Buddhism and Education
Published by James Chen Ball under on 21:39
Page 1/2 - Buddhism and Education
When we speak about Buddhism and education, we are prone to referring to the past when temples were the center for education and monks were the trainers and teachers in charge of education. This type of reference is a way of showing the value of Buddhism in society, which once really existed. But at the same time, it is like accusing oneself of a kind of negligence because now these values and benefits no longer exist, which can be called a kind of degeneration. Moreover, turning away from the confusion and void of the present and finding amusement and pride in the richness of the pasi might be viewed as a symptom of people who have run out of hope, who are trying to escape the sorrow of the present by turning to and making references to the past and finding pleasure and fulfillment there. This is not an auspicious thing to do nor a sign of progress that we should be pleased with.
This article is like some other articles in one respect, it turns back again to reclaim the past when temples were the center of education and learning in Thai society and when monks, since ancient times, had the important role of trainer and teacher of the populace. At any rate, in this article I will not revert to describing how the temple was the source of education and how the monks were the bestowers of education; I will only refer to these things to link them with the present. The important point is that I will make sufficient references to show that, even at the present time, Buddhism has not completely lost its importance in education; it still has a residual or latent role and sometimes these residual things have a great importance for Thai society.
There are two kinds of important Thai customs related to Buddhism and education which are fundamental to the current situation:
Customs in which the temple is the center of education and learning for the people and the monks are the teachers who carry out their duty of training others. This custom may be almost invisible to the urbanites and city-dwellers of the current day, but for villagers in the distant countryside it is still visible; even though it may not be the center it was in the past, it is still a path or a last refuge.
The custom of ordaining and studying (buat-rian), which can mean entering the monkhood along with studying, or when one ordains one must study, or ordaining for the purpose of studying; this might even mean being a monk for as long as one wishes to study, and after studying, those who want to stay in the Order can stay, and those who do not, can disrobe. This has become the custom of temporary ordination. One aspect of this custom still well known today, is the "three-month ordination" which continues to shrink to one month, half-a-month, even to seven days—that is one thing; and when one has remained in the monkhood for a time, one can leave the Order whenever one wishes-that is another thing.
Actually, these two customs are one and the same thing; but here I have divided them into two because the effects of these two aspects-which have come down to us to the present day-are different, as we will see below.
There are two important events and conditions which have resulted in the present state of Buddhist education:
The State established a system of education following the Western model and separated education for the masses away from the temple. At first, it was done with the cooperation of the temple, giving the temple an important element of responsibility; later, the two gradually became more and more distant to the point that the State and the temple might be considered as completely separate in educational matters.
The State has not yet been successful in establishing education for the general public and has not yet been able to give its people an equal opportunity to receive an education, because some people have not had access to this important opportunity: Some have lost this for geographical reasons, in that many places do not have access to a school; and some have lost out for economic reasons, because if a student studies well and has no money, schooling must cease.
Saying this is tantamount to criticizing the government as the primary cause of this degeneration, but actually it is not this way. The two points mentioned above are accepted facts, especially point number two. Educators themselves bring this Up and discuss it. The government is trying to find a way to rectify this. Just the opposite of criticizing are the points that follow: Because the conditions of the nation are this way, this still allows the temples and the Sangha a role and some importance in education; but if the government were to successfully perform the two activities mentioned above, the temples and the Sangha may completely lose their role, shrinking in importance in the area of education. We do not have to turn to the past to make suppositions about this; in the present we can see this more and more clearly. Whenever the government expands and spreads its service of education, wherever it goes, the role and importance of the temples and the Sangha are reduced or else their role must change, becoming different from before. It is understandable that the condition which will disappear most slowly (or very lastly), which will help the temples and the Sangha still maintain a role and importance in education for some time to come, is the lack of equal opportunity in education due to economic conditions. When the government is able to successfully solve the two problems above, then the educational role of the temple and the Sangha, as it exists today, must fade away and be lost, or change to become something very different. All of this depends upon working with knowledge that can keep pace with this situation, and whether or not, or to what degree, one is willing to accept the truth.
The current conditions resulting from the clash between the two customs above and the two major causes just mentioned, can be summarized as follows:
1. When the State does not have enough power to spread education to the masses and is still not able to provide equal opportunity to the people, the poor peasants and villagers in the countryside depend upon the custom of ordaining and studying and the temple as an ancient place of education, as a channel or path, even to the point of being a "path of mobility" (thdng phan) which allows one's children to receive a certain amount of education. This also has many other effects, such as:
Most of the so-called permanent monks and novices (samanera) in Thailand who reside at temples (numbering approximately 230,000) come from poor farming families in the distant countryside. These monks and novices flow into the temples in the major cities for further education. This makes the temples, even in the capital city, a community for upcountry people right in the middle of the city (more than 90% of the monks and novices residing at temples in Bangkok are from the countryside).
Normally, even though these monks and novices have the duty to study coursework related to Buddhism, because of their background and some other good supporting reasons, they are inclined to desire worldly studies as well—and this inclination increases, especially when one sees his contemporaries studying in the government system. If the temples and the Sangha are willing to accept these monks and novices into the Order, then it becomes their duty to see to what extent and degree they will have a way to motivate or force them to study courses related to Buddhism, and how much they should yield to their needs for worldly education. It is also normal that these needs and attitudes of the monks and novices of school age will not coincide with that of the Sangha or the ecclesiastical administrators of the Sangha; the greater the gap between their educational needs and the education offered by the Sangha, the stronger the conflict becomes. To put this as some modern people do: the situation has become sharply polarized. When things have reached this point, it ordinarily follows that the administrators of the Sangha only increase their concern; having become very concerned, they are likely to strictly, or even forcefully, make the monks and novices remain within the framework they stipulate. In modern terms, this is called working on the minus side (in a negative or destructive way). At any time or place, if these administrators have sufficient power to successfully control, they become overjoyed, but the overall conditions worsen each time. I feel that the way to bring about positive results cannot surpass the way of old Thai custom-that is, employing a policy of tactful conciliation and allowing benefits for both sides. To further illustrate this point. Thai custom is not averse to using a "path of mobility," quite the opposite, it supports using it, but it insists that those who tread this path must maintain it.1 The more the path is walked, the more progressive it becomes-including all those who walk the path, the path itself, and the community involved with this path-and the more everyone thrives together. Aside from all of this, there still will be only a certain number who will always remain in the Sangha and work there.
c) When monks and novices from the countryside flow into this path of mobility for education in the city and there is no flow back to the countryside, this makes for a further loss, a continuous loss of strength on the part of the countryside. In the cities, even though a monk may be well-educated, it still is not enough for him to acquire the status of being a leader: whereas in the outlying areas, whatever knowledge the monks and novices may have, or do not have at all, the villagers regard them as leaders. But the qualified monks, who might provide good leadership in the countryside, jam into the cities, which makes for a two-fold loss.
d) When the role and condition of the education of the Sangha must depend on the deficiencies and ill — preparedness of the State education system, especially for potential ordinands, then when the State education system spreads or develops to any place (or the economics develop to any place) the number of young boys who ordain as novices decreases to the point that we can say there are no such ordinations at all, aside from novices ordaining at a cremation ceremony (kan buat nafai), or else gathering a group of young students together to ordain for a short period during the summer recess.2 There are always some novices around, but they have come to be novices from the far away countryside where the State education system has not yet reached. This is the cause for an ever-increasing lack of monks who are leaders in the countryside, which goes hand-in-hand with a decline of the temple and the Buddhist religion.
'We must undersland that using the term "path of mobility" (thing plain) here is a manner of speech used simply to describe the condition or reveal phenomena in society. It does not mean that it is the intention of monks and novices to use the temple as a path of mobility, because most of them enter the Order at an age when they do not have knowledge or understanding of these matters. They, therefore, do not know themselves that they have entered such a path These monks and novices entering the Order can be called a product of society which tradition and custom have established. According to traditional belief, ordination is an act of merit. Merit can also be transferred. It is believed, therefore, that an ordinand (nak) who ordains upon the occasion of a cremation can pass merit on to the deceased-trans.
Go to Page 2/2 - Buddhist Monks Education and Society
Buddhism and Education - Author: Phra Rajavaramuni (Prayudh Payutto)
Poetry by Grant A.Olson
When we speak about Buddhism and education, we are prone to referring to the past when temples were the center for education and monks were the trainers and teachers in charge of education. This type of reference is a way of showing the value of Buddhism in society, which once really existed. But at the same time, it is like accusing oneself of a kind of negligence because now these values and benefits no longer exist, which can be called a kind of degeneration. Moreover, turning away from the confusion and void of the present and finding amusement and pride in the richness of the pasi might be viewed as a symptom of people who have run out of hope, who are trying to escape the sorrow of the present by turning to and making references to the past and finding pleasure and fulfillment there. This is not an auspicious thing to do nor a sign of progress that we should be pleased with.
This article is like some other articles in one respect, it turns back again to reclaim the past when temples were the center of education and learning in Thai society and when monks, since ancient times, had the important role of trainer and teacher of the populace. At any rate, in this article I will not revert to describing how the temple was the source of education and how the monks were the bestowers of education; I will only refer to these things to link them with the present. The important point is that I will make sufficient references to show that, even at the present time, Buddhism has not completely lost its importance in education; it still has a residual or latent role and sometimes these residual things have a great importance for Thai society.
There are two kinds of important Thai customs related to Buddhism and education which are fundamental to the current situation:
Customs in which the temple is the center of education and learning for the people and the monks are the teachers who carry out their duty of training others. This custom may be almost invisible to the urbanites and city-dwellers of the current day, but for villagers in the distant countryside it is still visible; even though it may not be the center it was in the past, it is still a path or a last refuge.
The custom of ordaining and studying (buat-rian), which can mean entering the monkhood along with studying, or when one ordains one must study, or ordaining for the purpose of studying; this might even mean being a monk for as long as one wishes to study, and after studying, those who want to stay in the Order can stay, and those who do not, can disrobe. This has become the custom of temporary ordination. One aspect of this custom still well known today, is the "three-month ordination" which continues to shrink to one month, half-a-month, even to seven days—that is one thing; and when one has remained in the monkhood for a time, one can leave the Order whenever one wishes-that is another thing.
Actually, these two customs are one and the same thing; but here I have divided them into two because the effects of these two aspects-which have come down to us to the present day-are different, as we will see below.
There are two important events and conditions which have resulted in the present state of Buddhist education:
The State established a system of education following the Western model and separated education for the masses away from the temple. At first, it was done with the cooperation of the temple, giving the temple an important element of responsibility; later, the two gradually became more and more distant to the point that the State and the temple might be considered as completely separate in educational matters.
The State has not yet been successful in establishing education for the general public and has not yet been able to give its people an equal opportunity to receive an education, because some people have not had access to this important opportunity: Some have lost this for geographical reasons, in that many places do not have access to a school; and some have lost out for economic reasons, because if a student studies well and has no money, schooling must cease.
Saying this is tantamount to criticizing the government as the primary cause of this degeneration, but actually it is not this way. The two points mentioned above are accepted facts, especially point number two. Educators themselves bring this Up and discuss it. The government is trying to find a way to rectify this. Just the opposite of criticizing are the points that follow: Because the conditions of the nation are this way, this still allows the temples and the Sangha a role and some importance in education; but if the government were to successfully perform the two activities mentioned above, the temples and the Sangha may completely lose their role, shrinking in importance in the area of education. We do not have to turn to the past to make suppositions about this; in the present we can see this more and more clearly. Whenever the government expands and spreads its service of education, wherever it goes, the role and importance of the temples and the Sangha are reduced or else their role must change, becoming different from before. It is understandable that the condition which will disappear most slowly (or very lastly), which will help the temples and the Sangha still maintain a role and importance in education for some time to come, is the lack of equal opportunity in education due to economic conditions. When the government is able to successfully solve the two problems above, then the educational role of the temple and the Sangha, as it exists today, must fade away and be lost, or change to become something very different. All of this depends upon working with knowledge that can keep pace with this situation, and whether or not, or to what degree, one is willing to accept the truth.
The current conditions resulting from the clash between the two customs above and the two major causes just mentioned, can be summarized as follows:
1. When the State does not have enough power to spread education to the masses and is still not able to provide equal opportunity to the people, the poor peasants and villagers in the countryside depend upon the custom of ordaining and studying and the temple as an ancient place of education, as a channel or path, even to the point of being a "path of mobility" (thdng phan) which allows one's children to receive a certain amount of education. This also has many other effects, such as:
Most of the so-called permanent monks and novices (samanera) in Thailand who reside at temples (numbering approximately 230,000) come from poor farming families in the distant countryside. These monks and novices flow into the temples in the major cities for further education. This makes the temples, even in the capital city, a community for upcountry people right in the middle of the city (more than 90% of the monks and novices residing at temples in Bangkok are from the countryside).
Normally, even though these monks and novices have the duty to study coursework related to Buddhism, because of their background and some other good supporting reasons, they are inclined to desire worldly studies as well—and this inclination increases, especially when one sees his contemporaries studying in the government system. If the temples and the Sangha are willing to accept these monks and novices into the Order, then it becomes their duty to see to what extent and degree they will have a way to motivate or force them to study courses related to Buddhism, and how much they should yield to their needs for worldly education. It is also normal that these needs and attitudes of the monks and novices of school age will not coincide with that of the Sangha or the ecclesiastical administrators of the Sangha; the greater the gap between their educational needs and the education offered by the Sangha, the stronger the conflict becomes. To put this as some modern people do: the situation has become sharply polarized. When things have reached this point, it ordinarily follows that the administrators of the Sangha only increase their concern; having become very concerned, they are likely to strictly, or even forcefully, make the monks and novices remain within the framework they stipulate. In modern terms, this is called working on the minus side (in a negative or destructive way). At any time or place, if these administrators have sufficient power to successfully control, they become overjoyed, but the overall conditions worsen each time. I feel that the way to bring about positive results cannot surpass the way of old Thai custom-that is, employing a policy of tactful conciliation and allowing benefits for both sides. To further illustrate this point. Thai custom is not averse to using a "path of mobility," quite the opposite, it supports using it, but it insists that those who tread this path must maintain it.1 The more the path is walked, the more progressive it becomes-including all those who walk the path, the path itself, and the community involved with this path-and the more everyone thrives together. Aside from all of this, there still will be only a certain number who will always remain in the Sangha and work there.
c) When monks and novices from the countryside flow into this path of mobility for education in the city and there is no flow back to the countryside, this makes for a further loss, a continuous loss of strength on the part of the countryside. In the cities, even though a monk may be well-educated, it still is not enough for him to acquire the status of being a leader: whereas in the outlying areas, whatever knowledge the monks and novices may have, or do not have at all, the villagers regard them as leaders. But the qualified monks, who might provide good leadership in the countryside, jam into the cities, which makes for a two-fold loss.
d) When the role and condition of the education of the Sangha must depend on the deficiencies and ill — preparedness of the State education system, especially for potential ordinands, then when the State education system spreads or develops to any place (or the economics develop to any place) the number of young boys who ordain as novices decreases to the point that we can say there are no such ordinations at all, aside from novices ordaining at a cremation ceremony (kan buat nafai), or else gathering a group of young students together to ordain for a short period during the summer recess.2 There are always some novices around, but they have come to be novices from the far away countryside where the State education system has not yet reached. This is the cause for an ever-increasing lack of monks who are leaders in the countryside, which goes hand-in-hand with a decline of the temple and the Buddhist religion.
'We must undersland that using the term "path of mobility" (thing plain) here is a manner of speech used simply to describe the condition or reveal phenomena in society. It does not mean that it is the intention of monks and novices to use the temple as a path of mobility, because most of them enter the Order at an age when they do not have knowledge or understanding of these matters. They, therefore, do not know themselves that they have entered such a path These monks and novices entering the Order can be called a product of society which tradition and custom have established. According to traditional belief, ordination is an act of merit. Merit can also be transferred. It is believed, therefore, that an ordinand (nak) who ordains upon the occasion of a cremation can pass merit on to the deceased-trans.
Go to Page 2/2 - Buddhist Monks Education and Society
Buddhism and Education - Author: Phra Rajavaramuni (Prayudh Payutto)
Poetry by Grant A.Olson