Born Again Buddhist

The Concept of Rebirth in Thai Buddhism

Frederick Goss

March 9, 2006

Table of Contents

I. Introduction ................................................................................ 1

II. Views from Traditional Sources ................................................ 2

A. TRI PHUM PHRA RUANG ...................................................................................... 2

B. MODERN TREATISE ON REBIRTH........................................................................ 4

C. DEPENDENT ORIGINATION ................................................................................. 5

D. REBIRTH PROCESS DESCRIBED .......................................................................... 6

III. Alternative Views ....................................................................... 7

A. VIEWS FROM ALTERNATIVE SOURCES ............................................................... 7

1. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu .................................................................................... 7

2. J.C. Jennings ................................................................................................. 9

3. Santi Asoke ................................................................................................. 10

4. Dhammakaya .............................................................................................. 11

B. ALTERNATIVE VIEWS FROM TRADITION SOURCES ........................................... 14

1. Tri Phum ..................................................................................................... 14

2. Sunthorn’s Alterative View ........................................................................ 14

3. Somdet Phra Nyanasamvara ....................................................................... 14

4. Phra Dhammapitaka .................................................................................... 15

IV. Concluding Remarks ............................................................... 16

V. Appendix 1-Standard Model of Dependant Origination ...... A-1

VI. Bibliography ........................................................................... B-1

1

I. Introduction1

“Growing up in Thailand, Jay believed in rebirth. He joked that he

wanted his ashes scattered in the sea so that they might be eaten by

fish and then the fish by humans. In this way, he could quickly return

to the human realm to continue his work (Pasanno).”

This statement shows one of the many concepts of ‘rebirth’ that one

encounters in Thailand. To most Thai Buddhists the idea of former and future lives is

one that is quite normal. It is a concept that is rooted in the teaching of Buddhist

doctrine and is reinforced at home and in school at a very early age. Parents will

frequently use the ‘threat’ of suffering some dire consequence if a child exhibits

unacceptable behavior. For example: ‘If you eat while lying on your stomach, you

will be reborn as a crocodile’. But for those of us who have not had the concept of

rebirth instilled at an early age and whose exposure to Buddhism is mainly from an

academic or intellectual perspective, the concept of rebirth raises many questions.

How does rebirth work? What determines where and how you will be reborn?

How does the seemingly mystical nature of rebirth fit into the mostly reasoned-based

doctrine of Buddhism? Is belief in rebirth a matter of faith or can it be proven? Do I

have to accept rebirth to call myself a ‘Buddhist’ or to ‘practice Buddhism’?

Whitley Kaufman, in “Karma, Rebirth and the Problem of Evil”, gives a well-

reasoned discussion of some of the problems with the concept of former and future

lives. He address many issues such as the problem of not being able to remember

former lives and the infinite redress question, that is if the rebirth process has an end

in nirvana, how does it start. Many others, such as Sri Aurobindo in The Problem of

Rebirth and John Hicks in Philosophy of Religion, have raised similar arguments.

These issues and questions led me to wonder how the concept of rebirth relates to the

way Buddhism is practiced in Thailand.

1 This paper was prepared for the course “Thai Buddhism”, as part of the authors course work in the

Master’s Degree program in Thai Studies, Chulalongkorn University.

2

I will try to provide some insight by exploring different views to the concept

of rebirth in Thai Buddhism. I will start by look at the traditional teaching of

Buddhism in accordance with the classical view. I will then look at the view from

alternative sources to see how this concept is incorporated into different teachings and

followings. I will then look at how some of these alternative views fit with the

teachings from some traditional sources. With respect to the use of the term ‘rebirth’,

during the course of this paper it will generally refer to the concept in terms of

former, present and future lives, although as we will see, there are other

interpretations of ‘rebirth’.

II. Views from Traditional Sources

A. Tri Phum Phra Ruang

Many of the ideas of rebirth, heaven and hell originally came to the Thai

through the Tribhumikatha (Sermon on the Three Worlds), or by its later name, Tri

Phum Phra Ruang (The Three Worlds According to King Ruang). This book is said to

have been written by Phya Lithai in about the year CE 1345, before he became the

ruler of the Sukhothai kingdom. Frank Reynolds, who translated this work into

English, says it is “…an almost uniquely comprehensive, colorful, and popular

presentation of the most profound teaching and message of Theravada Buddhism

(Reynolds 5).” Donald Swearer goes so far as to say that this work formed “…the

core of the Siamese Buddhist system of belief (Swearer 654).”

The Tri Phum was an attempt to explain the world and the way things are,

that is the cosmology of the world. The text of the Tri Phum starts out with the

statement “Generally beings take cycles of birth within the three worlds…the world

of sensual desire…the world with only a remnant of material factors…the world

without material factors (Reynolds 49).” The text describes in detail the existence to

be experienced in each of the thirty-one realms of the three worlds. It is a remarkable

achievement in imagery, particularly with respect to the ‘realms of hell’, and has

3

served as a powerful deterrent and reminder of what is in store in a future life for

those who might commit some evil.

Lithai explains how rebirth works by describing the concept of ‘rebirth

linkages’, of which he identifies twenty different kinds. Reynolds points out with

respect to the discussion of ‘rebirth linkages’, there are some ‘significant deviations’

from the established scriptures and commentary upon which Lithai says he based his

text. Reynolds claims that Lithai made his revisions for “…obvious moral

appropriateness…[and]…to resolve the moral ambiguities…” contained in the earlier

texts (53-54). Thus we have an early example in Thai Buddhism of reinterpretation

of the scriptures and commentary regarding rebirth.

Much of what is included in Tri Phum regarding rebirth is standard Buddhist

doctrine, that is the state in which one is reborn is determined by the amount of merit,

knowledge and good and evil deeds one has accumulated. The remarkable aspect of

the text is the great detail and imagery provided in describing each of the realms of

the three worlds, the physical details, the suffering or pleasure one will enjoy and,

most important, why one would be reborn in that realm. For example:

“The ninth auxiliary hell is called the Silakatta hell. There are those

who kill fish and carry them to the middle of the market in order to sell

them there, and when they die such persons are born in this hell. The

yama guardians take a fiery red iron rope, lasso them and drag the

away to fry them on fiery red iron plates. The yama guardians then

stab them with lances and harpoons, cut them with butcher’s knives,

and filet them so their flesh can be lined up for sale just as they lined

up the flesh of the animals and fish in the market place. After that,

their bodies come back together, just as they had been before. And all

of this happens over and over again (76).”

It is this depth of detail and imagery that has had such an impact on Buddhism

in Thailand, not only in dogmatic belief but also in artistic expression. Much of the

cosmological discussion of the world in terms of mountains, seas and continents was

dismissed with the coming of scientific ideas by certain early reform movements,

such as that initiated by King Rama IV, which “…de-emphasized (or rejected) the

classical Buddhist cosmologies of multiple heavens and hells, legends and the

4

historicity of the Buddha’s miracles (Swearer 662).” Notwithstanding these reform

movements, Reynolds points out that the Tri Phum “…has remained in the

background, and its presence can still be discerned… (Reynolds 26).”

It seems apparent that rebirth plays a very central role to the Buddhism as

described in the Tri Phum. This is evidenced by the fact that much of the text covers

the consequences of specific actions on where one will be reborn and what is in store

for those who commit evil or meritorious actions. It is also evident that the Tri Phum

has been very influential in shaping the Thai view of the concept of rebirth. In fact,

many of the ideas of reward and retribution in specific heavens or hells live on, as we

will see in the discussion of a modern treatise on rebirth.

B. Modern Treatise on Rebirth

While the Tri Phum is a good starting point, in order to understand the view of

rebirth in traditional Thai Buddhism, a more modern text was reviewed. While there

are numerous sources available on this subject, I choose to look at Ajarn Sunthorn

Na-Rangsi’s The Buddhist Concepts of Karma and Rebirth as a reflection of the

traditional, orthodoxy view of the concept of rebirth in Thai Buddhism.

Sunthorn’s discussion of the concept of rebirth is much the same as the Tri

Phum, albeit with frequent specific citation to the scriptures and other commentarial

material. Sunthorn’s description of rebirth can be summarized as one of cause and

result, with impurities of the mind in the form of cravings and ignorance as the

condition of rebirth and karma as the determiner or agent. Cravings and desires keep

one in a vicious cycle of suffering, birth, death and rebirth (samsara). The good and

bad karma that one has accumulated, as a result of good and bad deeds, in this and

past lives will determine the state of being in the next life. The only way to break this

cycle is to break the condition of craving and ignorance, which will allow one to

interrupt the rebirth cycle, end suffering and thus reach the state of no more rebirth,

that is nirvana.

5

Sunthorn makes clear the importance of rebirth when he states “…the law of

karma is the central theme of Buddhism…[and]…the law of karma implies rebirth

(Sunthorn iv, viii).” Sunthorn goes on to state, “…only in Buddhism has the law of

karma been worked out in such a way that a specific karma can be rationally related

to a specific result (vii).” Thus, by implication the law of rebirth would have the

same cause and effect relationship. “According to Buddhism, the nature of one’s

future birth is conditioned by karma performed in the present life. From here one

may, after death, go ‘upwards’ to the plane of happiness or ‘downward’ to the realm

of misery (139)” depending on the meritorious or demeritorious actions in this life.

That is specific actions result in specific rebirths in specific realms and conditions.

Sunthorn spends much of his treatise, like the Tri Phum, on describing these

specifics. In fact the similarity between the two is striking, as one often thinks of the

Tri Phum, with its graphic portrayal of heaven and hell, as an obsolete text. But it is

very much alive in modern writings such as Sunthorn’s and thus seems to be still very

much a part of the traditional Thai Buddhist philosophy.

C. Dependent Origination

To understand the concept of rebirth from the traditional point of view, it is

important to also understanding the Principle of Dependent Origination. This

principle is frequently described as one of the most basic and important of

Buddhism’s teachings (Payutto Dependent 1, Piyadassi 1). The Principle of

Dependent Origination is the explanation for the cause and effect of all suffering,

represented by a twelve-step cycle with each step being the cause of the next. (See

Appendix 1 for a depiction of the complete cycle.) Explained in the traditional way,

this cycle covers three lifetimes, the first two steps in the past life, the next eight steps

in the present life and the last two steps in the future life. Thus, as explained by Phra

Dhammapitaka, “…the relationship of the past section as purely a causal one, that is

results in the present are derived from causes in the past, whereas the future section

specifically shows results in the future (Payutto Dependent 33).” Phra

Dhammapitaka implies that there is not much room from the traditional point of view

for any deviation from this ‘Standard Model’ “…as modern day study of the teaching

6

(at least in traditional scholastic circles) interprets it completely (emphasis added) on

a lifetime-to-lifetime basis (Payutto Dependent 98).” Others would imply it is really

the only interpretation since “…it is indeed necessary (emphasis added) … to speak

of three successive lives, of past, present and future life (Nyanatiloka 5).”

Given that the Principle of Dependent Origination is the ‘most basic and

important’ teaching in Buddhism and is a teaching where the concept of past, present

and future lives is ‘necessary’, the importance of is evident. This would reinforce the

idea that the concept of former and future lives is central to the teaching of standard

and traditional Thai Buddhism.

D. Rebirth Process Described

Many traditional commentators are able to describe the process of rebirth in

detail. The description centers around various forms of ‘consciousness’, with the most

important being the ‘re-linking consciousness’ that arises at the moment of death and

comes between the ‘life continuum or subliminal consciousness’ and the ‘last

moment or death consciousness’. Karma will dominating the thoughts and objects

will be presented that will determine where and how one will be reborn. The process

has been worked out to such minute detail that the number of moments that each

consciousness occurs can be explained (Sunthorn 121-124; Mahasi 145). One source

even explained this process in terms of biology “…when a sperm cell from the father

merges with an egg cell or ovum with the mother. This is the moment of birth.

Science speaks of only these two physical common factors. Buddhism, however,

speaks of a third factor which is purely psychical…the third factor is… re-linking

consciousness (Piyadassi 17-18).”

Although it is said that those who develop their minds through deep

meditation practice can attain supernatural powers and insight to be able to discern

such matters, this level of detail seems remarkable. One great meditation master even

claimed that an experienced mediator “…is in a position to discern all past, future

(emphasis added) and present minds with his personal knowledge (Mahasi 147).”

7

Sunthorn provides further interesting insight into the rebirth process by

explaining ‘who’ is actually reborn:

“…although Buddhism categorically rejects the existence of the

permanent self (atta) on the transcendental level of truth (lokuttara-

dhamma), it by no means rejects the existence of the empirical self or

the conventional individual. This conventional individual is regarded

as the performer of karma and the receiver of its results. And it is this

conventional individual who undergoes rebirth in the course of his

wandering in Samsara (Sunthorn 110).”

This very specific discussion of the rebirth process, breaking down of

‘consciousness’ into component parts, the talk of a ‘third psychical factor’, the ability

to see into the future, and identification of a ‘conventional individual’, all seem to

border dangerously on metaphysical matters that the Buddha famously refused to

address. The Buddha cautioned against wondering too much about such matters as

“being without spiritual ‘benefit’ in the effort to attain salvation from suffering

(Jackson 38)”. The focus given to these matters would seem to further reinforce the

idea that the concept of rebirth plays a central and important role in the Buddhism as

described by the traditional sources.

III. Alternative Views

There are a number of alternative views on rebirth in Thai Buddhist discourse,

both in reinterpretation of the very concept in terms of former and future lives and in

its importance to the practice and doctrine espoused. In this section I will first discuss

the alternative views and then point out how some of these alternative views can be

found in traditional sources.

A. Views from Alternative Sources

1. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu

The clearest alternative to the traditional view of rebirth comes from

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. Buddhadasa reinterpreted the scriptures relating to rebirth in

order to bring them more in line with what he saw as the core of the Buddha’s

teaching. Buddhadasa’s approach relies on his application of Dhammic language to

8

interpret various ancient Pali words, “language referring to mental things,

psychological language, Dharma language, which is spoken by people who know

Dharma (Buddhadasa Another 3).” Buddhadasa reinterprets the language of the

scriptures using this Dhammic language to come to a different conclusion about

rebirth. Rebirth is here and now, one does not have to wait for the next life to

experience heaven and hell.

Santikaro Bhikkhu, in his essay “Buddhadasa Bhikkhu’s Contributions to the

World,” sets forth Buddhadasa’s view stating “…jati (birth) means a mental birth of

the ‘I am,’ of ego, of self, whenever we foolishly take sense experiences to be

positive or negative. When birth is seen happening right now – and is going on all the

time – we no longer need depend on beliefs about the future (Santikaro 90).”

Buddhadasa made very clear he categorically rejected the traditional view of

Dependent Origination covering three lives (Buddhadasa Paticcasamuppada 78).

Ajarn Suwanna Satha-Anand provides insight on Buddhadasa’s position in her essay

“Buddhadasa’s Bitter Potions as Legacies for Thai Society” by stating that

”Buddhadasa…interprets the theory of Dependent Origination as covering the present

life of a person and not the past, present and future lives as traditionally understood.

The ‘birth’ within this chain of causation is a psychological birth and not a physical

one (Suwanna Buddhadasa 68).”

While Buddhadasa did not come right out and refute the concept of rebirth in

terms of former and future lives, it is clear it does not play a role in his teachings as

evidenced by statements such as:

“…there is no person who spins around in the cycle of birth, death and

rebirth (Buddhadasa Paticcasamuppada 68).”

“To insist that defilements and karma from a past life become effective

in this, a later life, is impossible. And when it is said that the same

person exists in the past, present and future lives, it becomes

eternalism, an extremist view (81).”

“We are talking about the young child who, upon birth has no

knowledge of anything at all. Dependent Origination does not become

operative until the child becomes concerned with the five sense

pleasures and knows satisfaction and dissatisfaction (97).”

9

Thus as we can see, Buddhadasa provides a very different view of rebirth, no

longer defining it terms of former and future lives, but happening here and now. He

makes it clear that this is not just a possible alternative view, but is in fact the real

view taught by the Buddha. While it is clear that the concept of former and future

lives plays little or no part in Buddhadasa’s version of Buddhism, he gives less

guidance on how to incorporate his well-reasoned reinterpretation of rebirth into

practice and thus how it fits into his overall teaching of Buddhism seems less clear.

2. J.C. Jennings

Before turning to views of rebirth in two alternative Buddhist movements in

Thailand, I want to take note of a non-Thai alternative view of the concept of rebirth.

In The Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha, J.G. Jennings makes the case that rebirth

was not preached by the Buddha because it was not relevant and does not fit with his

teachings of impermanence, suffering and non-self. Jennings, in fact, states

emphatically that the idea of reward and punishment in successive lives is ‘radically

inconsistent’ with these doctrines (Jennings xivii): “The goal to which Gotama points

is freedom from the temptation arising from the bodily senses and from spiritual

desires, not freedom from the terror of rebirth (xli).”

Jennings sums up his view on what the Buddha taught on this matter, which I

have quoted at length given his eloquent and well-reasoned argument:

“…the great moral lesson vividly impressed by the doctrine of Karma

is that every action, word, and thought bring their inevitable

consequences…But whereas to the Hindu the consequences are borne

…by the individual responsible…to Gotama this individualistic appeal

…is strongly reprobated by it as an appeal to that very individuality

which is the basis of all thirst, desire, grasping, sorrow and evil… To

Gotama…every action, word and thought of man has its immediate

consequences, here and now, on all who are brought into relationship

with it, and that these consequences have no end, but proceed

relentlessly onward from life to life, from generation to generation…it

is not one single individual who suffers or who gains by any

action…but it is all the world, in each transient generation, that suffers

or gains by the deeds, words and thoughts of every fleeting

individuality that manifests for a brief lifetime the phenomenon of

separate being (572-573).”

10

The position that Jennings puts forth is quite similar to that of Buddhadasa,

although there is no evidence that one had any influence on the other. Both provide

clear and well thought out positions that rebirth in terms of former and future lives, if

it happens at all, is not important to the practice of Buddhism as taught by the

Buddha. One might even go so far as to say their position would advocate that a

strongly held belief in former and future lives would be detrimental to being able to

following the path the Buddha taught as it creates attachment to the self and inhibits

progress toward ultimate freedom from suffering.

3. Santi Asoke

Santi Asoke was founded by Samana Bodhiraksa in 1975 as a reaction to

mainstream Buddhist practice. The Santi Asoke movement relies upon a highly

developed discipline to their practice of Buddhism, marked by such prominent

features of the eating of vegetarian food, following the five precepts and focusing on

simple living.

Marija-Leena Heikkila-Horn, who has done serious study of Santi Asoke,

states “…the theory and practice of the Asoke …come very close to the teachings

of…Buddhadasa (Heikkila-Horn Buddhism 106,142)” with a focus on the here and

now. Santi Asoke’s promotional literature states “…the Asoke members are all

encouraged to strive to become enlightened…within this present life (Heikkila-Horn

Insight 58)”. Santi Asoke also appears to be trying to distance themselves from

mainstream Thai Buddhism by saying “…the concept of nirvana differs in the Asoke

ideology from the general ideas of the Thai Buddhist…Asoke group teaches that

nirvana can be reached in this life since it is a state of mind (60).”

This view was reinforced by Ruangkhao Chaohinfa, a 20-year resident and

chief librarian of Santi Asoke. Khun Ruangkhao stated they believe one should not

worry too much about the next life because nirvana can be reached in this life, even if

only in small ways on a daily basis. However, when asked about rebirth, she said ‘for

sure’ they believe in former and future lives and that one’s karma, both from past and

11

present lives, is the determiner of our situation in this life because this is what the

Buddha taught and experienced himself. (Personal Interview, 25 February 2006)

Thus, while Santi Asoke’s ideas may be similar to some of Buddhadasa’s, it

would appear that Santi Asoke has not been willing to take the concept of rebirth as

far as Buddhadasa. This can be seen in Heikkila-Horn’s analysis of merit making by

Santi Asoke: “In order to improve his (or her) social and economic status in the next

life, a Buddhist should earn religious merit which then affects his future existence

and, according to a more popular interpretation, his present life. The Asoke sect has

not abolished this system, but has criticized the traditional forms of merit-making

(Heikkila-Horn Buddhism 97).”

In addition, the statements made by Samana Bodhiraksa “…. that he is a ‘Phra

Bodhisattva’, a reincarnation of the spirit on his/her way across lifetimes to

Enlightenment…that he needs no formal training since he has accumulated

knowledge and merit from his past lives…[and that]…he is the reincarnation of or, at

the very least, a follower in the footsteps of Phra Sariputta (Sanitsuda)” all seem to

give the traditional concept of rebirth in terms of former and future lives a higher

degree of prominence and importance.

Therefore with respect to Santi Asoke, it appears that while they have de-

emphasized the idea of former and future lives, they have not gone as far in rejecting

or reinterpreting the traditional concept of rebirth like Buddhadasa. It appears to play

some importance in their view of Buddhist doctrine, even thought they have tried to

distance themselves from mainstream Thai Buddhism. Furthermore, the concept of

rebirth appears to ‘legitimize’ its founder and thus perhaps, to a certain extent, it does

have a central and important role.

4. Dhammakaya

The last alternative view that I will look at is that of Wat Dhammakaya. Wat

Dhammakaya was formed in 1978 by disciples of Luang Phor Sodh, a meditation

master who claimed to have rediscovered the meditation technique that was used by

the Buddha to reach enlightenment (Bowers 29). This meditation technique is perhaps

12

the most prominent feature of the Buddhism practiced by the Wat Dhammakaya

followers. However, the unique ideas about the cosmology of the world and its ideas

and use of the concept of rebirth are one of its most interesting features. It is these

that distinguish Wat Dhammakaya from traditional Thai Buddhism.

The Dhammakaya meditation technique can be spilt into two levels, low and

high. The low-level Dhammakaya meditation is practiced by most followers and

involves multiple steps to seeing bodies within. However, it is in the high-level

meditation, which is only offered to a select few who have completely mastered the

lower level, where it is said one can gain special powers “…which enable one to visit

one’s own past lives, or the lives of others, discover where someone has been reborn

and know the reasons why the person was reborn there (24).”

While these powers are not unique to those practicing Dhammakaya

meditation, Wat Dhammakaya’s view of the cosmology of the world seems to be

unique. Jeffery Bowers relates an interview with Mettanando Bhikkhu, a monk who

was at one time active in Wat Dhammakaya, in which this cosmology is explained. I

recently confirmed the accuracy of this statement with Mettanando Bhikkhu, who

said this is how the abbot of Wat Dhammakaya had explained it to him (Mettanando,

e-mail 15 Feb 2006):

“…before the present Buddha, Sidartha Gautama, attained

enlightenment, conquering Mara in the process, human beings’

existence was not a cycle of rebirth, sickness, death, subsequent

rebirth, sickness, etc., until enlightenment, but rather moving in a

straight line toward emancipation or enlightenment. In order for the

Buddha to attain enlightenment, he had to defeat Mara. This caused

the universe to split. Where there had once been only a single center in

the universe, around which existed good, evil and indifferent beings

and focus, there were now three poles or dimensions. After this, Mara

is described as twisting existence into a samsaric circle which is

described as today, perhaps in retribution for being removed from the

original single dimension of the universe (Bowers 25).”

While the origin of ‘samsara’ according to Wat Dhammakaya seems to be

unique, it highlights the fact that the concept of former and future lives held by the

Wat Dhammakaya movement is very much along the lines of the traditional view.

13

This is highlighted by broadcasts over the temple’s cable television network,

Dhamma Media Channel (DMC). In a session seen on February 25, 2005, the abbot

of Wat Dhammakaya gave a sermon regarding one of the temple’s members. He

explained why she and her family had suffered various problems, relating each

problem to a former life situation. For example, he said that her sister’s son had been

born unable to speak because he had yelled at his parents in a former life. When

describing how an uncle who was a drunkard had gone to hell, lurid images of hell

were shown. The abbot concluded by telling her that since she was a member of Wat

Dhammakaya and had been making merit with them, if she continued, she could

expect be reborn in her next life in Tusita, the fourth level of heaven.

These broadcasts that focus on rebirth would appear to have a number of

implications and apparent intentions. First, the very specific connection between

suffering, merit and one’s rebirth prospects, indicates an interpretation of rebirth very

much along the lines of the traditional view, perhaps one could even say ‘ultra-

traditional’. Second, it is made clear that the more merit making one does with Wat

Dhammakaya, the better one’s rebirth prospects. This makes for a strong incentive to

donate more to the temple. One of Wat Dhammakaya’s founders, Khun Yai Chun, is

described by Mettanando Bhikkhu “…as a type of ‘merit calculator’. She had the

ability to determine exactly how much merit, and one assume demerit, one has made

by a given act (69).” Third, the broadcasts demonstrate that the abbot has the special

power to be able to perceive such things, much like the Buddha did himself.

According to Mettanando Bhikkhu, this gives the abbot tremendous authority in the

eyes of this followers (Mettanando, e-mail 6 Mar. 2006). Like Santi Asoke, this may

serve to ‘legitimize’ him and might explain the reverence the abbot has gained along

with his ability to motivate his followers into merit making activity, which he seems

to have done with spectacular success judging from the millions being spend on

building Wat Dhammakaya into the ‘world center of Buddhism’.

Wat Dhammakaya, while following an ‘ultra-traditional’ concept of rebirth,

seems to have gone further and, perhaps one could say, has co-opted the concept to its

own advantage. Even though the original purpose of the movement was to promote

14

Dhammakaya mediation as taught by Luang Phor Sohd, and this continues to be one

of its most public faces, the exploitation of the concept of former and future lives

appears to be an integral part of its success.

B. Alternative Views from Tradition Sources

Having looked at alternative views of rebirth from non-traditional sources, a

closer look at some of the traditional sources shows some views much in line with the

alternative side. This indicates that, notwithstanding the importance that rebirth has in

traditional Thai Buddhism, there appears to be room for alternative views from some

very traditional sources.

1. Tri Phum

Lithai, even with his endless discussion of rebirth in the myriad of heavens

and hells, seems to provide an out: “The people…should hasten to …show zeal in

practicing the Dhamma …so as to gain immediate release and reach the treasure that

is the great city of Nibbana (Reynolds 326.)” This is a view much like the view from

some alternative sources that nirvana can be reached here and now, in this lifetime

with the right practice.

2. Sunthorn’s Alterative View

Toward the end of Sunthorn’s treatise, he appears to provide room for

alternative views on the importance of rebirth by saying “Buddhism, however, does

not lay much stress on future existences, its main stress being on the life that one is

experiencing here and now (Sunthorn 212).” He concedes “…as regards rebirth or a

new life after death, it is true that the belief in such a state is mainly a matter of

faith…[and]…there is no harm in adopting a skeptical attitude toward the doctrine of

rebirth (285).” He ends saying “no matter whether the doctrines of karma and rebirth

are valid or not, one who keeps and follows the watchword ‘do try to do good always’

is always well-protected against all possible kinds of degeneration and ruin (286).”

This all sounds very much like the views of Buddhadasa being espoused by this very

traditional source.

3. Somdet Phra Nyanasamvara

15

Another source that would normally be considered very traditional is that of

Somdet Phra Nyanasamvara (Venerable Suvaddhano Bhikkhu), the abbot of Wat

Bowoniwet and the current Supreme Patriarch of Thailand. A review of two of his

writings Selected Articles on Buddhism and A Guide to Awareness, indicates only

one passing reference to ‘future lives’. Recognizing that one can not necessarily

prove a view by its absence and that he does not address the subject directly, he does

cover such topics as “What Did the Buddha Teach?”, “Practical Buddhadhamma” and

“Integration into the Noble Truth of Suffering”. These are all standard subjects

whereby the idea of former and future lives is usually presented. A reading of these

texts leads one to believe that he wanted to emphasis the need to focus on cessation of

suffering and achieving mindfulness in this life and not worry about the next.

Buddhadasa also makes the claim that another Supreme Patriarch might have

had some alternative views to rebirth. He said Somdet Sangkharaj Krom Phra

Vachirayanawong of Wat Bowoniwet “…didn’t accept that version of Dependent

Origination that spans three births and he taught that it spans only one birth, but he

was not sure and so he did not go into details (Buddhadasa Paticcasamuppada 66).”

4. Phra Dhammapitaka

Phra Dhammapitaka has been labeled as a “brilliant contemporary reformer

(Swearer 662)”, as “one of the foremost Buddhist scholars in Thailand today (Payutto

Good v)” and as “as a brain and representative of the Thai Sangha (Dhanapon 3).”

Whatever label he is given, Phra Dhammapitaka tries to provide balanced

presentations of both traditional and alternative views in his writings.

In his book Dependent Origination, the Buddhist Law of Conditionality, Phra

Dhammapitaka, while explaining the ‘Standard Model’ of the principle of Dependent

Origination along the lines of the classical traditional views, also gives considerable

time and discussion to ‘Other Interpretations’. These other interpretations are very

much in tune with those of Buddhadasa, that is that the cycle of suffering occurs in

this present life (Payutto Dependent 42). Furthermore, he gives scriptural proof for

such an interpretation saying in “Abhidhamma Pitaka (Sammohavinodani) the

16

principle of Dependent Origination is shown occurring entirely within the space of

one mind moment. (98).”

Phra Dhammapitaka continues this theme in Good, Evil and Beyond: Kamma

in the Buddha’s Teaching. When discussing the “Fruition of Kamma”, he says:

“…overemphasis on rebirth into heaven realms and hell realms ignores

the good which should be aspired to in the present…ignores the

importance of the qualities of moral rectitude and desire for goodness,

which in turn becomes a denial of, or even an insult to, the human

potential to practice and develop truth and righteousness for their own

sakes (Payutto Good 50).”

He then goes on to conclude that belief in former and future lives can not be

proven one way or another and is thus a matter of a faith. This would lead one to

conclude that he leaves plenty of room for alternative views to rebirth in his version

of Buddhism.

IV. Concluding Remarks

From this brief survey of some of the concept of rebirth in Thai Buddhism, it

is evident that there are a variety of views that can be incorporated into one’s

understanding and practice of Buddhism. While all seem to include the concept of

rebirth in some form and manner, they all do it to different degrees.

The traditional view provides a very clear and easy to understand concept of

former and future lives governed by one’s accumulated karma. This model fits nicely

into one of moral atonement and the need for virtuous actions, with the concept of

rebirth in terms of former and future lives very much at the center. The alternative

views, from both alternative and traditional sources, provide new and interesting

ways to look at this concept. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu has the most radically new

approach, one that incorporates a focus on the here and now. There is no need to

wonder about all those heavens and hells in other worlds, you can experience it all in

this world. J.G. Jennings provides an interesting intellectual complement to

Buddhadasa to help answer some of those nagging questions of how the Buddha

might have looked at this issue. In fact, one does not really need to go far beyond the

17

traditional sources to find alternative views to rebirth, as we can see in Phra

Dhammapitaka, Sunthorn Na-Rangsi and even His Holiness, the Supreme Patriarch.

The two prominent alternative Buddhist movements in Thailand, Santi Asoke

and Wat Dhammakaya, show how the concept of rebirth can be used to some

advantage. While they have taken very different approaches to the practice of

Buddhism, there are similarities to their use of the concept of rebirth as a form of

‘legitimization’ by their founders. Having said that, it is clear Santi Asoke has de-

emphasized the mystical aspect of rebirth, trending more toward the Buddhadasa

model of here and now, while Wat Dhammakaya has fully embraced it in an ‘ultra-

traditional’ mode.

So have I provided some insight into one of my initial question: Do I have to

accept rebirth to call myself a ‘Buddhist’ or to ‘practice Buddhism’? A clue to

answering this question perhaps comes from another possible alternative view, this

one from the Buddha himself. In a passage from the Anguttara-Nikaya:

“…the Buddha is reported to have said that a virtuous person who has

performed only good deeds will have four comforting convictions in

this very life…

1. If there be a world beyond and there be the results of good and evil

deeds performed by beings, this (good karma) is a basis for the

possibility that on the dissolution of the body, after death, I shall arise

in the blissful state of the heavenly world.

2. If there be no world beyond, no results of good and evil deeds done

by beings, I shall keep myself free from ill-will, from oppression, and

from suffering, enjoying only happiness in this life.

3. If evil is done, evil is there to befall the evil-doer. I have not

designed evil for anyone, wherefore, then, can suffering befall me who

has done no evil?

4. If evil is done, evil is not there to befall the evil-doer. I have

considered and found myself purified in both ways. (Sunthorn 236).”

Source: Payutto, Dependent Origination 39

A-1

V. Appendix 1-Standard Model of Dependant Origination

1.Ignorance

2.Volitional

A. Impulses

3. Consciousness

4. Body

& Mind

5. Sense

Bases

6. Contact 7. Feeling

8. Craving

9. Clinging

10. Becoming

11. Birth

12. Aging

& Death

Present

Past Future

Result Cause

Result

Cause

Defilement

Kamma

Kamma

Defilement

Kamma Result

Kamma Result

Craving

Clinging

Becoming

Birth

Aging

& Death

Ignorance

Vol.

Impulses

Conciseness

Body & Mind

Sense Bases

Contact Feeling

B- 1

VI. Bibliography

Works Cited:

Bowers, Jeffery. Dhammakaya Meditation in Thai Society. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn

Press, 1996.

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. Paticcasamuppada: Practical Dependent Origination. Trans.

Steve Schmidt. Nonthaburi, Thailand: Vuddhidhamma Fund, 1992.

------. Another Kind of Birth. Bangkok: Sivaphorn Ltd, 1969.

Dhanapon Thitapakittirat. ”The Middle Path For The Modern Thai Society: A

Perspective Of Venerable Phra Dhammapitaka (Prayudh Payutto).” Nakhon

Phanom: Rajabhat Institute Nakhon Phanom, 2002

Heikkila-Horn, Marja-Leena. Buddhism With Open Eyes: Belief and Practice of Santi

Asoke. Bangkok: Fah-Aphai Co., 1997.

Heikkila-Horn, Marja-Leena and Rassamee Krisanamis, eds. Insight Into Santi

Asoke. Bangkok: Fah-Aphai Co., 2002.

Hicks, John H. Philosophy of Religion. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1990.

Jackson, Peter A. Buddhadasa: A Buddhist Thinker for the Modern World. Bangkok:

Siam Society, 1988.

Jennings, J.G. The Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,

1974.

Kaufman, Whitley R.P. “Karma, Rebirth, and the Problem of Evil.” Philosophy East

& West Volume 55, Number 1 (Jan 2005): 15-32.

Mahasi Sayadaw. The Great Discourse on Not-Self. Trans. U Ko Lay (Zeya Muang).

Bangkok: Buddhadhamma Foundation, 1996.

Mettanando Bhikkhu. “Re: Questions on Dhammakaya” E-mail to Frederick

Goss. 15 Feb. 2006.

-----. “Re. Wat Dhammakaya”. E-mail to Frederick Goss. 6 Mar. 2006.

B- 2

Nyanasamvara. A Guide to Awareness. Trans. Bhikkhu Ariyesako and Bhikkhu

Kantasilo. Bangkok: Wat Bovorniwet.

-----. Selected Articles on Buddhism. Bangkok: Mahamakut Rajavidyalaya Press,

1989.

Nyanatiloka Mahathera. The Significance of Dependent Origination in Theravada

Buddhism. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Center, 1969.

Pasanno Bhikkhu. “The last breath.” Bangkok Post. 29 January 2006.

Payutto, P.A. Dependent Origination: The Buddhist Law of Conditionality. Trans.

Bruce Evans. Bangkok: Buddhadamma Foundation, 1994.

-----. Good, Evil and Beyond. Trans. Bruce Evans. Bangkok: Buddhadhamma

Foundation, 1996.

Piyadassi Thera. Dependent Origination. Kandy: Buddhist Publications Society,

1959.

Reynolds, Frank E., and Mani B. Reynolds, trans. Three Worlds According to King

Ruang. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1982.

Ruangkhao Chaohinfa. Personal Interview. 25 Feb. 2005.

Santikaro Bhikkhu. “The Buddhadasa Bhikkhu’s Contributions to the World”. The

Quest for a Just Society. Ed. Sulak Sivaraksa. Bangkok: Thai Inter – Religious

Commission for Development, 1994.

Sri Aurobindo. The Problem of Rebirth. India: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1978.

Sunthorn Na-Rangsi. The Buddhist Concepts of Karma and Rebirth. Bangkok:

Mahamakut Rajavidyalaya Press, 1976.

Suwanna Satha-Anand. “Buddhadasa’s Bitter Potions as Legacies for Thai Society”.

The Quest for a Just Society. Ed. Sulak Sivaraksa. Bangkok: Thai Inter –

Religious Commission for Development, 1994.

Swearer, Donald K. “Fundamentalistic Movements in Theravada Buddhism.”

Fundamentalisms Observed. Eds. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. 628-690.