University of Virginia Library

INTERPRETATION: WHO IS UPPAKRUT?

In this final section I examine the symbolism of Uppakrut in terms both
of the limited context of village behaviour and of the links between locally
observed symbols and those of the grand Buddhist (and Hindu) historical
traditions.

Who is Phraa Uppakrut? What is his role in these Bun Phraawes
festivities? This is indeed an intriguing question and I do not know
whether I can provide an answer. I will report in detail the points of view
expressed by village informants. First some references found in the literature:
according to Harry Shorto (personal communication), the Upagupta
legend and cult has a fairly long history. Upagupta was the subject of
a local Indian cult centred in Mathura. There are literary Canonical
texts which refer to him (e.g. Asvaghosa's Sutralamkara (extant in Chinese);
Divyavadana, and Lokapannatti). I have not been able to consult these
Indian texts but Shorto says the striking point expressed in them is that
Upagupta converted Mara, Budha's enemy, to Buddhism and is called
alaksonako Buddo (probably `the crypto Buddha'). However, Duroiselle
(1904) gives a translation of the legend found in a Burmese Pali version
of the Lokapannatti which makes the same assertions and is similar to
the Thai legend reported by Wells. Wells (1960, p. 113) states, in regard
to the Loi Kratong festival (festival of lights) in Thailand, that one of the
popular explanations advanced for it is that `King Asoka once decided
to build 84,000 cetiyas but Mara threatened to destroy them. The king
appealed to the Lord of the Nagas, Phraa Upagota, to help him by capturing
Mara. This the Naga Lord did, and since then the people have shown their
gratitude to the Naga by this river festival.' The Loi Kratong festival is
not celebrated in Baan Phraan Muan; but Upagota (Uppakrut) appears
in the Bun Phraawes festivities.

The villagers were by no means agreed as to who Uppakrut was, and
it is precisely because he represents several ideas that he is especially
interesting.

1. Two elderly informants, one of whom was very learned in ritual
matters, gave roughly the same version. Phraa Uppakrut was a novice
who lived in the water of the swamp (in a subterranean town). He was
the son of Buddha and his mother was a mermaid. It is said that once the
Buddha forced his semen (beng nam asuchi = forced out impure water)
into the water and a mermaid swallowed it, became pregnant and gave birth
to Uppakrut. He was subsequently ordained as a novice (or monk) and
lives in the water, for he is a mermaid's son.

One of the elders who advanced this story said on further questioning
that Phraa Uppakrut has great supernatural power (rit ah-noo-phab), more
power and authority than monks who have attained the highest level of
religious merit (phraa arahan) (arahat). Whenever a big ceremony is
undertaken, he must be invited to ward off dangers caused by Praya Marn,
a giant (Mara the demon king, Buddha's enemy and signifying death).
He finally explained Uppakrut's power to subjugate Mara in this way:

`When we make merit, we invite Phraa Uppakrut to come so that he
will prevent fighting and killing and damage by fire.' Uppakrut is not
invited for any other village ceremony or collective wat rites.

It is important to note that all informants, whatever original story of
Uppakrut they give, are consistently agreed that Uppakrut is the enemy
of Mara and is invited to the Bun Phraawes in order to safeguard the
proceedings, to prevent participants from fighting or killing one another,
and to bless them in order that they may live long and in good health
(ju dee mee haeng). His absence will enable Mara to sow disaster.

2. The second version collected from laymen said that Uppakrut is
a Naga or serpent spirit. This Naga lives in the water; at the same time,
water is Uppakrut. He is invited to guard the proceedings; if he is not,
then murder, storm and lightning will occur through the acts of Mara.

3. As might be expected, the monkish version is different. A monk of
wat Phraan Muan said: about 236 years after the death of Lord Buddha,
King Asoka called together a meeting of 1,000 monks in order to eliminate
doctrinal differences. It was the third meeting of this sort since Lord
Buddha's death. The monks assembled but someone was sorely needed
to preside. There was in the gathering a novice, ordained while the Buddha
was alive, and greatly respected, but he declined to be the head. Instead
he went and invited Phraa Uppakrut to preside; he was in the water
meditating.

While Uppakrut was on his way to the meeting he was met by King
Pasenathikosol, who, seeing that he was a thin man, decided to test his
strength. An elephant was let loose to attack Uppakrut but he vanquished
it; he then successfully presided over the meeting, eliminating
controversies in respect of the Dhamma and contributing to the success of
Buddhism.[6]

The following structural elements can be discerned in the three stories.

In the first story Buddha (human being with spiritual power) is possed
to a creature of the water (nature), and from their union springs a novice
who resides in the water, thus combining both elements. Tentatively, we

may postulate that this story represents the taming of the spirit of the
natural element (water) and its conversion into a Buddhist agent (novice).

In the second story human beings and their solidarity (society) are
opposed to their mortal adversary Mara, embodiment of passion, death
and malevolence (chaos). The Naga as nature's powerful agent allies
himself with humans to protect them.

In the third story, the latter half poses the opposition between religious
or spiritual power (thin ascetic) and royal power (symbolized in the
elephant, symbol of royalty). Uppakrut as monk is superior to temporal
power, and also defends Buddhism by reconciling theological differences
in the Sangha.

Now to go back to the ethnography. The rite of the `invitation' of
Uppakrut at the swamp consists of words chanted by a village elder
combined with the act of manipulating ritual objects. I shall just deal
with the words.

The invitation begins with the Buddhist Pali verse repeated three
times: `Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa.'

There is then a shift to the local Lao language and I give a free translation
into English of the words said:

The words thus begin with a Pali formula used in all rituals in which
monks participate. They make it crystal clear that Uppakrut is an opponent
and subduer of Mara, the archetype enemy of the Buddha. We also

note that, together with Uppakrut, the denizen of the water, are invoked
the cosmological and planetary entities to lend their power to the great
battle and also to participate in the worship at the wat, where the supreme
deeds of the Buddha as a world renouncer will be recounted. The monks
come into the picture only after the invitation is completed by lay elders,
to chant in ringing tones the victory blessing.

If we now examine the rite in toto, concentration on the non-verbal
acts and manipulation of objects, we are able to perceive a slightly different
emphasis in the proceedings.

We have seen that some of the ritual articles carried were conspicuous
symbols of monkhood—the begging bowl, sandals and robes. What was
interpreted as `invitation' by the villagers seems to me the taming and
conversion of the Naga or spirit of the water to Buddhism. Note that the
Buddha images were shown to Uppakrut, that he was then coaxed with
puffed rice to come on to the sedan. Finally the kettle of water is carried
to the sala. Cries of victory and the monks' victory blessing express the
success of the encounter. Thus the ritual successfully recruits the power
of the Naga to protect human society and Buddhism, and it enacts the
two phases: submission (invitation) and then protection.

There is, however, another dimension of meaning. Uppakrut lives in
the never-drying pond. As mermaid's son, or as Naga, he represents water.
In the villagers' statements continual references are made to rain, long
life, good health and absence of conflict. The preoccupation with rain is
real and this agricultural interest is reflected, I think, in the Bun Phraawes
rites.

Good grounds for my linking Uppakrut with rain appear in the ethnographic
facts pertaining strictly to the village as a contextual field. The
villagers of Baan Phraan Muan have a cult of the village guardian spirit
(Tapubaan); he is the `owner' of the village and acts as a communal
guardian and disciplinarian: he has a counterpart who is the guardian of
the wat (Chao Phau Pha Khaw); both are on the one hand distinguished
and on the other fused in a common shrine. Uppakrut then takes over
their roles at Bun Phraawes; he is incorporated into Buddhism, while the
two guardians in their non-Buddhist aspect remain intact. Buddhism
cannot entirely secure their submission or, to put it differently, the
submission of natural forces in the service of man and religion. The
village and wat guardians are again, as an entity, differentiated from the
owner and spirit of the swamp, who is propitiated for rain at the same
time as the former are propitiated separately for village security and
prosperity. Uppakrut in Bun Phraawes takes on the aspect of rain spirit
and thus is brought under the aegis of Buddhism; but the swamp spirit

also preserves his separate identity and autonomy. Thus I see in the
Uppakrut rite the universalizing aspects of Buddhism, its attempt to bring
nature under man's metaphysical control; but its comprehensiveness must
remain partial, for man's control over nature is always incomplete.

Now to turn to a level of ritual symbolism which poses problems for
the anthropologist if he tries to shift from his immediate ethnographic
context and the conscious thought processes of his subjects to the realm
of historical traditions and mythology on the grand civilizational scale.

Villagers identify Uppakrut with the Naga, with water and rain, with
protection against the machinations of Mara as an antisocial agent. The
villagers are also familiar with fragments or `distorted' versions or reinterpretations
of mythology several centuries old. While not imputing
these cognitive associations to the villagers, I want briefly to indicate the
wider implications of the Naga symbolism.

To begin at the village level and then to move away: as indicated in
Chapter 7 before, the Thai word for a man in his transitional status
just before ordination as a monk is nag (Naga), and in that chapter I
interpreted the symbolism implied. I also described the ceremony for
honouring a monk, in which the nag in the form of a wooden serpent
appears as a conspicuous ritual object, namely the vehicle for bathing the
monk with water, and uniting in its person the dual themes of animal
sexuality and potency transformed into the energies of asceticism and
of faithful benevolent service to the Buddhist faith.

A brief consideration of the Naga in Hindu and Buddhist literature
helps to illuminate the symbolism of Uppakrut in our village ceremony.
In Hindu symbolism, the Naga and the Garuda, the serpent and the eagle,
are opposed as eternal enemies, and this opposition is finally resolved
in the attributes of Vishnu. The spiritual antagonism between them is
symbolized in terms of natural elements: the serpent represents the earthly
waters, it is a subterranean creature, it is the eternal life force; the eagle
is the sun principle, it is free from the bondage of matter and represents
the higher spiritual principle of the infinity of heaven (Zimmer 1946, Ch. 3).
In Buddhism the Naga has an important role as pious devotee and as
representing animality. It is said that all the creatures of nature, together
with the gods, rejoiced upon the birth of the Buddha and guarded his
progress towards enlightenment. A telling illustration referred to earlier[11]
is the story of the cobra Muchalinda who protectively enveloped the
Buddha seven times and spread out his hood as an umbrella over his
blessed head to protect him from a storm as he sat, absorbed in his bliss,

under the bodhi (bo) tree. An important function of the Nagas is that of
door guardian, in their proper attitude of pious devotion. Geiger writes
that the Nagas `are always adherents and worshippers of the Buddha.
The Bodhi tree, when it was brought to Ceylon, was protected by them,
and they wished to get it for themselves . . . In their possession were the
sacred relics of the Master which afterwards were deposited in the great
Thupa at Anuradhapura' (1960, p. 166).

Alabaster (1871), who deals with Thai sources, not only refers to the
Muchalinda legend, which is frequently depicted in Thai temples, but
also adds that `In the "Life of Buddha" we read of the Naga King Kala,
who wakes only when a new Buddha is about to illumine the earth, and
who, having arisen from his subterranean abode, honours the Buddha
with innumerable songs of praise and then returns to sleep' (pp. 300-1).

The serpent also is the symbolic vehicle representing Buddha's conquest
over life. (The Naga symbol as representing Buddha's conquest over
craving is known to the villagers.) As Zimmer (1946, p. 68) comments:

I may add that the Naga was the symbol of Konagamana, a Buddha who
preceded the historical Gotama Buddha.

To return to the village temples of Thailand: while the bood and sala
in Baan Phraan Muan are singularly meagre in architectural elaboration
and decoration, a vast number of them, in both villages and towns, have
balustrades in the form of long Nagas (i.e. the temple rests on the serpent),
and gable ends in the form of Nagas with their heads as eaves, or alternatively
with hang hong or `swan's tail' (actually tail of hamsa, the gander or
wild goose). The hamsa in Hindu symbolism represents the twofold
nature of all beings—it is at ease in both the upper celestial and the lower
earthly spheres and not bound to either, a perfect symbol for expressing
the Hindu ideas of maya and atman and the Buddhistic idea of salvation
through conquest of our human condition.

The better known duality in Hindu and Buddhist (especially Mahayana)
mythology and sculpture (and art in general) is the opposition between
the Garuda (the mythical sky bird) and the Naga (water-serpent), enemies
but also reconciled and united in God Vishnu who rides on the Garuda
(his vehicle or vahana) and also rests on the Naga (sesha) of the ocean.

It is unnecessary to document the importance of these symbols in Southeast
Asian art: Khmer architecture, for instance, never tired of the drama
between the Garuda and the Naga and represented it in various ways
(e.g. see Lawrence Briggs 1951).

It has been argued by some writers (see Waddell 1912/13) that the
fierce brahmanical sun bird was transformed by Buddhism to the golden
peacock and the milder golden goose of the Asokan pillars, and of the
Burmese and Thai temples. Nevertheless, the Garuda persists as an
important symbol in these Buddhist countries, perhaps most importantly
in Cambodia, which went through various religious phases.

In some astrological charts currently used in Phraan Muan village the
krut (Garuda) is opposed to nag. Perhaps it is not accidental that popular
tradition transformed the name Upagotha to Uppakrut, thereby making
the serpent of the water share the name of the mythical sky bird and
reconciling both in the service of Buddhism.

The problem of interpreting the symbolic significance and role of
Uppakrut has taken us on a long and devious journey. There are complex
levels of communication between village tradition and the grand tradition,
a complexity at least showing, rather than a separateness between them,
a mutual reinforcement and illumination. The anthropological perspective
as it focuses on contemporary village behaviour and traditions demonstrates
more than this: the contextualization of literary and artistic themes and
forms of a grand past may be in a humbler form, but importantly not as
a dead past but as a living reality; one also sees the elaboration and
expansion of meaning of these themes as they are closely woven into the
texture of contemporary social life and interests. In this way the anthropological
present gives flesh to the historical past while at the same time
the past persists in the present.

Uppakrut, his legends and rites, are known in Burma, Thailand's
neighbour. In the appendix to this chapter I review the Burmese data
and interpret them, and show that the features demonstrated for the
Thai case are reflected in Burma as well.

The symbolism of the Naga in Thai religion is not exhausted yet; we
shall encounter the Naga again in a later chapter, not as a servant of
Buddhism but as an agent in its own right. It is only after seeing these
more general contrasts that we may better grasp the many facets and the
internal structure of the religious kaleidoscope.