Things Pali in Bangkok, 2008

A short report on some places and resources related to Pali studies in
Bangkok, 2008.

_Table of contents_
(1) Notes on Chulalongkorn University
(2) Notes on Mahidol-Salaya
(3) Notes on the National Library
(4) Notes on Museums & Historiography
(5) Short note on publishers


(1) CHULALONGKORN

UNESCO's Bangkok office under R. Engelhardt has, reportedly, been
highly influential in "schooling" the Thai universities in winning
project funding.  The most palpable result is the proliferation of
tiny, specialized departments, such as the (alleged) "Department of
Xipsongpanna-culture studies" (!) at Chulalongkorn University, headed
by Prof. Pawan (presumably a nickname or shortened surname; the
professor is female, but we have not met).  Presumably, this tiny,
specialized department will take advantage of the UNESCO-led
manuscript research in Yunnan --I have written for more information.

Chulalongkorn has succeeded in making its campus both "more beautiful"
and "less ugly" over the last three years --and the
construction/upgrading now continues.

Unfortunately, the gardens at "Chula" are indeed infested with rats
--and the barking dogs don't help matters.  Pali scholars should start
a petition to replace the dogs with cats, to guard against the rats
--as, after all, rats can destroy books and manuscripts (no animus
against them on my part, I assure you!  The year of the rat is fast
upon us!).

The university also has two (equally large) bookstores, with
confusingly similar names, at present; one in the middle of the
campus, one adjacent to Siam square.  I would advise against promising
to meet anyone "at the bookstore" for this reason.


(2) MAHIDOL-SALAYA

I made a formal visit to Mahidol University, to meet with the
professor who founded their new Pali & Buddhist Studies programmes (a
department now less than six months old) --and to "inspect" the place
generally.

The University campus that houses the programme is NEITHER in Bangkok,
nor in Nakhon Pathom.  Do not be misled into thinking that the city of
Nakhon Pathom is closer to the university than Bangkok (it isn't).  In
reality, the University is NOWHERE, but it is apparently more popular
to describe its location as "Nakhon Pathom" than "out on a highway
somewhere".

If you wish to visit the campus in question, the easiest way to do so
from Bangkok is to go to the Victory Monument, and get onto Bus #515.
In addition to the number (515), this bus does have the toponym
"Salaya" written on it in English --and the campus in question is
"Mahidol Salaya".  This is genuinely easier even than taking a taxi
(not to mention train --which I also tried).  When you buy a ticket,
the only Thai you need to know is to repeat the name of the college
(at most, one could say, /Bai Kollet Mahidon Salaya/ --and then the
ticket-seller on board would know to tell you to get off when you come
to the correct location).  The bus travels by the same major highway
that leads to the airport, and then passes the college campus almost
immediately after it turns off of the highway; thus, it is easy to see
(on your left), and you will surely notice when you have suddenly made
the 90-degree turn off of the major highway into the town of "Salaya"
(you won't see anything like a town from the campus, however).

I met with Prof. Bodhi, and spoke with him for a little under two hours.


(3) NATIONAL LIBRARY

The national library has much changed in the three years since I saw
it first (or: last).

The first two floors have been entirely refurbished, and rooms that
used to be sweltering hot, and full of the polluted dust of the
street, are now "sealed" and air-conditioned.  The locations of the
books are largely unchanged.  Thus, I had the slightly surreal
experience of walking into the main room of the second floor
collection, and walking directly to the location of the linguistics
section, and the sub-section on Pali, while the actual appearance of
the room had utterly changed since I had last taken those same steps
through it.

The bathrooms, too, have made a leap into the modern era (but bring
your own toilet paper).

Unfortunately, while the 4th floor (bastion of conservatism that it
is!) has not changed a bit, all of the non-Thai script (Pali)
materials that used to be on the second floor were removed to the 4th.
  Thus, the Mon Tipitaka, _inter alia_ is now nearly impossible to get
at, along with the manuscripts on the 4th floor.  Start writing those
letters to parliament if you want permission to use the resources
there.

If you have not arranged access to the 4th floor collections in
advance, there is now hardly any reason for a Pali researcher to go
there.  The English-language resources on Pali/Buddhism are still in a
strangely organized room "to one side of" the main room on religion.


(4) MUSEUMS

Museums were the reason that I originally lived in Bangkok (now over
three years ago) --and two of the projects I was sent there to work on
are now manifest in brick.

One of the two, "TCDC" (Thai Creative & Design Centre) is not salient
to this list; however, the National Discovery Museum Institute
("NDMI") is worth noting briefly here.

The NDMI was created to challenge the both the orthodoxy of Thai
museology, and the official historiography (cf. Prince Damrong, etc.)
still found echoed in the National Museums throughout Thailand.

Unfortunately, it replaces one "fictional history" with another, and
many of the fictions will be especially painful for a Pali scholar to
witness --especially as (re-)stated in such a newly opened
institution.

A large part of the museum is dedicated to "retrenching" the myth of
Suvannabhumi, including the (repeatedly stated) assertion that
Ashoka's two missionaries were sent there (viz., "here").

The illusory nature of this claim (or even the notion that the edicts
of Ashoka mention Suvannabhumi as a destination of his missionaries)
has already been discussed on this list.

Other long-since-debunked notions, such as the equivalence of "Siam"
with modern Thailand in Chinese dynastic records (circa 2,000 years
ago), are employed with no more tact than the name of Ashoka.

A long narrative that emphasizes the peaceful co-existence of multiple
races (in "Suvannabhumi" then and in Thailand now) begins with the
absurd racialist premise that "Homo erectus, 'Peking Man' evolved into
today's Mongoloid element, while 'Java man' provided the Australoid
input today."

Despite everything we know about migrations and the non-continuity of
Thailand's population, it is boldly asserted that "Lampang man" of
500,000 years ago, could be among "the earliest ancestors of the
Siamese people".  No, he couldn't.

Quite a number of politically charged claims are made about Buddhism
itself, and, sadly, almost all of them are either historically false
or wildly misleading.  As part of the retelling of history minus
slavery and warfare, it is essential to mis-represent Buddhism as
"uniting" the people of the putative Suvannabhumi, "as it failed to do
in India" (!) ... "Thus in Suvarnabhumi, Animism, Buddhism and
Hinduism fitted [sic.] together so perfectly that now only scholars
can distinguish them".

Perhaps the scholars working for the museum ought to go ahead and
distinguish them.

It is asserted that Ayudhaya ruled over all of the "city states" of
Suvannabhumi (which is defined as stretching from Burma to Cambodia!)
starting from the 14th century; among the examples of such alleged
"city states" under Ayudhaya's dominion are Lan Xang ("Lanchang"),
Lavo and Sukhothai.  What was formerly "the Sukhothai period" is
actually deleted from history --along with any notion of Lanna's
independence (not to mention Cambodia, Laos, etc.!).

This pseudohistory is a self-conscious attempt to replace the
"nationalist" and "racialist" narratives of the past; and it does so
by denying the existence of "national" and discrete "ethnic" entities
in pre-modern South-East Asia --and then subordinates the histories of
all of the "city-states" (that remain after national and ethnic
toponyms are removed from the map) as supposed vassals to the kingdom
of Ayudhaya.

This effectively deletes Cambodia from the history of South-East Asia
(something many Thai nationalists have attempted to do before in their
historiographies) and relegates Burma to an extremely shadowy role,
until its (inconvenient) conquest of Ayudhaya (viz., the only war
mentioned in the entire historical portion of the museum).  Dvaravati
is described repeatedly as a multi-ethnic society, too, and while this
may be politically preferable to the old narrative of the Thais
conquering and enslaving the non-Thais, it only serves to mystify the
real ethnicity of each of the "city states" described --and to further
obfuscate the question of when and where the Thais/Tais migrated (and
who was, so to speak, "pre-Thai").

Students of Thai culture and anthropology will here see another
attempt at writing the myth of the "noble savage" in Thailand.  The
Chinese dynastic records actually show that Thailand exported natural
forest products (including resins and medicines that were tremendously
valuable in the ancient world), and imported metals, gold, etc.
(resulting in a well-documented balance-of-trade problem for the
Chinese) --but the museum sets out to prove the very opposite instead.
  It is asserted that the Thai "noble savages" were great producers and
exporters of metals and gold to the world.

Reflecting nothing other than modern, bourgeois preoccupations, the
museum goes on to say, "Rice cultivation may have reasons [sic.] for
permanent settlement, but it did not necessarily lead to growth and
development of towns and states.  What was it that made Suvarnabhumi
so important, attracting outsiders to seek its wealth?  Certainly not
rice and bamboo!"

On the contrary, the crucial factor for the development of cities and
ports for international trade was NOTHING OTHER than rice --viz., the
need to produce sufficient rice not only to sustain a large
population, but to load up trade ships for long, slow journeys along
the shores.  Rice, forest products, and slavery were the crucial
factors in the history of trading empires as they rose and fell in
South-East Asia.  The protracted claims about early Thai metal-workers
are about as absurd as claiming that Cambodia was exporting fine
porcelain to China; very simply, it was the other way around.

The main point of the "new historiography" of the NDMI seems to be the
anachronistic projection of an idealized multi-ethnic Bangkok onto
previous periods of history --all the way back to the stone age.  The
"bad" old narrative of one race conquering and enslaving another has
been replaced by an equally flawed new narrative in which slavery (and
feudalism) has completely disappeared --and wars between states have
been reduced to a very minor part of history.

The history continues into the modern period, presenting the dictator
Phibun ("Phibul Songkran") as if he had invented racism, and racial
nationalism, in Thailand.  The enslavement of non-Thais by Thais seems
to just pop up as a novel idea in 20th century propaganda, with no
historical precedent.  Thus, the (supposed) multi-ethnic utopia comes
to an abrupt halt in the modern era.  Apparently, Phibun is the only
historical figure whom it is safe for the curators to blame.  As bad
as this pseudohistory is, it is difficult to imagine any contemporary
scholar wanting to take on the thankless task of defending Phibun's
(odious) role in history against this slight.


(5) PUBLISHERS

It is remarkable that (a) White Lotus, (b) Silkworm, and (c) Orchid
Press, are all interested in publishing materials on Pali.  The latter
two were founded later, and their business model follows the first
(viz., they openly sought to emulate White Lotus) --and, of course,
none of them make any money.

Thus, Bangkok has an unusual concentration of private-sector
publishers that are willing to support scholarship in our field
--apparently with a degree of disinterest.

E.M.