CRRS 655 (ISBS) by
Lecturer Prof. Jeremy Saul, Ph.D.
Mini Paper-2 on 04 November
2014 of Ven. Husen Dhammahuto (5638620)
THE POTENT AMULETS
The
Amulet’s Words
“Amulet”
is derived from the Old Latin AMOLETUM, i.e.
a “means of defence” (SELIGMANN (Heil and
Schutzmittel, Stuttgart, 1920, p. 26)). In addition, the word AMULET is borrowed from
the Latin AMULÈTUM, which we find in PLINY, who uses the word to indicate:
(i)
an object which preserves a man from some
trouble;
(ii)
medical or prophylactic treatment;
(iii)
a substance used in medicine
Stengs
claimed that the importance of the power amulets that is attributed to powerful
objects dates back at least to the time of the Buddha. Anyhow, the protective
power of an amulets works only for those who are morally good.[1]
According
to Sheila Paine, an amulet is a device, the purpose of which is to protect, but
by magical and not physical means – a lump of meteorite worn against gunfire is
an amulet, a bullet-proof vest is not. Moreover, an amulet is part of such a system of natural and magical
force. The invisible aura of an unusual stone, the perfume of a pungent plant,
the tortured shape of a root, the soaring power of an eagle, all such phenomena
can be used to redress the imbalance of evil influences.
Then the Cambridge dictionary claimed that
potent is the adjective word that means very powerful, forceful or effective.
So, this title talks about the very powerful of a device (an amulet) that the
purpose is to defence or protect.
The Amulets’ Source and Progress
Sheila mentioned that the story of amulets is a continuous one from prehistoric
times to the present day. Texts from Sumer show that the evil eye was known
from about the fourth or third millennium BC, while amulets survive in huge
numbers from Ancient Egypt. A Chinese jade amulet of a boar-dragon from the
Hongshan culture of about 3600 to 3000 BC is drilled with a hole to wear as a
pendant and is similar to objects six thousand years old. They were used as
ritual offerings to deities and spirits for protection, while later ones of the
Eastern Zhou dynasty, such as the emperor's amuletic pendant of around 400 BC
made of white jade hung on red strings as stipulated in the Book of Rites, were
also a sign of status.
Meanwhile, Wallis Budge argued that the
amulets worn by primitive men and women were made of simple natural substances,
and at first were chosen simply because they were of unusual form and colour,
or because their substance was new to them. The oldest amulets were objects
which roused man’s curiosity, or excited his wonder and admiration, and his
natural love of possession led him to make them his own property, and to make
them to his dwelling.
The portions of their bodies with
which animals and reptiles slew their prey also attracted his attention, and
hence the horns, claws, teeth and tails of animals, and the skin of serpents,
were used as amulets at a very early period. The dwellers on the sea-coast, and
on lakes filled with fish, made amulets of shells and parts of fishes; and
little fingers, toes, eyes, phalli and hair of human beings have been regarded
as powerful amulets in many countries.
Objects colored white, blue, red,
and yellow have more often been chosen as amulets than those which were grey or
brown or black. As soon as man learned the art of working in metals he made
many amulets, in many forms, in gold, silver, copper and iron. When he had
learned to write figures of men, animals, birds, fish, trees and plants cut in
stone or wood, or drawn upon some substance which served as a writing material,
were also used by him as amulets.
Within this earthly and celestial world, concepts of the
symbolism of astrology, of numbers and colors, of alchemy and magic, of wind,
sun and moon are all harnesses into the power of amulets. And into this world
intruded, the established religions of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism,
Taoism, Shinto and Hinduism.
Actually, we shall never know
accurately what primitive man expected his various amulets to do for him, or
how he thought they worked for his good, but it is quite clear from the number
and variety of them that there was no one amulet which he believed to be
capable of protecting him from every
danger.
The Amulet’s Makers
According
to Sheila Paine that the truly professional makers of amulets fall into two
distinct categories, for both of whom this work is something of a sideline. The
one bases his power in magic – like the creator of the red plastic and wolf toe
confection – and the other in religion.
1. The
amulet makers whose field is magic are variously described as medicine men,
witch doctors, herbalists, healers. For all of them it is the magical potency
of plants, of the tree barks, of animal parts, of arcane substance that they
harness into an amulet.
2. The
amulet makers of religious persuasion are the guardians of Shinto shrines and
Buddhist temples, the monks of impoverished monasteries, the holy men of Islam,
who supply folded pieces of inscribed paper. These men will make amulets but
only at a high price and as a mark of respect to their standing: their main
function remains that of the revered holy man of the village.
3. A
third category of amulet makers are the amateurs. These are usually mothers,
married at fourteen, illiterate, uncomprehending, whose babies have died
inexplicably one after another.
Meanwhile
interestingly in the Thailand Language, which they illustrative for the
autonomous power of amulets by not using the word buy (ซื้อ or sue) when it comes to
purchase of an amulet, but the word renting, hiring or leasing (เช่า or chaw)
instead. This shows that one never can become the actual owner of amulet. It is
more that one temporarily has the opportunity to take advantage of its power.[2]
Yet
the mass-produced Thai amulet is a commodity like any other item that is
produced to be sold on the consumers market. Similarly in the true Marxian of
“commodity fetishes” that ‘This division of the product of labor into a useful
thing and a thing possessing value appears in practice only when exchange has
already acquired a sufficient extension and importance to allow useful things
to be produced for the purpose of being exchanged, so, that their character as
values has already to be taken into consideration during production’ (Capital
Vol I, 1982: 166).[3]
The Potent Amulets in Thailand
According to Stengs that Amulets in Thailand were
sold in the temples and the “second hand” markets. This does not mean that the
value of those amulets is lower than that of newly produced amulets. On
contrary, older series generally will rise in price, and during the last decade
the prices for some of the rarer old amulets have rocketed sky high.[4] In
the below cited from one website to show the “antique potent amulets.”
The Grand 5 Sacred Buddha Amulets
(Phra Benjapakee) by ahaina website are Phra Somdej (King of Amulet), Phra Nang
Phaya (Queen of Amulet), Phra Rod, Phra Phong Supan, Phra Somkor. We can see
like this:
1. Phra
Somdej (King of Amulet)
Phra
Somdej were created by Somdej Phra BuddhaJahn Toh Prommarangsri (Somdej Toh).
He’s a son of King Rama I. He
started to make Phra Somdej amulets in B.E. 2409. Materials for making Phra
somdej comprise: Shell lime, holy powder, assorted flowers from shine, rice, lotus,
ashes, honey, banana, tang oil, etc. Then chanted with spells and meditate. To
bless every life in this world for good karma and strong protection against
negative energy. Total of 84,000 amulets was made at the time. Phra Somdej Wat
Rakhang is once of
the most famous and the best amulets from Thailand.
2. Phra
Nang Phaya (Queen of Amulet)
Phra Nang Phaya were created during of Ayuttaya era,
Pitsanulok province. The major discovered are from Wat Nang Phaya around
B.E.2444. The temple was said to be built for merits making to his Queen, the
mother of King Naresuan, the Thai people given name “Queen of Thailand
amulets”. Phra Nang Phaya are very famous for bless strong with
attractiveness and respectful from all others, also power on charm and safe
from all dangers.
3. Phra Rod
Phra Rod was created by a hermit. First discovered during
the earlier days of King Rama 5 reign when a pagoda from Wat Mahawan in Lumpoon
province. The Thai people regard this particular amulet as Buddha
of Escape, they have superb Buddhistic power, especially in protection and
being safe from all dangers and disasters or
misfortunes. They are made of clay and the oldest once are over 1,250 years
old.
4. Phra Phong Supan
Phra Phong Supan were discovered on B.E. 2456 in Wat Phra
Sri Ratanamahathat, Supan Buri province. According to a golden scripture found
together in the pagoda which described that Phra Phong Supan was created by
Phra Mahathera PiyaThassi Saribut during the period of King Bormrajathiraj 2nd.
It has strong ”U-thong” art style. Most of
unique of this amulets is at the back had a thumb print of the creator. A
superb Buddha amulets had all mighty protective power against weapon and bring
good luck. Is the most powerful amulet of ever.
5. Phra Somkor
Phra Somkor were first discovered on B.E. 2392 in Wat
Phra Boromathat. Gumpangpeth province. The amulets were created in the era King
Phra Maha Dharmarajalitai, the 5th king of Sukhothai. Phra Somkor is a mixture
of Sukhothai-Lanka (Sri Lanka) style. It form a sitting posture of a thumb
shape. According to memorandum of Wat Phra Boromathat, Phra Somkor amulets were
made by 11 hermits or Phra Lersi using special materials and invited Devadas to
create the molds. There is a slogan for Phra Somkor ”If you have me, you never
get poor”. Estimated to be made some 550 years.
Moreover
Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah would like to differentiate four classes of potent amulets
in Thailand:
1. Amulet
representations of famous and historic Buddha Images, which have played the
roles of palladia of the Thai kingdoms.
2. Amulets
that owe their fame to the reputation of famous Buddhist monks, especially of
the nineteenth century, who sponsored their making and sacralized them. The
most famous of them are called Phra
Somdet and Phra kling.
3. Miscellaneous
amulets, a large residual class of representations of gods, humans, animals,
birds, and anomalous beings, sacralized by monks and lay experts skilled in saiyasāt (“base art).
4. The
contemporary amulets being blessed by the forest-dwelling meditation masters,
some of whom are acclaimed as “saints” (arahants).
Nicola
Tannenbaum who write his paper of “Tattoos: Invulnerability and Power in Shan
Cosmology” argued that both Buddhist and animist practices are integrally
related and are derived from a single worldview structured on the existence of
morally neutral power. This worldview and the political realities state systems
account for animist practices and Buddhist elements, which are incorporated
into the religious system. Actually in my opinion, his argument was closed to
be well that Buddhism and animism walk together. But this practice is only for
the beginner level, which need to do rituals or ceremonies. For at least of the
“stream enter” or “Sotapana level” and upper levels, they do not believe in the
rituals and ceremonies again, tend to practice only the Buddha’s teaching that
included of insight meditation (Vipassana meditation).
Some
people argued that the potent amulets as represent of Buddha, like in the Kaliṅgabodhi Jātaka (J., IV, 228),
Ānanda desires to set up in the Jetavana a substitute for the Buddha, so that
people may be able to make their offerings of flowers, not only when the Buddha
is in residence, but also when he is away preaching elsewhere. Then Buddha asks
to Ānanda about how many of cetiya there
are, Ānanda answers that three of cetiya – those of the body (sārīrika), those of association (paribhoga), and those prescribed (uddesika). The Buddha rejects of his
body as relic at that time, except he already demise. So, the associated
symbols, example: the boddhi tree, the wheel (cakra), the footprints, and so on. Even, the amulet did not
mentioned by the Buddha, but many famous monks in Thailand made and sacralized
the potent amulets. They legalized the potent amulets as part of cetiya that
can represent of Buddha, because the Buddha was already demise.
Fortunately, Stengs said that Amulets in Thailand
were sold in the temples and the “second hand” markets. So, I think with this
reality that mean can to reduce the jobless indirectly in economic development.
The market amulets could take several employers in their one store, which in
one market may be more than 100 stores in ‘Tha Phra Chan’ Bangkok; Thailand.
In addition, Stengs suggested that their value at
the collectors market should similarly be seen as an expression of the social
relationships between the collectors. The amulets markets in this sense can be
understood as a condensed model of the highly competitive and hierarchical
world of the Thai men.[5]
Furthermore,
in Aṅguttara Nikaya III; 208 (22/212) about five kinds of Micchāvaṇijjā
(Trading which is wrong Dhamma) are:
1. Trading
in things which kill living beings
2. Trading
in human beings (slave trading, prostitute).
3. Trading
in animals which are to be slaughtered for food.
4. Trading
in intoxicating liquors.
5. Trading
in poisons.
These
five kinds of trading are prohibited for Buddhist lay devotees (upāsaka). So, to sale the potent amulets does not
include in the trading of wrong Dhamma. The blacksmiths, makers, sacralizer,
sales, traders, user are seemed happy as part of potent amulets circulation. In
addition, the economic of amulets market is going to grow increased.
Mr. Charoen gave the example story
of the power amulet that in a newspaper article about the Thai Airways plane
crash in China, early in 1997, which left many people dead, the only person who
was not harmed at all was wearing a Luang Puu Thuad amulet.[6] I guess his fortunate came
to this guy, but maybe he was very guilty of this accident that his amulet can
not save all passengers too.
On
the other hand, in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta mentioned that after the Buddha
parinibbana (demise), only his teaching (Dhamma) and the discipline (Vinaya)
are the represent of him. The Buddha never suggested to his disciples to
worship the statues (images), the potent amulets, as represent him-self.
Durrenberger
(1981b)[7] argues that monks as
nonreciprocating superiors provide a fixed standard to rank competitors.
Through their offering to monks they make claims that their power has a base in
morality. So, the Buddhist devotees should offer some basic needed to the monks
and keep morality as good as well rather than depend to the power amulets.
According to my understanding that nonreciprocating of monk is because all of
Buddhist devotees as direct or indirect, quick or long, this life or next life
will come to the Nibbana (Buddhahood or Arahanthood). However, he or she will
follow the monks or the nuns hood to upgrade their willing to attain of
Nibbana. Like one probe from Buddha
directly that “As you sow, so shall you reap..” Who offers to the monks
(Sangha), which they already keep their seed to their own sake next.
Meanwhile,
Vū often heard from the ritual masters describes an amulet as “a double-edged
sword.” They cited numerous instances where ritual masters and clients had been
punished by the gods for mistaken or careless magic. For example, ritual master
Nguyễn Van An in Bắc Giang ceased to be a ritual master when he went mad, his
family was ruined, and his domestic animals died. [8] We can see the dangerous of the potent
amulets here that can destroyed the masters of rituals and the wearers. Perhaps
who wore the potent amulets like make a deal to ‘the spirit,’ which this
‘spirit’ still in the lokiya world, where they still have hatred, greedy and
ignorance. In contrast that only the holy men mean Arahants, and all Buddhas
haven’t (hadn’t) had hatred, greedy and ignorance. Any risk of wear the potent
amulets should rethink and re-choose to selective the best one without any
fear.
By
the way, According to the Frits Staal that makes the provocative claim of
ritual is meaningless.[9] With this characterization
Staal proposes to problematize various ritual theories. Staal argues tha ritual
is primarily self-referential: ritual is pure activity; it follows a particular
set of rules or syntax; it is not symbolic; it has no goal [outside itself?].[10] With his statement, I
will suggest that not necessary to ritual or wear the potent amulets, because
the ritual to wear of the potent amulets is only conceptual minded and maybe
speculation in his or her wished. But, sometime rituals needed to make the
societies together.
Moreover,
in Dhammapada XII; No: 160 that Buddha’s word said:
Atthā hi attano
nātho
Ko hi nātho paro
siyā
Attanā hi
sudantena
Nāthaṁ labhati
dullabhaṁ
“ One truly is the protector of oneself;
Who else could the protector be?
With oneself fully controlled,
One gains a mastery that is hard to gain.”
Buddha advised to all people to be the owner
of him or her-self that not depend to him, god, divine, teacher, witch, potent amulet
and so on. Only by himself that people can be liberation or be jailor.
REFERENCES:
Budge,
Wallis E. A. Amulet & Magic.
Oxon: Routledge, 2001.
Buddha’s Word (Dhammapada). The Buddha’s Path of Wisdom. Indonesia: Bahussuta Society, 2012.
Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. The Buddhist Saints of the Forest and the Cult of Amulets.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Tannenbaum, Nicola. Tattoos: Invulnerability and
power in Shan Cosmology. JSTOR, American Ethnologist, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Nov.,
1987).
Paine, Sheila. Amulets:
A World of Secret Powers, Charms and Magic. London: Thames & Hudson,
2004.
Swearer, Donald K. Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha
Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. JSTOR, History of Religions, Vol.
34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism (Feb., 1959), p. 279-280.
Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple
Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING
(1998.
Webster, Richard. Write
your own magic: The Hidden Power in Your Words. St. Paul: Llewellyn
Publications, 2004.
Vajirañāṇavarorasa, Somdet Phra Mahā Samaṇa Chao Krom
Phrayā. Navakovāda: Intructions for
Newly-Ordained Bhikkhus and Sāmaṇeras. Bangkok: Mahamakuta Rajavidyalaya
Faoundation Under Royal Patronage, 2551/2008.
Vū, Hông Thuât. Amulets and the Marketplace.
JSTOR, Asian Ethnology, Vol. 67, No. 2, Popular Religion and the Sacred Life of
Material Goods in Contemporary Vietnam (2008).
Retrieve on 15
October, http://books.simonandschuster.com/Amulets/Sheila-Paine/9781594770258/excerpt#sthash.UmbGt3EV.dpuf
Retrieve on 20 October 2014, https://ahaina.wordpress.com/category/the-grand-5-sacred-buddha-amulets/
Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://www.mybuddha108.com/article_and_tips/benja_pakee.html
Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://thailand-charms-amulets.blogspot.com/
Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://sanaakosirickylee.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/the-curious-case-of-a-powerful-relationship-thai-amulet/
Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread981654/pg1
Retrieve on 18 October 2014, http://www.thailandamulet.com/
[1] Stengs, Irene. Collectible
Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor,
Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.
[2]
Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men.
JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.
[3]
Ibid. p. 58.
[4]
Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men.
JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.
[5] Stengs, Irene. Collectible
Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor,
Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.73.
[6] Stengs, Irene. Collectible
Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor,
Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.67.
[7] Tannenbaum, Nicola. Tattoos:
Invulnerability and power in Shan Cosmology. JSTOR, American Ethnologist,
Vol. 14, No. 4 (Nov., 1987), p. 707.
[8]
Vū, Hông Thuât. Amulets
and the Marketplace. JSTOR, Asian Ethnology, Vol. 67, No. 2, Popular
Religion and the Sacred Life of Material Goods in Contemporary Vietnam (2008),
p. 241.
[9] Frits Staal, “The meaninglessness
of Ritual,” Numen 16 (June 1979): 2-22. Quoted from Swearer, Donald K. Hypostasizing
the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. JSTOR, History
of Religions, Vol. 34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism (Feb., 1959), p.
279-280.
[10] Catherine Bell challenges the
construction of the autonomy of ritual in her notion of “ritualization’: “If we
take seriously the idea that even the exact repetition of an age old ritual
precedent is a strategic act with which to define the present, then no ritual
style is autonomous,” That is ritual cannot be understood apart from its
immediate situation (Bell [n. 11 above], p. 101). Quoted from Swearer, Donald
K. Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand.
JSTOR, History of Religions, Vol. 34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism
(Feb., 1959), p. 279-280.
No comments:
Post a Comment