I have been visiting some monasteries in the West and I have noticed a difference between the socio-economic background of Westerners and that of Thai or more generally Asian people attending the temples. Of course this is a generalisation, but I thought that it is probably statistically meaningful so I wanted to share my reflections here.
I had the impression that people from Asia were generally quite wealthy and from what one would loosely call the middle class; in contrast many Westerners were there because they did not (want to?) fit in society, their understanding of Dhukkha (and of greed) sometimes puts the accent on the way our globalised economy and capitalism have changed our lives and are constanly pressuring us in wanting more. Even the stories one hears about some Western monks and why they ordain seems to point in this direction. Like stories of their travelling to Thailand and then remarking (perhaps jokingly bur perhaps not) that they ended up staying at a monastery because it was free.
So I was first of all wondering whether anyone else agrees with these observations? Or perhaps I just happened to be in those monasteries and temples at particular times?
Secondly I was wondering whether there were any studies on these sociological aspects of Buddhism, perhaps including the situation at the time of the Buddha. For example sutta like these:
state that one of the first advantages of ordaining was getting the respect of kings and the upper classes even though you originated from a low caste; so I was thinking that from a sociological point of view buddhism might have been revolutionary in the sense that it created social mobility in that it allowed the lower castes to rise at the top when ordaining, in marked contrast to the rigid structure of the Vedic religion. I would be grateful for comments and perhaps suggestions on how to learn more on this topic that I have just startd to reflect upon.
I mean, it largely depends on the particular place and people. Many places in Sri Lanka and Myanmar are stricken with severe levels of poverty, while still supplying monastics with foods selflessly. I’ve heard of many remote places in Thailand where that is the case. These are all anecdotes from monastics who’ve spent some time there.
And of course, in urban places, things just might be different. It’s not so different in Christian countries either - Mormon churches are unbelievably rich (generally), while there are churches in the south that barely get by.
If there’s a significant difference between eastern and western monks, I think western monks are generally more in tune with the scripture and intellectual side of things, while eastern monks are born in the culture and are part of the living tradition. Even then that’s a broad stroke with many exceptions.
But I could also understand the perspective that Western monks are generally more motivated by Samvega compared to an Eastern monk. It takes a bigger leap of faith for a westerner who grew up without a significant buddhist influence to take these steps, whereas for a Thai youth, it’s a prestigious thing to become a monk, still living in the same country with your friends and family and motherland, no language barrier to overcome, etc. There are certainly fewer obstacles. So it probably takes a stronger drive for a westerner to take these steps, and that probably translates into some generalities that could be observed.
But again, these are just broad strokes with exceptions bound to happen.
I certainly don’t look down on anybody whose main reason for ordaining is merely to escape the “rat race”. It’s overwhelming for some and certainly seems like a scam, and it is, because you can never win, the winners are at the top of the food chain, and you have to play the game regardless of whether or not you want to win. So, many just see how arbitrarily meaningless the whole thing is and yearn to escape. That is certainly a desire to escape one particular type of suffering. Certainly not the motive of the Buddha, however. The Buddha had everything and realized … etcetera etcetera … you know the story. But, I would expect that overtime, to be a successful monk you also have to want deeply to escape existential suffering. So, perhaps the stories of people who “have it all” - and then go on to renounce - are more “persuasive” and seem more genuine. But both types, the poor convert and the rich convert, are trying to escape the meaninglessness of modern society. However, the Buddha’s example was not simply a commentary on “belonging to the village”. It was the deep deep search for lasting happiness. And people of all walks of life struggle with basic anxiety, grief, and mental anguish. So, all types of people yearn for mental happiness. If it just so happens that you feel you need to escape society in order to achieve that, then so be it. Perhaps you are referring simply to thr freeloaders. I don’t know. I guess there are freeloaders everywhere. But I don’t think the term applies to all or most or even a significant proportion of those from the West who ordain. I also don’t think that particular motive for ordaining is exclusive to Western monks. Again, escaping the awful rat race is something a lot of people want to do deep down inside. Buddhism offers a platform for it.
As others have said, it may depend on where you are. Here in New Zealand you need some sort of skills, or an NZ spouse, to migrate. The Thai people I know who are not married to locals seem to mostly work in restaurants and other services. So they are not poor, but not rich either. I’ve seldom come across Hiso Thais here, apart from wealthy people coming as Kathina benefactors.
The Sri Lankans here tend to be better educated, e.g. working in medical professions.
I have come across occasional “missfit” NZ Buddhists, but not many. Many do tend to have concerns about the environment and so on, but they are firmly embedded in the middle class.
