Buddhist Monks Education and Society
Published by James Chen Ball under on 21:45
Page 2/2 - Buddhist Monks Education and Society
Meanwhile, inside the structure of the State education system, the higher the students go, the more they have to move into the urban areas. Some middle-class people in the up country may have partial means to send their children to study in the State system, but this still is not sufficient to support them completely; so when their children progress to higher levels of study and are to enter the market towns and major cities, they are often put in the care of the urban temple as dependents of the monks. This makes the temple a dwelling, a boarding house, for students from the countryside enrolled in the State system. This condition has even more evidently turned temples in the middle of cities into communities for people from the countryside; while at the same time, the temples have, in another way, become places offering support to the State education system.
Part of the custom of ordaining and studying which still remains in principle, if incompletely, is ordaining for the three-month rainy season (khao phansa); but this custom has been, to a large degree, disturbed by the State education system. Because most young people do not have the opportunity to ordain when they reach the proper age, they must wait until they graduate, or postpone this even further due to work, a career, or a government post, for example. At any rate, this custom still is of great benefit to Thai society. Most importantly:
a) Young men in the cities-given the surrounding conditions and the lifestyle there-are estranged from the customs of their own society. Ordination is a tool for pulling them back to be complete Thai people, not strangers to culture and custom.
b) For the young men living in the countryside, it can be of especially great benefit. In the eyes of this writer, I see the training and daily life in the temple, even during this temporary ordination period of three months, as real education and of greater benefit than their schooling during the early ages of primary school (prathom) grades 1-4, because it is education which brings one's life to bear on one's studies and it is studying based on real life within the surrounding conditions, culture and customs, including the relationship with the people who belong to one's own community. Ordination, which, we say, makes one ripe or mature (suk), still holds true for ordination in the countryside, because it makes those monks enter into adulthood, prepares them for joining or for becoming a complete member of a community. Besides gaining knowledge of the traditions and customs of the community, during their time in the Sangha, monks attain knowledge they can put to good use or use to serve the needs of their own community. Aside from this, many rural youngsters graduate from the fourth grade (prathom 4) and go off to live in the midst of the rice fields, almost completely forgetting their courses, even reading and writing Thai. When they enter the monkhood they can reconsider, make use of thai knowledge, and revive it again. Especially during a time when Thai educators are complaining that education in this country has been treading the wrong path for a long time and modern education makes students alienated from their own communities, culture and customs, the value of ordination according to custom, as I have mentioned so far, is very clear.
Anyhow, it is most unfortunate that the three-month ordination continues to fade even in the countryside--due to the state of the economy, for example—which makes the stay in the monkhood become shorter: one month, half-a-month. or even seven days. Daily training deteriorates. Many places have monks residing idly for a matter of days, while others lack leadership, such as lacking monks with enough seniority to become abbot, housing monks who have been in the monkhood only one to two years (phansa), continuing to maintain the temples according to the previously mentioned causes and conditions. The benefits of this custom are, therefore, in decline.
4. While monks and novices from the countryside currently use the "path of mobility" for attaining the benefits of education, taking some worldly courses and some Buddhist studies, in the end, most of them end up leaving the Order-this is the ordinary state of affairs; while at the same time, the Sangha, or the monks in administrative positions, are all caught up in trying to control or contain this situation, partially out of anxiety and confusion, and partly out of confidence in their own power, which can unmistakably be called busily engaging in a fight to the finish. In the meantime, a new trend has arisen: A group of young, modern people—some with high education and a lot of worldly experience-have become bored with the world or have come to see the value of Buddhism (dhamma-vinaya). They have been willing to leave their homes and follow out their intention to ordain for life (thawon). While at the same time, it has become clear that the Sangha was not prepared to receive this group of people, especially in terms of their education. Most of these people cannot find much meaning in the existing ecclesiastical education and have a wide circle of relations with groups of students in institutions of higher learning for laymen, which also have groups studying about Buddhism, and these groups exist beyond the confines of the Sangha system itself. It is true that the ordination of people of this calibre is something that should bring about good results, but if the educational system cannot meet their needs, then this may be the cause of bad results. If the Sangha has not made arrangements to accommodate and assimilate this group, then it is foreseeable that this new trend may become a strong force which is currently called challenging the whole educational system and administration of the Sangha-all of which would happen within a short period of time.
5. A short time after education had separated from the temple, other aspects of the life of the laity gradually moved away as well. Yet in the rural communities, some people still depend on the temple for education, and life is still more closely tied to the temple in accordance with tradition and custom than it is in the cities. Furthermore, after older generations pass away, if the later generations who hold responsibility in the government and modern society are no longer familiar with the temple and monks and come to have any relationship with them, it is like meeting strangers from different groups; they will not truly meet each other on common terms, nor will they understand each other's problems; in fact, they are likely to misunderstand each other very easily. All of this is due to the distance between the temples, the State, and urban society, which breeds an undesirable attitude, for example:
Most people in city and urban society are not familiar with the temple and the Sangha which constitutes a community in the middle of their own society. Only seeing its outward form and its occasional superficial movements, they do not know what it is or how it exists. They then paint a picture in their mind: Seeing monks study and then disrobe, they criticize and complain saying that the monks exploit the temple for their own education and take advantage of the villagers; after they disrobe, they take jobs away from lay people; or seeing no social role on the part of monks, they say that monks are listless and useless to society. Actually, the criticisms of these people are, to some extent, correct, but because the reasons for these attitudes are not based on understanding and knowledge, this brings about more bad results than good--at least it does not contribute to the solution of problems.
Currently, it is as if many of the people in important positions of responsibility in the State education system, or, to put it more broadly, the State does not know, does not understand, the customs and relationship between itself and the Sangha in the area of education-forgetting how, over time, the State had partial responsibility for the education of the Sangha-and so they do not take the correct stand on education for the monks, and sometimes even end up in confusion and conflict amongst themselves. For example, some people, on occasion, have been known to say that the education of the monks is the monks' business, and the education of the nation is the business of the nation: It's everyone for himself, different people, different work. But occasionally, some people are given to saying that this education for the monks has been conducted by the monastic institutions themselves, and there are no laws which recognize it; it is therefore, a kind of "outlaw" education, school, or university.
The patronage and support of the religion, since earlier times, has had, among other things, the goal of promoting and encouraging religious education-both directly and indirectly; but when educational activities of the temples continued to decrease, the meaning of this-in terms of the relationship between support of the religion and support of Buddhist education—also decreased until it has been almost completely lost. You can see that the supporters of Buddhism in this later period now focus on materialism, putting up more and more structures or monastic buildings-and even the Sangha guides the people in this direction.
The Sangha has become accustomed to feeling that education for the masses-or for children and young adults-is currently the responsibility of the government and the Sangha is only involved in teaching the monks and novices about Buddhism. This feeling is deep-rooted to the point that, generally, when one mentions religious education, the Sangha sees this only in terms of monks and novices and what goes on in the temples. They do not look beyond the fence or the wall of the temple; they do not think that "I ought to have a modicum of responsibility for the religious and ethical education of the children and young adults at large" at all. They, therefore, do not get involved in knowing how the young people, the children of villagers, receive their ethical training. Even if they were to talk about or criticize any news or situation of this kind, they would do it with the attitude of those who are outside the realm of responsibility.
Having said all of this, I have not wished to chastise or criticize any particular person or group; in fact, everyone and all groups are the product of all the causal factors mentioned above. The best path is one of cooperation or helping each other to study and understand the facts, accept the truth, and come together to change and solve these problems. The most unfortunate thing is that many people, especially those in positions of responsibility-either governmental or ecclesiastical—enjoy setting up regulations based on attachment to notions they have in their heads saying: "things must be like this," or "things must not be like that." When real life conditions do not fit the regulations they have established, they absolutely refuse to listen, and are unwilling to further investigate the truth with an open mind according to the related causes and effects. These people have good wishes for Buddhism and are concerned about its activities, but it is the concern and good wishes of these very same people which contribute to the increase and escalating seriousness of different problems. And it is the opposing or negative actions of these very people which have led to a kind of cooperation with their "perverted" monks, creating a field of battle for a fight to the bitter end; this, in turn, has helped to eliminate any common benefits or happiness and sometimes may even assist in the final destruction of Buddhism. Aside from the people at the administrative levels and those in positions of responsibility, we must admit that there are some monks and novices who do intentionally use the temple as a path for further study, for actual personal career benefits in a way which can be called using the "path of mobility" without helping to maintain the path. Besides, even among the monks and novices who tread this path of mobility mindful of the reason for doing so, thinking that they will maintain the path, there are still many others who act like seeds which break away and disperse, coming to rest just beneath the surface of the earth, crumbling, deteriorating, and rotting in the middle of the field instead of withstanding being tread upon, rolled over, dumped upon, and waiting to grow quietly, without anyone noticing, until the time is ripe and flowers bloom, making people willing to appreciate—by their show of beauty—the real fruits to be admired.
Go to Page 1/2 - Buddhism and Education
Buddhism and Education - Author: Phra Rajavaramuni (Prayudh Payutto)
Poetry by Grant A.Olson
Meanwhile, inside the structure of the State education system, the higher the students go, the more they have to move into the urban areas. Some middle-class people in the up country may have partial means to send their children to study in the State system, but this still is not sufficient to support them completely; so when their children progress to higher levels of study and are to enter the market towns and major cities, they are often put in the care of the urban temple as dependents of the monks. This makes the temple a dwelling, a boarding house, for students from the countryside enrolled in the State system. This condition has even more evidently turned temples in the middle of cities into communities for people from the countryside; while at the same time, the temples have, in another way, become places offering support to the State education system.
Part of the custom of ordaining and studying which still remains in principle, if incompletely, is ordaining for the three-month rainy season (khao phansa); but this custom has been, to a large degree, disturbed by the State education system. Because most young people do not have the opportunity to ordain when they reach the proper age, they must wait until they graduate, or postpone this even further due to work, a career, or a government post, for example. At any rate, this custom still is of great benefit to Thai society. Most importantly:
a) Young men in the cities-given the surrounding conditions and the lifestyle there-are estranged from the customs of their own society. Ordination is a tool for pulling them back to be complete Thai people, not strangers to culture and custom.
b) For the young men living in the countryside, it can be of especially great benefit. In the eyes of this writer, I see the training and daily life in the temple, even during this temporary ordination period of three months, as real education and of greater benefit than their schooling during the early ages of primary school (prathom) grades 1-4, because it is education which brings one's life to bear on one's studies and it is studying based on real life within the surrounding conditions, culture and customs, including the relationship with the people who belong to one's own community. Ordination, which, we say, makes one ripe or mature (suk), still holds true for ordination in the countryside, because it makes those monks enter into adulthood, prepares them for joining or for becoming a complete member of a community. Besides gaining knowledge of the traditions and customs of the community, during their time in the Sangha, monks attain knowledge they can put to good use or use to serve the needs of their own community. Aside from this, many rural youngsters graduate from the fourth grade (prathom 4) and go off to live in the midst of the rice fields, almost completely forgetting their courses, even reading and writing Thai. When they enter the monkhood they can reconsider, make use of thai knowledge, and revive it again. Especially during a time when Thai educators are complaining that education in this country has been treading the wrong path for a long time and modern education makes students alienated from their own communities, culture and customs, the value of ordination according to custom, as I have mentioned so far, is very clear.
Anyhow, it is most unfortunate that the three-month ordination continues to fade even in the countryside--due to the state of the economy, for example—which makes the stay in the monkhood become shorter: one month, half-a-month. or even seven days. Daily training deteriorates. Many places have monks residing idly for a matter of days, while others lack leadership, such as lacking monks with enough seniority to become abbot, housing monks who have been in the monkhood only one to two years (phansa), continuing to maintain the temples according to the previously mentioned causes and conditions. The benefits of this custom are, therefore, in decline.
4. While monks and novices from the countryside currently use the "path of mobility" for attaining the benefits of education, taking some worldly courses and some Buddhist studies, in the end, most of them end up leaving the Order-this is the ordinary state of affairs; while at the same time, the Sangha, or the monks in administrative positions, are all caught up in trying to control or contain this situation, partially out of anxiety and confusion, and partly out of confidence in their own power, which can unmistakably be called busily engaging in a fight to the finish. In the meantime, a new trend has arisen: A group of young, modern people—some with high education and a lot of worldly experience-have become bored with the world or have come to see the value of Buddhism (dhamma-vinaya). They have been willing to leave their homes and follow out their intention to ordain for life (thawon). While at the same time, it has become clear that the Sangha was not prepared to receive this group of people, especially in terms of their education. Most of these people cannot find much meaning in the existing ecclesiastical education and have a wide circle of relations with groups of students in institutions of higher learning for laymen, which also have groups studying about Buddhism, and these groups exist beyond the confines of the Sangha system itself. It is true that the ordination of people of this calibre is something that should bring about good results, but if the educational system cannot meet their needs, then this may be the cause of bad results. If the Sangha has not made arrangements to accommodate and assimilate this group, then it is foreseeable that this new trend may become a strong force which is currently called challenging the whole educational system and administration of the Sangha-all of which would happen within a short period of time.
5. A short time after education had separated from the temple, other aspects of the life of the laity gradually moved away as well. Yet in the rural communities, some people still depend on the temple for education, and life is still more closely tied to the temple in accordance with tradition and custom than it is in the cities. Furthermore, after older generations pass away, if the later generations who hold responsibility in the government and modern society are no longer familiar with the temple and monks and come to have any relationship with them, it is like meeting strangers from different groups; they will not truly meet each other on common terms, nor will they understand each other's problems; in fact, they are likely to misunderstand each other very easily. All of this is due to the distance between the temples, the State, and urban society, which breeds an undesirable attitude, for example:
Most people in city and urban society are not familiar with the temple and the Sangha which constitutes a community in the middle of their own society. Only seeing its outward form and its occasional superficial movements, they do not know what it is or how it exists. They then paint a picture in their mind: Seeing monks study and then disrobe, they criticize and complain saying that the monks exploit the temple for their own education and take advantage of the villagers; after they disrobe, they take jobs away from lay people; or seeing no social role on the part of monks, they say that monks are listless and useless to society. Actually, the criticisms of these people are, to some extent, correct, but because the reasons for these attitudes are not based on understanding and knowledge, this brings about more bad results than good--at least it does not contribute to the solution of problems.
Currently, it is as if many of the people in important positions of responsibility in the State education system, or, to put it more broadly, the State does not know, does not understand, the customs and relationship between itself and the Sangha in the area of education-forgetting how, over time, the State had partial responsibility for the education of the Sangha-and so they do not take the correct stand on education for the monks, and sometimes even end up in confusion and conflict amongst themselves. For example, some people, on occasion, have been known to say that the education of the monks is the monks' business, and the education of the nation is the business of the nation: It's everyone for himself, different people, different work. But occasionally, some people are given to saying that this education for the monks has been conducted by the monastic institutions themselves, and there are no laws which recognize it; it is therefore, a kind of "outlaw" education, school, or university.
The patronage and support of the religion, since earlier times, has had, among other things, the goal of promoting and encouraging religious education-both directly and indirectly; but when educational activities of the temples continued to decrease, the meaning of this-in terms of the relationship between support of the religion and support of Buddhist education—also decreased until it has been almost completely lost. You can see that the supporters of Buddhism in this later period now focus on materialism, putting up more and more structures or monastic buildings-and even the Sangha guides the people in this direction.
The Sangha has become accustomed to feeling that education for the masses-or for children and young adults-is currently the responsibility of the government and the Sangha is only involved in teaching the monks and novices about Buddhism. This feeling is deep-rooted to the point that, generally, when one mentions religious education, the Sangha sees this only in terms of monks and novices and what goes on in the temples. They do not look beyond the fence or the wall of the temple; they do not think that "I ought to have a modicum of responsibility for the religious and ethical education of the children and young adults at large" at all. They, therefore, do not get involved in knowing how the young people, the children of villagers, receive their ethical training. Even if they were to talk about or criticize any news or situation of this kind, they would do it with the attitude of those who are outside the realm of responsibility.
Having said all of this, I have not wished to chastise or criticize any particular person or group; in fact, everyone and all groups are the product of all the causal factors mentioned above. The best path is one of cooperation or helping each other to study and understand the facts, accept the truth, and come together to change and solve these problems. The most unfortunate thing is that many people, especially those in positions of responsibility-either governmental or ecclesiastical—enjoy setting up regulations based on attachment to notions they have in their heads saying: "things must be like this," or "things must not be like that." When real life conditions do not fit the regulations they have established, they absolutely refuse to listen, and are unwilling to further investigate the truth with an open mind according to the related causes and effects. These people have good wishes for Buddhism and are concerned about its activities, but it is the concern and good wishes of these very same people which contribute to the increase and escalating seriousness of different problems. And it is the opposing or negative actions of these very people which have led to a kind of cooperation with their "perverted" monks, creating a field of battle for a fight to the bitter end; this, in turn, has helped to eliminate any common benefits or happiness and sometimes may even assist in the final destruction of Buddhism. Aside from the people at the administrative levels and those in positions of responsibility, we must admit that there are some monks and novices who do intentionally use the temple as a path for further study, for actual personal career benefits in a way which can be called using the "path of mobility" without helping to maintain the path. Besides, even among the monks and novices who tread this path of mobility mindful of the reason for doing so, thinking that they will maintain the path, there are still many others who act like seeds which break away and disperse, coming to rest just beneath the surface of the earth, crumbling, deteriorating, and rotting in the middle of the field instead of withstanding being tread upon, rolled over, dumped upon, and waiting to grow quietly, without anyone noticing, until the time is ripe and flowers bloom, making people willing to appreciate—by their show of beauty—the real fruits to be admired.
Go to Page 1/2 - Buddhism and Education
Buddhism and Education - Author: Phra Rajavaramuni (Prayudh Payutto)
Poetry by Grant A.Olson



