The Golden Peninsula: Culture and Adaptation in Mainland Southeast Asia. (By Charles Keyes)
The Golden Peninsula: Culture and Adaptation in Mainland Southeast Asia. (By Charles Keyes)
The text “The Golden Peninsula: Culture and Adaptation in Mainland Southeast Asia” explores both the history of Theravada Buddhism and the way it is seen and used in Mainland Southeast Asia. The origins of Theravada Buddhism began with the birth of Siddhattha Gotama in north India during 563 BC and continues with a small group of monks and nuns that attempted, as closely as possible, to live by his lifestyle and teachings. Theravada Buddhism first spread to Southeast Asia when King Anoratha, founder of Pagan, elected for it to be chosen and promoted as the true faith. During the 12th century, there were three main sects of Buddhism, these being Abhayagiri with Mahayana Buddhism, Mahavihara with Theravada Buddhism, and Jetavana which alternated between the two. The Shingalese king Parakkama-Bahu I, wanted to find the sect with the true doctrine of Buddhism and decided himself it was to be Theravada Buddhism. Theravada Buddhism further spread as monks who went to Cleyon to study Buddhism would return to their homes and spread their positive thoughts of it. The monks came from different parts of Southeast Asia which in turn saw Buddhism become a universal religion that is not tied to one region. The second half of the text explores how Theravada Buddhism is seen and practiced in the everyday life of Southeast Asian countries. Keyes discusses the main practices of Theravada Buddhism, being Karma along with the discussion of how westerners view the practice.
Theravada Buddhists live their life by the Law of Karma with the aim of reducing their suffering both in their current life and their next. The Law of Karma sees that good actions are rewarded with good consequences and bad actions rewarded with bad consequences. The Buddhists see these consequences as either increasing or decreasing their suffering. Keyes highlights how many Western writers see the ultimate goal of Buddhists is to use the Law of Karma to reach Nirvana, the state of no suffering. However, Keyes sees that the journey for reaching Nirvana is so rigorous that if it was the sole purpose “Buddhism could never be a popular religion”. Keyes believes that Buddhists follow the Law of Karma to “ensure the improvement of one’s existential condition” even if it does not become “effective until a future lifetime”, demonstrating how the main goal of Buddhists is not to find Nirvana but a better rebirth. Even though Keyes agrees that a Buddhist’s goal is to find a better rebirth, he also sees that people in Theravada Buddhist societies hold to other beliefs that are not of Buddhist origins. He believes this is due the Law of Karma being so psychologically unsatisfying. I see this as a demonstration of how Buddhism has developed from a strict lifestyle of the first monks to a religion open to people of any background and commitment and who want to better their next life.
The way that Buddhists find good and bad karma is by avoiding demeritorious actions and performing acts of merit. The people of Southeast Asia see there being three vices to avoid if one wants good Karma, these being Lobha (greed), dosa (anger), and moha (delusion). If one cannot sustain from the three vices they will pay the price in their next life and be born in a “subhuman state”. To find good merit one would seek the opposite of the three vices, be compassionate, maintain equanimity and seek wisdom. The most popular way to find good merit was through the performance of rituals, and to be able to perform these rituals one must be literate. Having the monks teach the youth how to read and write, would cause issues in modern society and the learning of languages. Keyes brings forward the case of the Shans in Burma and the northern Thai communities. These communities have a different language for secular education and the local villagers, meaning if you want to study traditional texts you will need to learn two languages. I see this having similarities to the text “A Chan H’Roi Girl” By Truong Wugen Chi, in that a big restriction for education, especially in the youth, comes from what language you speak.
Quotes
-
“For all Theravada Buddhists, the reality of sentient existence is determined by the Law of Karma” pg 86
-
“Fate implies a causation that operates irrespective of the moral actions of people, whereas the Buddhist concept of Karma relates all causation ultimately to moral action” pg 117
-
“Laws of Karma are psychologically unsatisfying, people in all Theravada Buddhists societies have also held to other beliefs that are not buddhist in origin” pg
Questions
-
How do the Theravada Buddhists who are searching for Nirvana feel about the Buddhists who practice Theravada Buddhisn but to a lesser extent?
-
Has there ever been a time when the people of Southeast Asia have been in conflict over which religion should be followed?
Comments
Fergus,
This is a comprehensive overview of the text and you pose interesting questions. In your invocation of secular education you bring up the matter of language within secular educvation, but I was curious about your thoughts on Keyes’ description of cultural change through extension education (e.g. monks and Communist folks sent to Thailand, and Laos and Cambodia, respectively) that have brought about cosmological orders that differ from that of Buddhism. It seems to me that Keyes is suggesting that the influence of modernity can be illustrated through the tension between the rural and the urban, without going as far as to imply that the urban and the rural are fixed archetypes. Such a claim might be worth thinking about more deeply as we consider the title of this class and what it means to study “modern” Southeast Asia.
Fergus,
You highlight many of the key points of Keyes’ text, but the core idea is the shift to the focus on buddhist practice, as you note so well. In this way, Keyes makes a very strong claim about the impossiblitly of distinguishing a “real” Buddhism from something deemed less focused on doctrinal practices (which most scholars or religion tend to agree with). Nevertheless, your question about how some Buddhists who are searching for Nirvana feel about other ways of practicing Buddhism remains quite important. This is because even though the scholars may say there are many ways of being Buddhist, there may well be debates among the people about what counts as good and bad Buddhism. Those debates, one might note, are part of the story too, and a scholar would do well to recognize them as part of the history and experience of life int he region. You will see opinions about this play out in some ways in the film we watch, Love Man, Love Woman.