The Culture Ministry of Thailand wants to stop Thai tattoo parlors from injecting images of the Buddha into the skins of foreign non-Buddhist tourists. "Foreigners see these tattoos as a fashion," Culture Minister Niphit Intharasombat said. "They do not think of respecting religion."
I take from this that having the image of the World-Honored One etched on one's body isn't wrong in itself, as long as the etchee has the proper reverence about it.
Buddhist body art is popular in the West, also. At least some of the etchees appreciate what the symbols mean and chose them to keep them close. And, anyway, we've got stranger things to worry about. Like, use of the word "Zen" to mean -- well, something other than Zen. And Buddha on a Visa card is just wrong.
This reminds me of a story a Thai/American friend told me. When Thai people fly into Bangkok they often make an offering to one of the buddhas (I forget which) in thankfulness for having arrived safely home. My friend lives in the US and partly grew up there, but often flies back to Bangkok for family matters, and on one of these occasions she got on line for the buddha offering. But there were two lines–one for Thais, one for foreigners. My friend is a large woman, and the guards took her for a foreigner until she sharply corrected him and got in the Thai line. There seems to be a cultural issue–Buddha belongs to us, not to you foreigners. Given how Buddha images are used on (yikes) Visa cards and so on, let alone tattoos, I can really understand this nationalistic attitude of the Thai authorities, but it is a bit unforunate. If a religious culture makes use of images they will not doubt be abused as well, but I do not see how policing the issue will help matters.
For ages, the Yin and Yang symbol of the Daoists has been seen in the form of everything from tatoos to bumper stickers to jewelry. l don’t even have to get started on how many crosses and virgin Mary’s there are on the road today much less in skin art. Buddhism seeks to find a middle way. I think Siddhartha Gautama would be honored to have his picture plastered all over out of respect and would find enjoyment in seeing people use his image for art. Whatever way we can get people to LOOK at something other than mainstream religion, if that means wearing Buddha t-shirts with the words “Enlightenment, Ask Me How!” on them, to get people to ask, “Who was that?” or “What is that about?” leading to explaining about the Dharma lessons, the four noble truths, the eightfold path, the five precepts, and leading to meditation, chanting, or however they decide to explore it and actually READ one of the many vehicles/paths, then they might be able to break free from indoctrination and mainstream religious propaganda. Government control of religion in any form is NOT something I, as a Buddhist, would ever consider a good idea. That would have to include all the parts of our melting pot and in America, that would be a many faceted task, unless someone who thought their religion was more important or more pertinent to our country and tried to impart their own one sided thinking onto our international image. I don’t think the historical Buddha, Shakyamuni, Siddhartha Gautama, or whichever name you wish to call him, took himself that seriously.
Is their or should there be any limitation on the Dharma?
The image of the Buddha is perhaps one of the most well-known in the world today and I see no problems with tattoos on the arms of so-called non-believers.
Me thinks officials in Thailand is a bit too protective of Buddhism.
Let the Dharma spread!
Buddha on a VISA™ card just plain wrong? But I’m so attached to it!
(Please note: I wrote that amid peals of laughter. I actually had a existential moment of pure clarity writing it.)
While not part of the dhamma, an image of the Buddha on a credit card convinces me more and more that O’Toole’s Corollary on Finagle’s Law should be. “The perversity of the Universe tends toward a maximum.”
With the laughter comes also a feeling of profound compassion. While I could be offended by such an image (or that of a Buddha inspired tattoo on a bicep), I find that I just can’t.
I look at the Buddha on a credit card and I see two of the three Poisons–of ignorance and greed. I see the thirsting and grasping as Buddhists are targeted by such marketing (the dukkha). And I can only shake my head.
Then the laughter starts again. Maybe, Barbara, we should write these folks a letter suggesting they’d be better off marketing to Buddhists by putting an image of Mara on the card.
And then the laughter starts again ….
It occurs to me that if the image of the Buddha were on my credit cards, I’d probably never buy another pair of cute shoes* again unless I could pay cash for them.
*As opposed to utility shoes. The other ladies will know what I mean.
Barbara, I read your comment and that got me to laughing again.
I’m titillated not just by how wrong that image is (the Buddha on a credit card) but how ironicly perverse it is. I have this picture in my head of His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, looking at such an ad and dissolving into fits of laughter after a 10 second facepalm.
And amid the chuckles, him saying fitfully, gasping for air, “Oh, I gotsta get me one o’ those!”
(The guy equivalent of cute shoes would be the el supremo super-duper fishing pole, perfectly balanced titanium golf clubs, or a Bowflex that now acts as a lovely clothes hanger/coat rack.)
Three of my five tattoos are specifically Buddhist, and the other two are Asian. They are respectfully placed, and respectfully treated. Sometimes people ask their meaning, and I’m glad to give a brief explanation. I think the only difference in the acceptability of Dharma Ink is whether they are received and treated with respect for the Dharma.
An additional concern for the Thais is the placement of the tattoos. Some farangs (foreigners) in Thailand are not aware they should not place images of Buddha on their lower legs or feet.
The Thais are right. Crosses, in Ethiopia, are placed on the forehead, usually in the countryside, usually to distinguish people from Muslims, or, as in the vampire tradition, to protect against evil forces. In Europe, the cross has become a profane, empty symbol.People who have tattoos are no longer Picts, but tend to be flighty birds of the moment, culture-vultures, and, sadly, are unlikely to be the best people to promote the profound teachings of the man who sat beneath a tree in the Gangetic plains more than 2000 years ago.