Buddhism and the spirit cults in North-east Thailand

There is a single linguistic index pertaining to food offerings which tells
us that villagers reduce these five classes into two groups. All offerings
to classes 1, 2 and 3 are referred to as kryang bucha, while those to 4 and 5
are called liang phii.

341

Kryang bucha: bucha is derived from the Indian word puja, which
means `propitiation' or `ritual worship'. The Thai concept is used only
in respect of certain supernaturals.

Offerings to the Buddha statue are called kryang bucha khaw phraa,
that is, offerings presented to the Buddha statue in respect. There is no
notion that the statue partakes of the essence of the food offered. It is
relevant to note that the same type of offering is made to the monk in an
attitude of respect (pha khaw tawai phraa). Food offered to the Buddha
and the monks may consist of rice, meat and fish (non-vegetarian) but
excludes liquor. Typically bucha offerings also include candles and flowers
and joss-sticks.

Now, although offerings made to divine angels (thewada) are also called
kryang bucha, they are typically vegetarian. This is interesting in view of
the inclusion of meat in offerings to the Buddha (and the monks). An
historical conjecture is that the brahmanical value of vegetarianism may
be preserved in respect of the deities which originally belonged to the
Hindu pantheon and were later brought within the fold of Buddhism.
Thewada are both witnesses in Buddhist rites and an independent category
opposed to phii (malevolent spirits), and their vegetarianism may be a
contrast to the meat-eating character of phii. However, such speculation
is not important to the orientation of the actors, for whom the overall
bucha concept is dominant.

The food offerings in sukhwan ritual are also referred to as kryang bucha,
although there is a more specific ritual item called the phakhwan which
is a ceremonial conical structure filled with lumps of rice, bananas, boiled
egg and flowers. Divine angels are invoked as witnesses and homage is
made to the Buddhist Trinity in khwan rites, and therefore the linguistic
extension makes sense.

Liang phii: this contrasting term, which means offerings to take care
of spirits, is used in the case of both the guardian spirit cult and the rites
addressed to malevolent spirits, thereby indicating that in this sense they
comprise a common class. A common feature emphasized by the concept
of phii is that guardian spirits and miscellaneous malevolent spirits alike
may cause affliction to individuals and have therefore to be placated, or
in the case of `possession' driven out. In rites of affliction other than
`possession' which requires exorcism, we have seen that there are two
sequences: (1) kuad, which means `inviting' the spirit to leave with an
opening offering; and (2) pai karav, which is a larger thanks-offering given
after the spirit has removed its bad influence. In exorcism, however,
instead of invitation to leave, we have lai phii, `chasing away of the spirit',
but the placatory offering made to the spirit after its expulsion is still

342

called liang phii. This offering stands in contrast to that made by the
exorcist to his teacher and the thewada at the beginning of the rite; it is
a bucha type offering called kaj. Thus, the exorcist's ritual which deals
with both thewada and phii clearly expresses the bucha and liang phii
distinction.

We have seen before that there is an internal differentiation between
the guardian spirit of the village, who is meat-eating, and the guardian
spirit of the wat, who is vegetarian. Offerings to both, however, are liang
phii. All malevolent spirits, as well as the guardian of the village (Tapubaan),
are offered rice, varieties of meat, liquor, betel and tobacco—articles of
a `stronger' character than those employed in bucha.

In sum, then, the distinction between bucha and liang phii expresses
a basic difference as to the form of communication and reciprocity between
man and the supernatural. Offerings to the Buddha and the divine angels
as well as the monks, are in formal ideology given as free gifts and to
honour and pay respect to them. In the phii affliction rites, offerings are
made in terms of a bargain and a fee if recovery is achieved. The same
logic is carried over to the guardian spirit rituals of a collective nature
conducted to solicit ample rain and good harvests.

It is this fundamental difference in the idiom of gift giving and making
offerings that assigns Buddhist norms and action a higher place than those
associated with spirit cults, in the hierarchy of values and acts that
comprises the universe of religious action. The Buddhist idiom of selfless
giving of gifts, control of passion through asceticism, and renunciation
of worldly interests is an idealization and extension of the social norm of
reciprocity. On the other hand, the coercive relationship of bargaining
with spirits, their placation or subduing, is again a statement of power
relations which are an extension of socially manipulative behaviour.
Ethically the first ranks above the second, as purity above power;
hierarchically the cults are similarly ordered. The social existence of the
people of Baan Phraan Muan is inevitably fraught with moments of
harmony and disharmony. Religious action devoted to the securing of the
former and the elimination of the latter is modelled on the possibilities
of social relationships ranging from altruism to naked power. However
ethically valued, both are stubbornly present in real life—and if either
should gain supremacy life would be heaven on earth or pure hell; both
are improbable.

University of Virginia Library

CATEGORY DISTINCTIONS IN RITUAL OFFERINGS TO SUPERNATURALS

CATEGORY DISTINCTIONS IN RITUAL OFFERINGS
TO SUPERNATURALS