A sixth feature can be gleaned from the photograph: Place village under military guard. Another feature would most probably also be to require villagers to wear yellow. Someone puts a red t-shirt in the wash and all of a sudden its Guantanamo Bay orange.
Why do some Americans on this site consistantly make insecure comparisons between Thailand and the US? It’s enducing paresthesia… and much more alarming symbolically than some offensive youtube incident.
“At the moral-ethical level he is very important in the **everyday lives** of people.”
“Anyway, my point is HMK is very, very, very important in a religious sort of way in the everyday lives of most Thais.”
During many years of doing research and working in a diverse range of “everyday” situations in Thailand, these ideas never occurred to me. Rather, I could not fail but notice that most Thais merely pay lip-service, stress the ceremonial and symbolic side, but take care that, in everyday life, their self interest prevails over all moral demands (same goes for Buddhism). Or why are the phraboromoratchowat habitually ignored, I wonder?
LKY up-date: It has been announced that his son had just increased his salary as PM of Singapore by 25% to 2 million US dollar per year. All this for governing a tiny city state!
“the recent slaughter of Malay Muslims by Thai Buddhist volunteers– and the given justifications for that.” (from M. Jerryson on the Thai/Siam thread)
This sad event reflects the dangerous deterioration of relationships between local Muslims (not merely the terrorists) and local Buddhists (not merely defense volunteers) that has been going on for quite some time.
MATES, What were to happen if some bloody nitwit from Surrey Hills posted a video on youtube of someone stabbing an AFL football? I’d break down and cry till the offending material was removed and the Sydney Swans club anthem was the only remaining thing on the internet. That and the Tooheys website!
Why do some Americans on this site consistantly make insecure comparisons between Thailand and the US? It’s enducing paresthesia… and much more alarming symbolically than some offensive youtube incident.
The piece by Streckfus that JFL points to is a good one.
However, if even 10 % of the rumours we heard about the other members of the royal family hold any waters, that will be reason enough for the ancien regime to keep this law.
David W: “I asked my question of who or what exactly the King is comparable to because it is clear, to my eyes, that he is NOT the equivalent of the Pope or the Dalai Lama.”
My point is only that *inside Thailand* he is.
“Nobody turns to the King for legally or theologically binding rulings on Thai buddhist practice or doctrinal positions to my knowledge.”
At the moral-ethical level he is very important in the **everyday lives** of people, which IMHO is probably more important than
arcane Vinaya interpretations.
For example, there are bedtime books to read children about HMK saturated with ethical lessons for children or little one-quote-a-day books that have a strong moral-ethical character, that you can buy at almost any 7-11.
“And Aung San Suu Kyi is not, again to my eyes, considered a religious icon or spiritual leader. She is a political leader who is seen as very pious and even perhaps religious accomplished. But again, no formal or informal religious authority is invested in her.”
I would argue that she is a spiritual leader and also has a status (vis-a-vis Burmese politics) among westerners much like HMK does in Thailand. She is really off-limits critically to any westerner writing on the topic of contemporary Burmese politics. For instance, someone might argue that her lack of flexibility in the approach she has advocated has led to a 20 year stalemate in Burmese economic and political development, but to do so would be to completely delegitimise your status as an intellectual in the west, you would reduce yourself to an audience of one, namely yourself, and some other wacko apologists for fascism.
“Which raises the question – just how exactly is the King a spiritual leader? Does he give teachings on Buddhist scripture?”
Actually yes, insofar as Jataka’s are Buddhist scriptures. (Will give references later)
“What other religious actors does he exert direct authority over, and how is this compared with the authority of the Supreme Patriarch or others? Which ceremonies does he officiate at?”
Take the evening news that millions watch everyday which stresses ceremonial correctness, the use of Ratcha-saab (Royal Language) and exact pronunciation, and often seems to have more ritual importance than strictly informational importance.
“People throw around the phrases “like a god” and “spiritual leader” all the time. But I’m wondering just what that means in specific terms – whether with regard to explicit ideologies or behavior on the ground.”
Walk into any house and you will find photographs of the Royal Family on the family altar. (Thai: To Buja) We have photographs of HMK from the 60th Anniversary Celebrations and also a big collage of photos of the Crown Prince’s young child. Some of these were gifts from neighbors, which might seem a little coercive at first, but actually could be interpreted as: “Here is a way that you can become one of us, we can share something
in common and be friends.” When my mother-in-law just lived in Maesai she only had a photograph of the very kind-hearted Chinese Bangkok gold shop owner who looked after her and her children for many years, on the family altar which she religiously put a little dish of sticky rice and some incense on every day.
Anyway, my point is HMK is very, very, very important in a religious sort of way in the everyday lives of most Thais.
IMHO being religous or sacred is not a binary, is or is not, sort of thing. In Asia they tend to show a religious type of reverence towards a much wider array of institutions or things than in the west. (Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblances is probably more appropriate here than notions of strict equivalence)
I also found it interesting that this topic has sparked so much discussion. As far as I can see, no one here is Thailand is debating the issue. Seems like the whole idea was just a filler article for an English Language newspaper, The Nation. I can’t detect any interest in the topic at all amongst the citizens of the country.
Historical orgins of words are interesting for scholars, but have little to do with how the words are currently perceived by the public at large. The word America may have originated from an obsure Italian map maker, but the current meaning of the word is obviously quite different.
Thais perceive the term Siam to be a foreign title imposed on them, rather that is actually true or not is not very important to the majority.
“Most people on the listserv were in agreement over condemning the coup. ” Really? Seems like there were many supporting the coup if memory serves me right, they seemed to have had the attitude anything, even a military dictatorship, was better then having Thaksin in charge.
1) Jon Fernquest’s comparison to 911 and Osama Bin Laden are fairly apt here. I was born and grew up in New York City and am often hurt by the frequent depictions of Osama Bin Laden and was offended when almost immediately afterwards people seemed to react with glee. However, I don’t think You Tube should ban the seemingly absurd videos and presentations that claim that the whole thing was a conspiracy by the US to murder its own people. Is that more or less offensive than picturing the King with feet over his head?
2) What would happen if You Tube posted a mocking video of Kim Jung-il? Then, North Korean newspapers raged about how this offended the people of North Korea and ignored cultural sensibilities. After all the Great Leader and his father made that country what it is today and had a role as large as that of the Thai King (leaving aside the interesting sufficiency comparison). Wouldn’t arguments made by Khanthong in The Nation apply equally to this case?
“any reasonable policies it might have had were designed to buy social peace at the cheapest possible price.” > Those were rather high-price policies, not at all cheap!
Andrew, the TLC listserv is relatively new. There were people who responded to the coup, as well as to the on-going conflict in the South. As a new listserv, it has been gaining members through the months. To criticize scholars for engaging in a debate concerning a name change instead of debating over the coup misses the point. Most people on the listserv were in agreement over condemning the coup. I think I was perhaps the only one who was dubious to condemning them outright. So the ‘lack of debate’ was not a lack of concern, but a lack of disagreement.
I would save your ire for much more pressing matters, such as the recent slaughter of Malay Muslims by Thai Buddhist volunteers– and the given justifications for that.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Offending the mainstream
nganadeeleg: “but TRT, Thaksin family & cronies were not the ones paying” > Exactly. 🙁
The fun part of governing is that you can spend the money of other people — the NSC and the Surayud government have discovered a similiar basic truth.
The regime’s royal ridicule
JFL: I intentionally put in “during my years” and “diverse” to preemt a remark such as yours.
Sufficiency design principles
…and the study pavilion completes the panopticon.
Sufficiency design principles
A sixth feature can be gleaned from the photograph: Place village under military guard. Another feature would most probably also be to require villagers to wear yellow. Someone puts a red t-shirt in the wash and all of a sudden its Guantanamo Bay orange.
Offending the mainstream
Srithanonchai: I agree, not cheap – but TRT, Thaksin family & cronies were not the ones paying.
The regime’s royal ridicule
Why do some Americans on this site consistantly make insecure comparisons between Thailand and the US? It’s enducing paresthesia… and much more alarming symbolically than some offensive youtube incident.
What are you talking about?
The regime’s royal ridicule
Srithanonchai:
Maybe it was just the crowd you hung out with?
The regime’s royal ridicule
MATES… bloody nitwit from Surrey Hills… AFL football…the Sydney Swans club anthem… Tooheys website!
Americans?
The regime’s royal ridicule
“At the moral-ethical level he is very important in the **everyday lives** of people.”
“Anyway, my point is HMK is very, very, very important in a religious sort of way in the everyday lives of most Thais.”
During many years of doing research and working in a diverse range of “everyday” situations in Thailand, these ideas never occurred to me. Rather, I could not fail but notice that most Thais merely pay lip-service, stress the ceremonial and symbolic side, but take care that, in everyday life, their self interest prevails over all moral demands (same goes for Buddhism). Or why are the phraboromoratchowat habitually ignored, I wonder?
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
LKY up-date: It has been announced that his son had just increased his salary as PM of Singapore by 25% to 2 million US dollar per year. All this for governing a tiny city state!
Offending the mainstream
“the recent slaughter of Malay Muslims by Thai Buddhist volunteers– and the given justifications for that.” (from M. Jerryson on the Thai/Siam thread)
This sad event reflects the dangerous deterioration of relationships between local Muslims (not merely the terrorists) and local Buddhists (not merely defense volunteers) that has been going on for quite some time.
The regime’s royal ridicule
MATES, What were to happen if some bloody nitwit from Surrey Hills posted a video on youtube of someone stabbing an AFL football? I’d break down and cry till the offending material was removed and the Sydney Swans club anthem was the only remaining thing on the internet. That and the Tooheys website!
Why do some Americans on this site consistantly make insecure comparisons between Thailand and the US? It’s enducing paresthesia… and much more alarming symbolically than some offensive youtube incident.
The regime’s royal ridicule
The piece by Streckfus that JFL points to is a good one.
However, if even 10 % of the rumours we heard about the other members of the royal family hold any waters, that will be reason enough for the ancien regime to keep this law.
The regime’s royal ridicule
David W: “I asked my question of who or what exactly the King is comparable to because it is clear, to my eyes, that he is NOT the equivalent of the Pope or the Dalai Lama.”
My point is only that *inside Thailand* he is.
“Nobody turns to the King for legally or theologically binding rulings on Thai buddhist practice or doctrinal positions to my knowledge.”
At the moral-ethical level he is very important in the **everyday lives** of people, which IMHO is probably more important than
arcane Vinaya interpretations.
For example, there are bedtime books to read children about HMK saturated with ethical lessons for children or little one-quote-a-day books that have a strong moral-ethical character, that you can buy at almost any 7-11.
“And Aung San Suu Kyi is not, again to my eyes, considered a religious icon or spiritual leader. She is a political leader who is seen as very pious and even perhaps religious accomplished. But again, no formal or informal religious authority is invested in her.”
I would argue that she is a spiritual leader and also has a status (vis-a-vis Burmese politics) among westerners much like HMK does in Thailand. She is really off-limits critically to any westerner writing on the topic of contemporary Burmese politics. For instance, someone might argue that her lack of flexibility in the approach she has advocated has led to a 20 year stalemate in Burmese economic and political development, but to do so would be to completely delegitimise your status as an intellectual in the west, you would reduce yourself to an audience of one, namely yourself, and some other wacko apologists for fascism.
“Which raises the question – just how exactly is the King a spiritual leader? Does he give teachings on Buddhist scripture?”
Actually yes, insofar as Jataka’s are Buddhist scriptures. (Will give references later)
“What other religious actors does he exert direct authority over, and how is this compared with the authority of the Supreme Patriarch or others? Which ceremonies does he officiate at?”
Take the evening news that millions watch everyday which stresses ceremonial correctness, the use of Ratcha-saab (Royal Language) and exact pronunciation, and often seems to have more ritual importance than strictly informational importance.
“People throw around the phrases “like a god” and “spiritual leader” all the time. But I’m wondering just what that means in specific terms – whether with regard to explicit ideologies or behavior on the ground.”
Walk into any house and you will find photographs of the Royal Family on the family altar. (Thai: To Buja) We have photographs of HMK from the 60th Anniversary Celebrations and also a big collage of photos of the Crown Prince’s young child. Some of these were gifts from neighbors, which might seem a little coercive at first, but actually could be interpreted as: “Here is a way that you can become one of us, we can share something
in common and be friends.” When my mother-in-law just lived in Maesai she only had a photograph of the very kind-hearted Chinese Bangkok gold shop owner who looked after her and her children for many years, on the family altar which she religiously put a little dish of sticky rice and some incense on every day.
Anyway, my point is HMK is very, very, very important in a religious sort of way in the everyday lives of most Thais.
IMHO being religous or sacred is not a binary, is or is not, sort of thing. In Asia they tend to show a religious type of reverence towards a much wider array of institutions or things than in the west. (Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblances is probably more appropriate here than notions of strict equivalence)
Thailand? Siam? Who cares?
I also found it interesting that this topic has sparked so much discussion. As far as I can see, no one here is Thailand is debating the issue. Seems like the whole idea was just a filler article for an English Language newspaper, The Nation. I can’t detect any interest in the topic at all amongst the citizens of the country.
Historical orgins of words are interesting for scholars, but have little to do with how the words are currently perceived by the public at large. The word America may have originated from an obsure Italian map maker, but the current meaning of the word is obviously quite different.
Thais perceive the term Siam to be a foreign title imposed on them, rather that is actually true or not is not very important to the majority.
“Most people on the listserv were in agreement over condemning the coup. ” Really? Seems like there were many supporting the coup if memory serves me right, they seemed to have had the attitude anything, even a military dictatorship, was better then having Thaksin in charge.
Of course, now the tone is beginning to change.
The regime’s royal ridicule
I think the seminal book on the spiritual authority and Thai kingship is World Conquerer, World Renouncer by Stanley Tambiah.
Also, another important book is Siamese State Ceremonies by
HG Quaritch Wales
The regime’s royal ridicule
1) Jon Fernquest’s comparison to 911 and Osama Bin Laden are fairly apt here. I was born and grew up in New York City and am often hurt by the frequent depictions of Osama Bin Laden and was offended when almost immediately afterwards people seemed to react with glee. However, I don’t think You Tube should ban the seemingly absurd videos and presentations that claim that the whole thing was a conspiracy by the US to murder its own people. Is that more or less offensive than picturing the King with feet over his head?
2) What would happen if You Tube posted a mocking video of Kim Jung-il? Then, North Korean newspapers raged about how this offended the people of North Korea and ignored cultural sensibilities. After all the Great Leader and his father made that country what it is today and had a role as large as that of the Thai King (leaving aside the interesting sufficiency comparison). Wouldn’t arguments made by Khanthong in The Nation apply equally to this case?
Offending the mainstream
“any reasonable policies it might have had were designed to buy social peace at the cheapest possible price.” > Those were rather high-price policies, not at all cheap!
Thailand? Siam? Who cares?
Andrew, the TLC listserv is relatively new. There were people who responded to the coup, as well as to the on-going conflict in the South. As a new listserv, it has been gaining members through the months. To criticize scholars for engaging in a debate concerning a name change instead of debating over the coup misses the point. Most people on the listserv were in agreement over condemning the coup. I think I was perhaps the only one who was dubious to condemning them outright. So the ‘lack of debate’ was not a lack of concern, but a lack of disagreement.
I would save your ire for much more pressing matters, such as the recent slaughter of Malay Muslims by Thai Buddhist volunteers– and the given justifications for that.
Offending the mainstream
…no readily measurable “product”…