Modern Thai Buddhism and Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: A Social History

Chapter 4: Debates on the Empty Mind

107 Debates on the Empty Mind As indicated in earlier chapters, reading the classical scriptures written in ,  was fascinated with the teaching of lokuttara dhamma, or the teaching of , which many Thai Buddhists in the early 20th century tended to consider unrealistic or unpractical. ’s interest in lokuttara dhamma was its teaching about “overcoming suffering,” and his spiritual pursuit was not confined to the scope of , the classical scriptures of  Buddhism. For the purpose of overcoming suffering,  found common ground in the notion of emptiness (: ), which had developed later in the  tradition rather than .  freely created dialogue with people and thoughts from other religious traditions, and he was enthusiastic to discover and propagate teachings which Thai Buddhists had hardly ever heard of. The notions of emptiness and empty mind (Thai: chit wang) were among the most striking ideas that  introduced to the Thai Buddhist public sphere. There were people who greatly appreciated  for teaching these new ideas, but at the same time, those unfamiliar concepts became an object of criticism. Earlier studies of  also considered his proposal of emptiness and empty mind as characteristic of his thought. Gabaude indicated that emptiness was one of ’s criteria for determining the authenticity of the scriptures and Buddhist beliefs,1 and Jackson implied that ’s promotion of empty mind was a modern, Protestant kind of abolition of the monk-laity distinction in order to afford wider access to .2 Both studies identified significant implications of ’s unique interpretive traits, and Jackson’s study at least partly mentioned critical statements by ’s opponents about his thoughts, and indicated some problematic aspects of their arguments.3 What has not yet been examined is people’s general perceptions and discussions of CHAPTER 4 108 Modern Thai Buddhism and Buddhadsa Bhikkhu ’s teaching. In order to approach this aspect, it is not sufficient to study solely the content of ’s sermons and publications. High-profile public discussions and even the inflammatory nature of the negative campaigns would have had a strong impact on people’s perception of ’s teaching. In the public sphere — probably not just that of Buddhism or of Thailand, but generally speaking — there are rumors, prejudgments, exaggerations, personal preferences and misunderstandings about well-known individuals. There have even been some intentional distortions of famous people’s reputations in order to provide the public with inaccurate interpretations of their thoughts. Even though some of those attacks are based on unreasonable grounds, their impact on the public image or perception of an individual can be significantly large. In the case of , his public image was characterized as polemical by his opponents, especially through reference to his introduction of unconventional ideas: emptiness and empty mind. As we shall see in this chapter, ’s opponents used various tactics to manipulate public perception of him. Few previous studies have given consideration to the discourses of ’s opponents. The aim of this chapter is not to present some interpretation of ’s teaching about emptiness and empty mind as a better alternative to existing studies, but rather to explore discussions in the Buddhist public sphere, which strove to characterize his teaching as controversial. In order to clarify this matter, the following four points will be examined: first, ’s and Thai Buddhists’ encounter with new ideas in Zen through intellectual assistance from local Chinese migrants; second, the main points of ’s interpretation of emptiness and empty mind; third, ’s panel discussions with Kukrit Pramoj, through which the notion of empty mind became widely known; and fourth, What is Right? What is Wrong? (Arai thuk, arai phit), a book in the form of a debate over the issue. This chapter will demonstrate how ’s opponents manipulated public opinion to undermine his credibility, and how his followers defended the relevance of his teaching. 1. ’s and Thai Buddhists’ Encounter with Zen Notions ’s Thai translation of the English edition of a classical Chinese Zen text, Sutra of Wei Lang, which was first published in the journal Buddhism in 1947, was probably the first work to spread the unfamiliar ideas of Mahāyāna Buddhism widely among Thai Buddhists.4 ’s lay friend, judge Phraya Latphli, introduced him to Wong Debates on the Empty Mind 109 Mou-lam’s English translation of this book.5 Latphli suggested that  translate the book into Thai and publish the chapters as a series in Buddhism, but initially  was not confident of his language ability. Latphli...