Landscapelanguage in a Contemporary Thai Buddhist
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Kasetsart J. (Soc. Sci) 34 : 139 - 151 (2013) ว. เกษตรศาสตร์ (สังคม) ปีที่ 34 : 139 - 151 (2556) Landscape Language in a Contemporary Thai Buddhist Temple Ground: The Case of Wat Phra Dhammakaya Weera Nongmar1,*, Saran Samantarat2, Paisarn Tepwongsirirat2 and Sasiya Siriphanich3 ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to analyze the language and meaning in the landscape design of a contemporary Buddhist setting—the Dhammakaya Temple—in comparison with traditional temples. Research methods used included a study of landscape planning, an analysis of landscape signs, and the use of participatory observation to obtain information about spatial use. The study of the language of landscape covers an analysis of the signifier and the signified, and the relationship between them, including both denotative and connotative meanings. The study found the language of the landscape in the Dhammakaya Temple was clearly different from that in traditional temples in terms of landscape planning, landscape signs, and spatial use. The traditional aspects that were maintained included the use of north-south and east-west axes for layout and the use of Buddhist terminology. The language of landscape used in the Dhammakaya temple exemplified a departure from traditional Buddhist temple ground design. As a result, it no longer communicated the same messages. Keywords: landscape language, Thai Buddhist temple, Wat Phra Dhammakaya, semiology บทคัดย่อ การศึกษาพบว่าการสร้างภาษาภูมิสถาปัตยกรรม ของวัดพระธรรมกายมีลักษณะแตกต่างไปจากภาษา การศึกษานี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อสำรวจการ แบบประเพณีนิยมอย่างเห็นได้ชัด ทั้งรูปแบบการวาง สร้างภาษาภูมิสถาปัตยกรรมของพุทธสถานร่วมสมัย ผัง องค์ประกอบภูมิสถาปัตยกรรม และกิจกรรมการ โดยหยิบยกพุทธสถานร่วมสมัยวัดพระธรรมกายเป็น ใช้พื้นที่ ซึ่งส่งผลไปสู่การแสดงออกทางภาษา กรณีศึกษา โดยศึกษารูปแบบการวางผัง องค์ประกอบ ภูมิสถาปัตยกรรมที่แปลกตา และไม่ได้ยึดโยงกับ ภูมิสถาปัตยกรรม รวมถึงกิจกรรมการใช้พื้นที่ผ่าน โครงสร้างทางภาษาหลักของวัฒนธรรมดังเช่นในอดีต การสังเกตแบบมีส่วนร่วม เพื่อเปรียบเทียบกับ คำสำคัญ: ภาษาภูมิสถาปัตยกรรม พุทธสถานไทย วัด พุทธสถานแบบประเพณีนิยมตามแนวทฤษฎีสัญวิทยา พระธรรมกาย สัญวิทยา คลังความรู้ดิจิทัล มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ 1 Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Landscape Architecture, Graduate School, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand. หมดอายุวันที่ 30-10-2564 2 Division of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand. 3 Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture at Kamphaeng Saen, Kasetsart University, Kamphaeng Saen Campus, Nakhon Pathom 73140, Thailand. * Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] 140 ว. เกษตรศาสตร์ (สังคม) ปีที่ 34 ฉบับที่ 1 INTRODUCTION paradigm of Traiphumikatha (Buddhist cosmology). The temple settings, especially the Kamavasi temple Thai Buddhist landscape architecture is a (urban temple) is divided into two types: royal complicated native language that is rooted in beliefs temple and community temple. In the case of a royal and is linked to the core culture. In addition to temple, the location is fixed on a specific area communicating religious messages, it is also (Kalyanamitra, 1996: pp.87–88) such as the area of designed to express various meanings such as a a royal cremation ceremony or on the place where reflection of the ruling class paradigm (Sapphasiri, important events in history took place. The locations 1998; Somboon, 2004), as a power proxy of community temples are usually decided simply (Prakitnonthakan, 2007), and the individualistic by where the donated land is located and by attitude of the designer (Intararumpun, 2009). parceling it into areas such as the Buddha’s quarter Contemporary Buddhist temples such as the Thai (Figure1), with the monks living quarters and temple Temple in Nong Khai, the Pa Lak Roi Temple in estate quarters granting greatest importance to the Nakhon Ratchasima, the Puech Udom Temple in Buddha’s quarters (Jiratatsanakul, 2001: p.27)—a Pathum Thani, the Pa Mahajedee Temple in Si Sa sign and symbol of where Buddha lived and Ket, the Muang Temple in Ang Thong, the Phai consisting of the main structures—namely, the Rhong Woa Temple in Suphan Buri, and the Khuad Viharn (sermon hall), Ubosatha (ordination hall), Temple in Songkhla were built in harmony within a and Chedi, (cetiya). cultural and historical context of the area with traditional language patterns and so have led to very little argument. However, the landscape design language of another contemporary Buddhist temple, Wat Phra Dhammakaya, has led to heated discussions with its application of unconventional design in space arrangement, architectural patterns, and the usage of activity areas. The debate over the design is not limited to those who are in the common Buddhist culture. This article will explore the differences in language structure and patterns of the contemporary Buddhist settings in comparison Figure 1 Landscape elements in Buddha quarter; 1. with the traditional language. Sala Thanam (riverside pavilion), 2. Soom Pratu (lintel), 3. Plap Pla Pleung Kleung (royal’s changing pavilion), 4. Viharn THE LANGUAGE OF THAI (sermon hall), 5. Chedi, (cetiya/stupa; BUDDHIST LANDSCAPE with relics of the Buddha), 6. Ubosatha ARCHITECTURE (chapel/ordination hall), 7. small Chedi คลังความรู้ดิจิทัล มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ or Pra Prang (grave monument), 8. Phra Thai Buddhist landscape architecture has its Rabieng (walking galleries/ cloister), 9. own layout patterns and elements inherited from Sala Rai (open-sided pavilion), 10. Hor custom architecture (Kalyanamitra, 1996; Dohring, Rakang (campanile/bellหมดอายุวันที่ tower), 30-10-2564 11. Maha 2000; Jiratatsanakul, 2001). The division of an area Sima (great boundary wall), 12. Kampheng into parcels for particular uses follows Buddhist Keo (wall of jewels). regulation (Nor Na Paknam, 1997) and the universal Source: Jiratatsanakul (2008) ว. เกษตรศาสตร์ (สังคม) ปีที่ 34 ฉบับที่ 1 141 In planning the layout and the orientation of maintaining religion and religious places. Abbots the buildings, their relation within the relevant gained control over layout formations and elements context of Traiphumikatha will be taken into of the landscape architecture in the temple grounds consideration (Jiratatsanakul, 2001: p. 35) an axis (Jiratatsanakul, Jaturawong, & Sapphasiri, 2005: p. pattern is used for ranking purposes and for 227). Moreover, the government policy of developing architectural balance while teaching the promoting the physical development of temples influence from Traiphumikatha through landscape (Buddhist Monastery Division, 1981) has resulted in elements. In addition, there are symbolic usages of ever increasing competition when creating new space by aligning the areas of different zones, both Buddhist landscape architecture. The rise of the vertically and horizontally according to Thai contemporary design of the Dhammakaya temple influences (Eawsriwong, 1992). This is done in derives from the above-mentioned reasons as well, order to set up boundaries and zone lines giving and the argument may be different from other cases priority and importance to each area, with rules and ever since the case of distorting Dhamma discipline a different meaning of each area with its specific that occurred and caused conflict in the ideology of usages (Bhandhavee, 2004: p. 84). For example, the social religious principles (Payutto, 1999) together walking galleries have both a zone line and with activity patterns that brought criticism into the boundaries that block the area around the Kampheng relevant fields (Alumni Association of Keo (wall of jewels)—a separation of an area or Mahachulalongkorn Rajavidyalaya, 1999) and building in a Buddhist setting in order to show the physical attributes that spread widely to general importance of the location and boundary of that recipients of landscape architectural language architecture. Another important attribute of the (Sanitsuda, 1998; Mydans, 1999; Taylor, 2008). As traditional Buddhist settings are the patterns called part of the design intentions of Wat Phra “oblation” or the hierarchal element in Thai Dhammakaya, are to make the temple a Buddhism architectural decoration to express the uniqueness Center, comparable to the Vatican City or Mecca and styling of communication of the individual and to make it one of the wonders of the world architecture, of whether it is temple or palace (interview Phra Thatthacheevo, the Dhammakaya (Suwankiri, 2004: p. 373). For example, a royal Temple assistant abbot, in Scott, 2009: p.102), this temple will have three tiers of roof, laying tier by has had a direct impact on the physical changes and tier, and the gable roof is adorned with the leads to an apparent exploitation of the landscape decorative elements. A community temple has two spaces. It is, therefore, essential to raise funds to tiers of roof, the upper part will be decorated with create the desired elements in landscape architecture Ruay Raka (Thai architecture roof ornament for through changes of the ideal concept from “Merit” temple and palace)—a kind of decorative element to “Goods”, (Fuengfusakul, 1998: p. 128; Scott, (Nimlek, 1996: p. 12). These attributes have been 2009) which gives rise to the social negotiating deemed a custom pattern of landscape architectural language pattern of landscape architecture, using the languages in the design of Thai Buddhist settings. phenomenon in religion as a guiding tool (O’connor, Althoughคลังความรู้ดิจิทัล the languages of มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ layout and architectural 1993; Mackenzie, 2007: p.191;