लाओसमधील बौद्ध धर्म

Monks gathering morning alms

बौद्ध धर्म लाओसचा प्राथमिक धर्म आहे. लाओसमध्ये प्रचलित बौद्ध धर्म हा थेरवाद परंपरेचा आहे. लाओ बौद्ध धर्म हा थेरवडा बौद्ध धर्माचे एक अद्वितीय रूप आहे आणि तो लाओ संस्कृतीच्या आधारावर आहेत. लाओसमधील बौद्ध धर्मात अनेकदा जवळच्या लोकांच्या ग्रामीण भागात राहणाऱ्या विश्वासांबद्दल आणि पूर्वजांच्या विचारांचा विश्वास टिकवून आहेत.

आधुनिक लाओसमध्ये बौद्ध धर्माचे पालन करणाऱ्या लोकांची लोकसंख्या ही विविध अहवालानुसार वेगवेगळी आहे, एका अहवालानुसार ९०% लाओ जनता बौद्ध धर्मीय आहेत. तर सीआयए वर्ल्ड फॅक्टबुकने अंदाज दर्शवला आहे की एकूण लोकसंख्येच्या ६७% बौद्ध म्हणून ओळखले जातात. लाओस सरकारमधील बौद्धांच्या संख्येचा अचूक अंदाज तयार करणे हे लाओटियन सरकारद्वारे उपलब्ध केलेल्या माहितीच्या कमतरतेमुळे गुंतागुंतीचे आहे आणि लाओसमध्ये बौद्ध व चैतन्यवादी (जीवात्मवाद) प्रथा यांच्यातील घनिष्ठ संबंध बौद्ध-जीवात्मवादी (बुद्धिस्ट-एनिमिस्ट) या दोन्ही बौद्धधर्माचे अनुयायी ९०% ते ९८% आहेत. येथे चिनी किंवा व्हिएतनामी महायान बौद्धांचीदेखील मोठी संख्या आहे.

इतिहास

Early histories of Lao Buddhism

Theravada Buddhism is believed to have first reached Laos during the 7th - 8th Centuries CE, via the kingdom of Dvaravati. During the 7th Century, tantric Buddhism was also introduced to Laos from the kingdom of Nan-chao, an ethnically Tai kingdom centered in modern-day Yunnan, China. The Nan-chao kingdom also likely introduced the political ideology of the king as defender and protector of Buddhism, an important ideological tie between the monarchy and the sangha in much of Southeast Asia. We also know very little about the transfer of Buddhism to the region which today is called Laos, but the current state of research suggests that Buddhism did not come in a single movement. According to Michel Lorrillard "the conditions surrounding this penetration remain very imprecise, due to the long duration of this process". From a general perspective, research on the early history of Lao Buddhism had advanced slowly, but recent studies are also signalling progress.

During the 11th & 12th Century, rulers took control of Muang Sua, the historical region of the kingdom of Luang Prabang in northern Laos. During this period, Mahayana Buddhism replaced Theravada Buddhism as the dominant religious ideology of the ruling classes. Epigraphical sources confirm that the early Lao kingdoms display the first clear signs of the Buddhicization of royal power around the middle of the fifteenth century when kings were labeled cakkavatti (Pali for king as the 'turner of the wheel of the Buddhist dhamma').

Historically, the Lao state is regarded as beginning in 1353 CE with the coronation of Fa Ngum at Luang Prabang. According to local historiography, Fa Ngum brought his Khmer Theravada teacher with him to act as adviser and head priest of the new kingdom. This Khmer monk named Phramaha Pasaman also brought to the kingdom a revered image of the Buddha that became known as the Phra Bang, the namesake of the city of Luang Prabang and the symbol of the Lao kingdom. However, Michel Lorrillard asserts the "complete artificial nature of this narrative" and is rather critical of the historical value of the Fa Ngum story. He instead emphasizes the influence of Buddhism from Chiang Mai. Subsequent alliances with Burma and Thailand helped cement the primacy of Theravada Buddhism in the Laotian kingdom. As attested in inscriptions, King Photisarath (1501–1547) tried to suppress the worship of spirits and further Buddhicize the population. However, the "animistic" elements of Lao Buddhism have over time survived all purification efforts and are still today of crucial importance. Local spirit cults and rituals associated with indigenous ideas of "soul substance" (khwan) are in most cases seamlessly integrated into Buddhism, and practitioners rarely see them as contradictive. Faced with rugged, isolating geography and the absence of a strong central government, Theravada Buddhism became one of the primary unifying features of Lao culture.

Lao Buddhism and Monastic Education under French Colonialism

The French colonial regime from early on sponsored Buddhism and its educational institutions. New curricula were set up, several monasteries were renovated and the educational system for monks was transformed so that it could serve colonial demands. During the 1920s, the administration of Buddhism in Laos was further reorganized by Prince Phetsarath and the French colonial regime. In order to subvert the dominance of Thai monastic education in the region, and use Lao and Khmer Buddhism for enhancing colonial control, the French set up institutes for the training of Buddhist monks under the auspices of EFEO. On the 24th of November 1914 the Ecole de Pali was founded by royal decree in Phnom Penh and renamed Ecole Supérieure de Pali in 1922. Having the aim to enhance the study of Buddhism through teaching monks "proper" Pali and Sanskrit, two Cambodian monks were in 1922 sent to EFEO Hanoi for language training.

Lao monks first went to Phnom Penh to study at the Buddhist Institute, but Lao branches were finally opened in 1931, reflecting the peripheral position of Laos in the colonial project. The French introduced new curricula based on the study of selected and appropriate texts, awarded monks with certificates and printed Buddhist books. Gregory Kourilsky and Soren Ivarsson have explored this restructuring of Buddhist education under French colonialism. They argue that the agendas behind this reorganization of Buddhism in Cambodia and Laos were similar: In order to build a national Buddhism within the context of Indochina, Siamese influence had to be curtailed. Instead of Bangkok, the Khmer and the Lao branches of the Buddhist Institute were to become centers for the higher education for monks. This sponsorship and control of Buddhism was also grounded in Buddhism's potential for anti-colonial resistance: During the early phase of French colonialism Buddhist millennial movements caused major troubles for the French regime, and parts of the Khmer sangha also opposed French influence. The influence of these colonial reforms in the field of monastic education were somewhat neutralized by the increasing political struggles during the 1950s, and finally the socialist revolution in 1975. However, during the first years of independence until 1975, signs of secularization also became visible in the domain of monastic education: While a state school system was spreading, monastic education became an increasingly specialized subfield.

Political Struggles and the coming of the revolution: Buddhism and the Pathet Lao

The Communist treatment of religion in Laos has diverged from the experience of many other countries which have had a communist regime. Instead of repressing or banning religion outright, the Communists in Laos used the Buddhist Sangha as a vehicle to achieve political aims. Officially, Marxist theory rejects religion because it is seen as a tool used by the ruling classes to mislead the oppressed classes and to keep them subservient. Even though the Pathet Lao saw Buddhism as an antithesis of Marxism, they were able to reconcile aspects of Buddhism with Marxism. The Pathet Lao saw Buddhism and Marxism conflicting on these principles:

• Marxism rejects all forms of religion;
• Buddhism's spiritual vision of the universe conflicts with Marxism's materialistic vision;
• Buddhism regards material attachment as the cause of suffering whereas Marxism bases its utopian vision on the material world;
• Buddhism strives for harmony whereas the Marxists see a constant class struggle between different classes; and
• Buddhism eschews the use of violence while Marxism approves the use of violence where necessary.

The Pathet Lao re-interpreted Buddhism by affirming that there was no conflict between the teaching of the Gautama Buddha and revolutionary aims. They focused on the life story of the Gautama Buddha. Gautama's rejection of royal status and his choice of becoming a mendicant could be considered revolutionary as he rejected the trappings of wealth and the privilege of the ruling elite. People were not accorded status based on caste or wealth but were accepted as long as they accepted the Dhamma. The Pathet Lao claimed that Buddha had already envisioned a classless society because of his rejection of class distinction. The Pathet Lao also pointed out Buddhism had a strong dimension of social justice as the Gautama Buddha was interested in the material welfare of people and he wanted to relieve the lot of the poor. Poverty was seen as a root of evil and as a cause of crime. A minimal level of material well-being was necessary before the Dhamma could be practised. This was not too different from the Pathet Lao's aim of redistributing wealth. The Pathet Lao also pointed out both Buddhism and Marxism were interested in the ultimate happiness of people; they both aimed to help people escape from suffering; the only difference was in their method of achieving happiness. Both Buddhism and Marxism rejects the capitalist system.

According to the Pathet Lao, Buddhism and Marxism advocated different solutions because they were the evolutionary product of societies at different stages of development. Buddhism was a historical product of a pre-industrial age while Marxism was the scientific ideology of the industrial age. Buddhism was acceptable and it was useful as a tool of the revolution if it was purged of superstitious practices which had accrued over time.

Politicisation of the Sangha

The Pathet Lao's choice to co-opt Buddhism into its revolutionary struggle had a historical basis. Traditionally, the monarchy and the Sangha had a reciprocal relationship. The Sangha aimed to remain on good terms with the state. The king's right to rule was based on his submission to the Dhamma. He only ruled through the power of the Three Jewels of Buddhism: Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. In return for the Sangha's support and legitimation of his rule, the king had to support the upkeep of the Sangha and promote the Dhamma in the kingdom. This was a relationship based on mutual benefits. The role of the king was to run the secular affairs of the country while the Sangha also derived its moral authority by being detached and aloof from mundane affairs.

French colonial rule resulted in the marginalization of the Sangha. It was during the Japanese occupation of French Indochina that a nascent Lao nationalist movement began to pay attention to traditional Lao culture. The nationalist movement focused on the role of Buddhism in Lao society and on the Sangha as a repository of traditional Lao values. Many young monks became involved in this resurgence of nationalism. It also meant that the traditional role of the Sangha was changing. The Sangha was no longer purely occupied with the spiritual realm; it had crossed into the secular realm. With the exile of the Lao Issara government in Thailand after the resumption of French control in 1946, the Sangha played a significant role in fanning nationalist sentiment in Laos. They also provided financial support by using Buddhist festivals as fundraisers. In 1950, the Lao Issara movement split into two factions. The moderate faction supported independence within the French Union while the radical faction supported the armed struggle of the Viet Minh. Some monks actually joined the Pathet Lao, while other monks used Buddhist teachings to bolster the liberation struggle. This was effective because of the great moral impact of the Sangha on Lao society. As a result, both the government in Vientiane and the Pathet Lao sought to use the Sangha as a vehicle for their political aims. In the First Coalition government of 1957, the Pathet Lao held religious affairs as one of their two portfolios. The Minister for Religious Affairs, Phoumi Vongvichit was a communist and there was a tactical reason for the Pathet Lao to take this portfolio. The Ministry of Religious Affairs supervised the Sangha directly, a function it inherited from its colonial predecessor. Information and instructions could be transmitted via the Sangha ranks without recourse to the civil administration. This meant that the communists were now in control of a communication network which fanned out from Vientiane to the most inaccessible villages. The ministry funds were also used to pay for monastic meetings where pro-communist ideas could be promulgated. This technique was so effective that even though the Coalition government collapsed in a matter of months, many monks had already been won to the side of the Pathet Lao. Communist propaganda was also incorporated into Buddhism sermons: the right wing forces were equated with evil and the Communists were seen as the forces of good.