
to the central administration?
The third chapter, "Modernization: The Dynamic of Tradition and
Change," discusses the changing roles of monks and laity; meditation
movements; women and Buddhism; and Buddhism in the West. This, much
the strongest part of the book, studies developments in Thai
Buddhism (with some mention of other countries), and draws on the
author's field-work and his familiarity with Thai sources. It is
current, dealing with the Dhammakaya and Santi Asok movements and
the Phra Yantra affair; with the contributions of outstanding
monastics like Buddhadasa and Chao Khun Dhammapit and of several
lesser-known monks; and with dubious monastics such as Kitthiwuttho.
(The attempt to relate the preeminently urban Santi Asok movement to
the forest tradition seems, however, neither valid nor useful.) The
role of contemporary lay activists, such as Ariyaratne and Sulak
Sivaraksa, is also discussed.
The text is well annotated, and complemented by photographs of
events and places. It has a comprehensive bibliography, and includes
an "Audio Visual Bibliography." Unfortunately the book is marred by
a number of misspellings of Pali words: puja for paja (repeatedly),
svabhava for svabhava (p. 12), patimokkha for patimokkha (p. 22),
Dhammapada for Dhammapada and Dhammapadatthakatha for
Dhammapadatthakatha (p. 15), and so on. The translation of yakkhas
as "demons" (pp. 16, 17) is inaccurate, since yakkhas are
nature-spirits, both benevolent and maleficent. There are also a
number of misprints in the English (e.g., "dias" for "dais," p. 26;
"chonthic" for "chthonic," p. 77; "complimentary" for
"complementary," p. 91).
More unfortunate are the number of inaccuracies. The "eye of heaven"
(p. 12, an unsuitable translation of dibbacakkhu, but not original
to the author) is not "the ability to see all worlds, far and near,"
but rather the ability to witness the rebirth of beings in happy or
unhappy destinies, according to the workings of kamma. On p. 67,
read (presumably) "Parakramabahu" for "Dutthagamini." On p. 72, the
statement that the "Mahaparinibbana Sutta refers to the stupa of a .
. . dhammika dhammaraja" (based apparently on Dutt) is incorrect:
the sutta refers to a raja cakkavatti (Dighanikaya, PTS ed.,
141-42). On p. 102 King Rama V's regnal dates are given as
1865-1902, on pp. 131-32 as 1886-1910: they should be 1868-1910 (he
was born in 1853). The glossary is unreliable, since it is vexed by
too many mistakes, not only in orthography (e.g., Asalaha for Asalha
Paja, p. 210: also Asalaha, p. 35; Kapilavattu for Kapilavatthu, p.
212; Moggalana for MogaBana, p. 213; Adhidhamma for Abhidhamma and
Theragatha for Theragatha, p. 215: also Therigatha for Therigatha,
p. 52) but of substance. A Cakkavattin is not a "Buddhist monarch"
(p. 210): the term is pre-Buddhist and pan-Indian. The Divyavadana
(p. 211) is not "a Mahayana Buddhist text" - it is Mulasarvastivadin
- and it does not contain "a legendary account of the life of the
Buddha," but a collection of avadanas. The Khuddaka Nikaya is not
the "Collection of Gradual Sayings" (pp. 211, 214, 215), but the
"Collection of Miscellaneous Texts." The Petaloka (p. 214, and also
p. 20) is not a hell (niraya), but one of the unhappy realms
(duggati).
The Buddhist World of Southeast Asia is described as an "updated,
expanded, and revised version" of Swearer's Buddhism and Society in
Southeast Asia (1980). The author notes that it is a product of his
observation and study of Theravada Buddhism since 1957.
Unfortunately, the book seems a rather hasty production, and is
uneven in quality: we feel that the author, with his experience and
knowledge, could have done better. Although the book contains much
that is useful and original - particularly in chapters 1 and 3 - it
must be used with caution. It does not really live up to its title
(although some of the limitations - that it "highlights Buddhism in
Thailand" and focuses on the Theravada - are set out by the author
in his preface). There is little on Laos or Cambodia, and not enough
on Burma. If space can be given to "Buddhism and the West," the
modern Theravadin movements in Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, and
Indonesia deserve at least a mention. There is a need for a reliable
book on the Buddhism of Southeast Asia, and we hope that these
remarks will contribute to an improved third edition.
PETER SKILLING PALI TEXT SOCIETY, BANGKOK
1 See, e.g., p. 189, n. 51. At pp. x and 2 the Mon should certainly
be mentioned. On p. 97 it is implied that the Shan and Mon are
non-Buddhist.
2 The following studies are useful for the study of the stupa (JIABS
= Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies):
Yael Bentor, "The Redactions of the Adbhutadharmaparyaya from
Gilgit," JIABS 11.2 (1988): 21-52; "Sutra-style Consecration in
Tibet and its Importance for Understanding the Historical
Development of the Indo-Tibetan Consecration Ritual for Stupas and
Images," in Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the
International Association for Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989, vol. 1,
ed. Ihara Shoren and Yamaguchi Zuiho (Naritasan Shinshoji, 1992),
1-12; "Tibetan Relic Classifications," in Tibetan Studies:
Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for
Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992, ed. Per Kvaerne, vol. I (Oslo,
1994), 16-30.
Daniel Boucher, "The Pratityasamutpadagatha and Its Role in the
Medieval Cult of the Relics," JIABS 14.1 (1991): 1-27; "Sutra on the
Merit of Bathing the Buddha," in Buddhism in Practice, ed. Donald S.
Lopez, Jr. (Princeton, 1995), 59-68.
Gerard Fussmann, "Symbolisms of the Buddhist Stupa," JIABS 9.2
(1986): 37-53.
Gregory Schopen, "An Old Inscription from Amaravati and the Cult of
the Local Monastic Dead in Indian Buddhist Monasteries," JIABS 14.2
(1991): 281-329.
For further references see, e.g., the bibliography in Bentor,
"Tibetan Relic Classifications," 1994.
While these articles exploit mainly non-Theravadin and non-Southeast
Asian sources, neither are the modern exegetes such as Mus
Theravadin, and their works involve a massive conflation of sources
(e.g., Hindu with Buddhist) - of ziggurats, mountains, eggs,
mandalas, and stupas - that tends to ignore historical and regional
variety.