Sulak Sivaraksa, Buddhist spiritual leader and international activist, is known for advocating social change and development based on an engaged Buddhism. Over the course of his long career, he has been arrested three times for his criticism of the Thai monarchy. Katherine Marshall sat down with him recently to discuss his own spiritual journey and his vision for Buddhism.
Can you speak a bit about how you got where you are, and particularly about how faith came into play in your life?
I was born in 1933 and was brought up as a Buddhist. My parents were not very spiritual. I was sent to a Catholic school, and I got my degree from the Anglican college. I didn't like the school. They used to treat me very badly, and they used to beat me because I didn't want to learn by rote. My parents said, "We have tried to bring you up in a Catholic and a Protestant school. Would you like to be a monk?" I said, "Yes, why not?"
So I became a monk at the age of 13. As a monk, they treat you as a grown up. It was the first time I was able to connect with and learn about my society and my culture, because the temple was open for everyone. I was very happy.
In 1953, I went to London to study. In our family background, which was middle-class and upper-class, being educated in Britain meant that you were educated properly, and that could help you get ahead. England was the place to be. While I was in England, I joined the Buddhist Society. Mr. Christmas Humphreys, founder of the Society, was a very great man.
But I did not agree with his approach. His view was that a Buddhist must concentrate on meditation, even when they are part of the society. He said that Christian men are wrong because they got involved in society and politics and lost their spirituality. To be Buddhist, he argued, you must concentrate on meditation. I felt that he was fundamentally wrong. Meditation is a good thing, but it does not mean only looking inwards. I realized that many Buddhists were from middle-class backgrounds. They didn't realize the suffering of the majority of our people. They didn't even question their own lifestyles. I think that is escapism, not Buddhism.
And what came next?
I returned from England to Siam in 1961. Probably because of my British education, I was very much influenced by Plato. In The Republic, he argued that we should all become philosopher kings, and that we should lead the poor. At first, when I went home to Siam, I thought the poor were so stupid and ignorant. But when I was exposed to them, I realized that I had much to learn from them and that they had much wisdom to share with me. Ever since my return to Siam, I have become more and more involved with the poor.
To make a long story short, I feel that to practice Buddhism, you must care not only for yourself but for society. To be Buddhist, you should not only adhere to the main teachings -- not killing, stealing, having sexual misconducts or lying -- but you also have to consciously distance yourself from the structures of violence that frame our lives. You may not kill directly, but you kill through the social structure. You don't steal directly, but you let the bank steal. So, I became more involved in addressing what you could term "structural violence."
Last year, you celebrated the 20th anniversary of the founding of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. What were some of the highlights?
A real highlight was to see and to build networks of friendships. In Buddhism, the main priority, externally, are good friends. Good friends are those who tell you what you don't want to hear. They are your external voice of conscience. I feel we have done that for 20 years.
We have also worked to develop an important side of Buddhism. Some Buddhists, for example, the Japanese, are wonderful with funerals and with thinking of the next world, but they have no care for the present world. Now they care more for the present world, and I am happy for that. The Taiwanese Buddhists have begun to help the poor in Bangladesh and Cambodia. I say that's good but not good enough. To help the poor is social welfare, but Buddhism demands social change. I think the Taiwanese are doing that, and I am very proud that the anniversary sees us with good friends who are challenging each other in good spirit, while we are changing.
When you look at the Buddhist establishments in Thailand, and the monks and the structures, how much of that would you say is engaged and how much of it is in a more traditional role?
The Thai monks, as a whole, cannot be completely traditional. We have been uprooted, if I may say so, because of the American hegemony. The Americans came in during the 1950s to save us from communism. They felt that Buddhism was not good because it does not teach about God, but teaches about contentment. They thought that Buddhism was all negative. I said: no sir. No to hatred, no to greed.
They came to our country with good intentions. But they wanted us to become industrialized and destroyed our whole agricultural system. Traditional Buddhism depends on farming, which was destroyed. Now, there is a new group of monks who go along with and rely on capitalism and consumerism.
Having said that, there are also some young monks who feel they must go back to the traditional Buddha. They try to understand suffering, and to see greed in the form of capitalism. They try to understand violence, hatred, ignorance and illusion in the forms of mass media and industry. There are more and more young people who are very helpful and work with us in Laos, Cambodia, Burma, India and Sri Lanka.
But they are a minority?
Yes. But, small is beautiful. And I believe that quality is more important than quantity.
What about interfaith work?
Friendship has no barriers, whether gender, nationality or faiths. Friends are friends. The Christian, the Muslim, or the atheist -- they are friends. Friends must not belittle each other's beliefs. My teacher taught that, to understand the basis of Buddhism, you have to know that there are a lot of dreadful things in Buddhism, also. He taught that Buddhism is how to learn how to change greed into generosity, hatred into compassion and friendship, delusion into wisdom and understanding. He said that other religions are the same but use different terms. They teach people to be selfless, not selfish. They teach to be brave, humble and generous. Don't think that other religions are inferior to your own. Respect other religions as your own. Buddhadasa, my teacher, taught me that we must unite people of different faiths -- whether agnostic or atheist -- because they are also spiritual beings.
An extended interview with Sulak Sivaraksa can be found here.
This interview is third in a series of conversations with activists working for development and peace who draw their inspiration and direction from their faith. The series is based on interviews led by Katherine Marshall, as part of policy explorations for the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs at Georgetown University and the World Faiths Development Dialogue.
Follow Katherine Marshall on Twitter: www.twitter.com/patlakath
How Buddhism Became Force for Political Activism - WSJ.com
Do Activism and Buddhism Mix? | Care2 Healthy & Green Living
Buddhist protests reflect growing activism - World news - Asia ...
Buddhism and Activism: Teenagers Get Off the Cushion and Into the ...
Buddhist Activism Tilting Thailand's Political Drama - New America ...
ABC: Activism, Buddhism, Compassion
Buddhism and activism: How would Sid produce social change? - One ...
Many Christian organizations have achieve high levels of distrust by being overly involved in politics Liberalas distrust churches who push the right-wing approach and vice versa.
So far, Buddhist public image in the West is politically neutral and benevolent to people of various political wings.
This is extremely valuable and MUST be preserved by staying away from political fracas.
The less helpful example-- those who get involved in politics having made little progress in personal development. This is a wrong path.
This is a precious jewel that should NOT be exchanged for a role as (yet another) shrill political actor.
Meditate on that.
Happy?
you don't need to make a conscious decision or an act of will to be more compassionate and to act accordingly.
THat's not what he is saying.
One of the Masters cited in the article, Thich Nhat Hanh, and his group at Plum Village in France have put together the 14 Precepts of Engaged Buddhism which states things like : Do not use the Buddhist Community for personal profit or gain or transform your community into a political party.
Even many local Sanghas in America are what you could call Engaged Buddhists. They run soup kitchens or run prison programs teaching meditation or volunteer at schools helping kids who have difficulty with schoolwork.
People get the wrong idea about Buddhism. Yes, we are to meditate. But your true practice is what you do OFF the meditation cushion. The idea of detachment doesn't mean detach from the world, it means detach yourself from the emotional states which bring suffering. And part of how you do that is to engage WITH the world. Detachment just means that you don't let your emotions get the best of you.
Buddha himself said we are to help those suffering. That's what a Buddha IS, one who engages in helping others and relieving suffering. Engaged Buddhism simply brings us back to the beginning, back to Buddha's original Teachings.
I respectfully but firmly disagree with the author that "Buddhism demands social change."
It is an extremely perilous path that many a zealot followed, almost always with results detrimental to themselves and the cause they espouse-- (the Taoist yin yang).
Lead by example, Mother Teresa's way, not Cromwell's way.
The insights here that it is necessary to have structural social change are very progressive. The old saying is that you can stand by the river and rescue people as they come by. Or you can go up the river to find out who is throwing them in. That's what structural social change accomplishes.
This is incorrect.
There are ways of caring for people without being attached to the feelings which arise from it.
Mr. Humphrey was absolutely correct, in my opinion. Nothing positive can come out of yet another religious group involving itself in Western politics.
One should focus on personal development first and foremost and then helping lay individuals to advance in personal development.
Only very advanced practitioners of meditation can ( very, very carefully) make their political opinions known. . Best not do ti at all and just lead by personal example.
Religion was a fundamental block of the Civil RIghts movement.MLK is its most famous example.
Happy?
Buddhists, at this junction of time, enjoy a unique position in the West as a politic-free un-grasping way of reaching for the spiritual.
This is a precious jewel that should NOT be exchanged for another shrill political actor on the scene.
Example: Hsi Lai Temple, Ch'an Buddhist foundation and Al Gore controversy.
now buddhism is a religion and like all relgions once you buy into a certain set of beliefs a form of paradigm effect takes over.
but buddhism like hinduism is a worthwhile study in the area of consciousness and awareness althought I think they have consciousness and awareness backwards.
our journey is towards greater awareness not greater consciousness.
now no buddhist will be able to understand that as their paradigm is consciousness creates awareness and not the other way around. that paradigm effect thing.
but I agree this was an interesting interview. we are a part of the whole and our journey is not just our individualistic self. but our main goal in this life before we move on to these higher dimensions is for greater awareness of reality.
It goes back to the 12 Links of Dependent Origination:
(1) Ignorance (a willful blindness) leads to
(2) Volitional Action or Mental Formation leads to
(3) Consciousness which requires
(4) Name and Form to carry consciousness and
(5) Six Sense Bases which experience
(6) Contact which generates
(7) Feeling (pleasant, unpleasant, neutral) which leads to
(8) Desire then to
(9) Attachment that triggers
(10) Craving and then
(11) Becoming (being) that ends with
(12) Birth/Rebirth.
In the 12 Links awareness precedes consciousness. Phenomenological aspects of consciousness don't come into the mix until there has been some form of awareness. At least that's how I see it.