Beyond Hybridity and Syncretism: Kala-Thesa Contextual Sensitivity and Power in Thai Religious and Gender Cultures

Main Article Content

Peter A. Jackson

Abstract

The polycultural multiplicity of Thailand is one of the defining issues for studies of the country’s religious culture, and scholars have struggled to appreciate Thai religion as a complex of multiple, partly discrete yet also intersecting and hierarchically organised ritual-belief systems. A key question is whether the amalgamated complexity of the Thai religious field is a single integrated system or a conjoined constellation of several distinct religions. I argue that in exploring this question notions of syncretism and theories of hybridity do not capture the full complexity of Thai religious and other cultural forms. Accounts of cultural hybridity are based on a binary notion that emphasises fusion and the formation of new internally coherent wholes. In contrast, Thailand is a polyvalent society in which more than two cultural and religious forms are often present in contiguous but non-intersecting ways. I contend that the Thai notion of kala-thesa (“time and place”)
contextual sensitivity offers a useful additional concept to understand patterns of cultural amalgamation in the fields of religion, gender and language as well as more broadly. I summarise Nidhi Eoseewong’s account of Thai kala-thesa “spatialities” as an important theoretical contribution to understanding how religious complexity, as well as ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity, are managed in Thailand. I describe kala-thesa contextualisation as a modality of power over a succession of foreign cultural influences throughout Thai history. I conclude that an expanded conceptual vocabulary and theoretical repertoire of cultural and religious mixing is needed to enable us to fully appreciate the character of religious, gender and other forms of cultural diversity that have emerged in modern Thailand from the society’s deep historical experience of pluralism and multiplicity.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Jackson, P. (2020). Beyond Hybridity and Syncretism: : Kala-Thesa Contextual Sensitivity and Power in Thai Religious and Gender Cultures. Journal of Anthropology, Sirindhorn Anthropology Centre (JASAC), 3(1), 1-37. Retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jasac/article/view/243148
Section
Academic Article

References

Anderson, B. R. 1972. “The Idea of Power in Javanese Culture”, in Holt, C. (ed.), Culture and Politics in Indonesia. (pp. 1-69). Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

Baumann, B. J. R.. 2017. Ghosts of Belonging: Searching for Khmerness in Buriram. PhD Dissertation, Südostasien-Studien, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. London and New York: Routledge.

Geertz, C. 1960. The Religion of Java. Chicago Il: University of Chicago Press.

Gong, G. W. 1984. The Standard of ‘Civilisation’ in International Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Holt, J. 2011 (2009). Spirits of the Place. Buddhism and Lao Religious Culture. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

Johnson, A. A. 2015. “A Spirit Map of Bangkok: Spirit Shrines and the City in Thailand”, Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 28(3): 293-308.

Kirsch, T. A. 1977. “Complexity in the Thai Religious System: An Interpretation”, Journal of Asian Studies, 36(2): 241-266.

Ladwig, P. and Paul, W. 2012. “Introduction: Buddhist Funeral Cultures”. in Ladwig, P. & Williams P. (eds.), Buddhist Funeral Cultures of Southeast Asia and China. (pp. 1-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McDaniel, J. T. 2011. The Lovelorn Ghost and the Magical Monk: Practicing Buddhism in Modern Thailand. New York: Columbia University Press.

McIntosh, J. 2019. “Polyontologism: When ‘Syncretism’ Does Not Suffice”, Journal of Africana Religions, 7(1): 112-120.

Maud, J. 2007. The Sacred Borderland: A Buddhist Saint, the State, and Transnational Religion in Southern Thailand. PhD Dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney.

Morris, R. 2002. “Crises, Tradition, and the New Values of Pastness”. in Tanabe, S. &, Keyes, C. F. (eds.), Cultural Crisis and Social Memory: Modernity and Identity in Thailand and Laos. (pp. 68-94).
Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.

Muecke, M. A. 1992. “Monks and Mediums: Religious Syncretism in Northern Thailand”, Journal of the Siam Society, 80(2): 97-104.

Mulder, N. 1990. Inside Thai Society - An Interpretation of Everyday Life. Bangkok: Editions Duang Kamol.

Nidhi Eoseewong. 1991 (BE 2534). “Spatiality in Thai Thought (Pheun-thi nai khati thai)”, Sinlapa-watthantham (Art and Culture), 13(2): 180-192.

Nidhi Eoseewong. 1994 (BE 2537). “The Cult of Lord Mother Kuan Im [Guan Yin]” (latthi-phithi jao-mae Kuan Im), Sinlapa-watthanatham (Art and Culture), 15(10): 79-106.

Pattana Kitiarsa. 2005. “Beyond Syncretism: Hybridisation of Popular Religion in Contemporary Thailand”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 36(3): 461-487.

Pattana Kitiarsa. 2012. Mediums, Monks and Amulets: Thai Popular Buddhism Today. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

Retsikas, K. 2010. “The sorcery of gender: sex, death and difference in East Java, Indonesia”, South East Asia Research, 18(3): 471-502.

Siani, E. 2018. “Stranger Diviners and their Stranger Clients: Popular Cosmology-Making and its Kingly Power in Buddhist Thailand”, South East Asia Research, 26(4): 416-431.

Siraporn Nathalang. 2002 (BE 2545). Chon-chat Thai Nai Nithan: Lae Lort Waen Khatichon Lae Wannakam Pheun Ban (Thai Ethnicity in Legends: Seen Through the Lens of Folklore and Folk Literature), Bangkok: Matichon Books.

Soraj Hongladarom. 1996. “How is Thai Philosophy Possible?”. Paper presented at the International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai University, 14-17 October, 1996.

Tambiah, S. J. 1977. “The Cosmological and Performative Significance of a Thai Cult of Healing Through Meditation”, Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 1: 97-132.

Tambiah, S. J. 1985. Culture, Thought and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Tambiah, S. J. 1990. Magic, Science, Religion and the Scope of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Terwiel, B. J. 1976. “A Model for the Study of Thai Buddhism”, Journal of Studies, 35(3): 391-403.

Thompson, E. C. 2006. “Comments on Michael Peletz ‘Transgenderism and Gender Pluralism in Southeast Asia since Early Modern Times’”, Current Anthropology, 47(2): 332-333.

Van Esterik, P. 1999. “Repositioning Gender, Sexuality, and Power in Thai Studies”. in Jackson A. P. & Cook M. N. (eds.), Genders and Sexualities in Modern Thailand. (pp. 275-289). Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

Van Esterik, P. 2000. Materializing Thailand. Oxford & New York: Berg.

Visisya Pinthongvijayakul. 2018. “Personhood and political subjectivity through ritual enactment in Isan (northeast Thailand)”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 49(1): 63-83.

Voravudhi Chirasombutti & Anthony Diller. 1999. “‘Who Am “I” In Thai?’: The Thai First Person Pronoun: Self-Reference or Gendered Self?”. in Jackson A. P. & Cook M. N. (eds), Genders and Sexualities in Modern Thailand. (pp. 114-135). Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

White, E. 2014. Possession, Professional Spirit Mediums, and the Religious Fields of Late-Twentieth Century Thailand. PhD Dissertation, Cornell University.

White, E. 2016. “Contemporary Buddhism and Magic”. in Jerryson, M. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Buddhism. Oxford Handbooks Online (DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199362387.103.34)

White, E. 2017. “Rethinking Anthropological Models of Spirit Possession and Theravada Buddhism”, Religion and Society: Advances in Research, 8: 189-202.