Organizer: Yoko Hayami, Kyoto University, Japan It has often been pointed out in Southeast Asia, that ethnic minorities opt for religions different from that of the majority population. When they choose another world religion, it is interpreted as resistance and self-demarcation from the majority, and yet if they choose the religion of the majority, their practices are often deemed to be heterodox versions. State-centered institutional religion delineates religious orthodoxy while the state delineates ethnic categories. Both scholars as well as the state-centered status quo have tended to associate specific religions with specific groups. If we focus on the interfaces, however, neither the religious practices nor the group boundaries are ever so clear cut, nor do the boundaries of religion and ethnicity coincide. At best, this has been recognized in the name of syncretism, or shifting religious identities.
In this session, we look at religious practices from the peripheries, questioning state-centered views of religions and their delineations. We examine orthodoxy and institutionalized religion from the peripheries and ask how practices by those defined as minorities contest the delineations made by the orthodoxy, as neither simple resistance nor total accommodation.
The panel consists of seven papers by anthropologists and historian addressing religious practices from Yunnan (China), Burma/Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia. All deal with minorities and their religious practices in relation to the majority state-endorsed religion. Since time is limited, in the panel we will each introduce the main points of our papers, while full versions of the papers will be made available online and at the session.
This presentation aims to examine Shan Buddhism in the border area of Northern Thailand. In the northern Thai-Myanmar border area where the Shan have mainly resided, we could find two contradictory processes- a rigid border control by the state administration and a fluid border crossing of people, goods and information. This area has a long history of the ceaseless migrations of the Shan and other ethnic groups; the flow of people has continued even after the border demarcation in the early 20th century. Recently, this migration may be characterized by a one-way flow from Myanmar to Thailand and its steady increase in quantity.
In the religious sphere, the Thai government has been institutionalizing and standardizing “Thai Buddhism” since early 20th century. The government’s efforts seem to have succeeded, resulted in the unified organization of “Thai Sangha”, the systematized curriculum for the monastery education, and the standar0D
This presentation aims to examine Shan Buddhism in the border area of Northern Thailand. In the northern Thai-Myanmar border area where the Shan have mainly resided, we could find two contradictory processes- a rigid border control by the state administration and a fluid border crossing of people, goods and information. This area has a long history of the ceaseless migrations of the Shan and other ethnic groups; the flow of people has continued even after the border demarcation in the early 20th century. Recently, this migration may be characterized by a one-way flow from Myanmar to Thailand and its steady increase in quantity.
In the religious sphere, the Thai government has been institutionalizing and standardizing “Thai Buddhism” since early 20th century. The government’s efforts seem to have succeeded, resulted in the unified organization of “Thai Sangha”, the systematized curriculum for the monastery education, and the standardized Buddhist festivals across the country. Some lineages in local Sangha in this border area have been integrated into “Thai Sangha” in this process. Shan Buddhism, however, is not totally assimilated into “Thai Buddhism” and still continues to maintain its unique style of practices in seasonal festivals, life cycle rituals, usages of Shan manuscripts, Pali scripture recitation and temple architecture.
By focusing on the flow of monks and lay intellectuals in the border area where the strong state control and the persistent border crossing co-exist, this presentation analyzes the important role of the border crossing migrations for continuing Shan Buddhist practices in Northern Thailand.
The purpose of this presentation is to examine the assertions made and logic presented in two Karen history books by Buddhist Karen, published around the last decade of the British colonial period in Burma. The 1921 census revealed for the first time with statistical precision that the majority (77.3%) of the Karen were actually Buddhist. However, Buddhist Karen received scant attention in ethnological reports, and remained largely ignored. In this context, the significance of the Kayin Chronicle by U Pyinnya (1929) and the Kuyin Great Chronicle by U Saw (1931) are noteworthy, as they were the first self-assertion by Buddhist Karen as being an ethnic group.
Writing in Burmese for Burmese readers, the authors sought to prove that the Karen were an authentic people (lumyou) comparable to the Burman and Mon in the Buddhist world, with dynastic lineages of their own kingship (min) leading back into the remote past, and a group faithful to their religious order (thathana). This linkage of lumyou=min=thathana was presented in both works in order to persuade skeptical readers, who in the 1920’s believed that the Karen were too primitive to constitute an authentic lumyou of the thathana world, since they lacked the tradition of Buddhist mins. Further analysis of these texts, in comparison to A History of Pgakanyaw (1939), the first self-portrait of a Christian Karen written by a Baptist author, will cast new light on the social formation of Karen identity among Buddhists in the 1920’s and 1930’s.
It has been pointed out that ancestor worship has been practiced throughout Vietnam, as one of the most popular religious beliefs, even for the people who have converted to Catholicism or to any other institutionalized religions. Within this perspective, this study aims to explore another aspect of Ramadan among Vietnamese muslims, which has been often described as “not orthodox” by many scholars.
According to official statistics of Vietnam, there are approximately 60,000 muslims in the country, a large number of whom belongs to the Cham ethnic group. In addition, muslims in Vietnam are divided into two different groups; "Islam" or the “New Islamic Group” which is Sunni, and "Bani" or the “Old Islamic Group” which is the original type of “Muslim” in Vietnam. This study will focus on the religious practices of Bani or Cham Bani during Ramadan.
Through this consideration, I would like to explore the dynamic process of Islamization and localization on the “periphery“, and to examine the diversity among Islamic elements which have hitherto been seen as unitary.
This paper, based on a case study of Chinese temples in Phuket, aims to demonstrate the importance of religious activities outside “religion” in understanding the so-called “Buddhist” societies in Thailand, and to question the category of “religion” itself.
In Thailand, most of the Chinese temples are not recognized as “religious places” by the religious administration (namely the Department of Religious Affairs), since they (called sanchao in Thai) are under the supervision of the Ministry of Interior. In Phuket, Chinese temples as “non-religious” places (of worship?) outnumber officially recognized Buddhist temples and they offer occasions to worship Buddhist deities. One of the unique features of the “Buddhist” activities of the Chinese temples in Phuket is that they are conducted without monks. Because the Chinese temples are placed outside the state protection of “religion”, they are not institutionalized to belong to any state-approved religion. This is beneficial to the Chinese temples for the reasons that they do not have to compete with “state Buddhism”, and that in such temples indiscriminate syncretic worship is latently sanctioned. The Chinese temples of Phuket also challenge the definition of religion in another way. The functions of Chinese associations and charity foundations overlap with those of the Chinese temples. Our discussion above leads us to conclude that all of these activities outside “religion” actually occupy an important part of “Buddhism” in Thailand, so that we need to reconsider the framework of “Buddhism” and “religion” in Thailand.
This presentation focuses on the recent re-recognition of Confucianism as one of the official religions in Indonesia and its impact to the Chinese Indonesian cultural practice as well as the positioning of Chinese Indonesians in newly democratized Indonesia after the fall of Soeharto in 1998.
Looking back into the history of Chinese Overseas, Confucianism occasionally came to mean more than simply a philosophy of filial piety, due to its association with China. First, at the turn of the last century, “Confucianism” became the backbone for the movement of re-sinicization and modernization among the Chinese overseas in Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia. In Indonesia, Confucianism was eventually established as a “religion” and even listed among officially recognized religions in Presidential decree No.1 in 1965. Official recognition of Confucianism, however, was lifted in mid 1970s by Soeharto’s government possibly as part of his assimilation policy towards Chinese Indonesians.
At the turn of this century, Confucianism once again gained public attention as the Supreme Council of the Confucian Religion of Indonesia (Majelis Tinggi Agama Khonghucu Indonesia, or MATAKIN) promoted a movement of re-obtaining official status as part of Chinese Indonesian cultural revitalization in newly democratized Indonesia. Though both movements were the consequences of re-contextualizing Chinese Indonesians after social changes, the emphasis of the new movement was more on defining Chinese Indonesians as part of the Indonesian Nation rather than on re-sinicizing them. The presentation first examines the process of re-recognition of Confucianism, and then discusses a few cases which represent its implications.
|
