19 hours Ago
Seventy-one corpses; that's what police found in two forest monasteries, thrusting them into the public eye for all the wrong reasons. The temples claimed the corpses were just "tools for meditation". But was this practice enlightening -- or just plain bizarre, a grotesque deviation from traditional Buddhist meditation? The police raid at the Nakornchai Boworn forest monastery in Phichit province on Nov 25 made headlines when officials found 41 coffins containing corpses in 15 meditation halls within the dense 200-rai woodland compound.
Each hall contained four to five bodies, many reduced to dried remains, their skin clinging to bone. The corpses, stored in coffins buried shallowly beneath golden lids, were used as objects of meditation, said the abbot, Phra Ajarn Saifon Pantito. Most of them were donated by relatives as "teachers" for meditation practitioners.
Hardly had the shock subsided when officials raided the Sirichan forest monastery in Kamphaeng Phet province, where 30 other corpses were similarly used as meditation objects. Both temples are part of the same network, employing the same meditation techniques. Meditation with decaying bodies is nothing new.
It is one of 40 meditation methods taught in Buddhism. In ancient times, some monks would head to cemeteries, sitting next to decaying bodies to meditate on life's fleeting nature. It was raw, direct, and effective -- a way to break attachment to the physical self and understand anicca or impermanence.
Yet scaling up by amassing dozens of corpses and turning the traditional asubha meditation into a formalised ritual is a new twist, raising ethical and legal questions. The truth of impermanence, however, is not the temple's ultimate goal. According to the abbot, the practice aims to cultivate "magic eyes and ears" supernatural powers, enabling practitioners to see and hear beyond ordinary senses.
He reportedly explained that developing psychic powers requires rigorous mental exercises to confront fear and build mental strength. The corpses, he said, act as their teachers. However, such pursuits are far from the Buddha's teachings.
While Buddhism acknowledges the mental power that comes from concentration meditation, it warns against becoming attached to psychic phenomena. Not only is it not the path to spiritual liberation, it can lead practitioners astray, trapping them in even deeper greed and delusion. The Buddha focuses on vipassana, or insight meditation, which focuses on cultivating mindfulness to observe the impermanence of life and the illusory nature of the self.
This practice fosters unconditional loving kindness and compassion by freeing the mind from greed, lust, and delusion. After the raids, the police charged the temples with operating cemeteries without legal permits and fined them 3,000 baht per corpse. Does this mean that with the right permits, these temples could continue using corpses to cultivate psychic powers, claiming that it is a Buddhist practice? The police clarified that their focus is purely on legal matters.
It's up to religious authorities to decide whether using corpses for meditation is acceptable. But the issue goes beyond legality. In Buddhist traditions, the dead are cremated, not kept permanently.
Cremation is believed to release spirits, allowing them a journey to other realms. Temples typically don't have cemeteries for long-term storage of bodies. Will legal permits change this tradition, allowing temples to keep dead bodies for good? The temples' proponents may argue that the corpses were donated with families' consent.
But consent isn't the only issue. Were practitioners prepared for the possible psychological toll? Was there support for those overwhelmed by fear and hallucination? Ethical and practical concerns abound. They may also argue that it is common for temples to preserve the corpses of meditation masters for public worship.
Why can't they? Amid the controversy, Chusak Sirinil, Minister Attached to the Prime Minister's Office, stated that he believes the practice of "magic eyes and ears" corpse meditation is a deviation from Buddhism. He urged the National Office of Buddhism to investigate the incidents on religious grounds and implement effective oversight policies and measures. There has been longstanding exploitation of Buddhist practices, he noted, and the National Office of Buddhism must take a more proactive role in addressing these issues.
He is being cautious. Politicians simply do not want to ruffle feathers with the clerical establishment. While aligning with public sentiment, he emphasised that it is the responsibility of clerical authorities to rule what is acceptable or not and address these problems internally to protect Buddhism.
The police have arrested the temple people in question. The government has spoken up, urging action from cleric authorities. The ball is in the clergy's court.
The clergy must answer. Are corpse meditations acceptable? If not, why? If so, under what conditions? What are the measures to protect practitioners? What actions should be taken to clean up rogue monks -- and to increase cleric efficiency? Throughout the controversy, an authoritative voice from the clergy is missing. This is troubling.
The deafening silence from the clergy reflects a systematic inertia that has allowed widespread laxity in the monkhood. As in past years, stories of sex and drug scandals in the monkhood have become so common that they hardly surprise anyone anymore. At the same time, temple corruption and the commercialisation of Buddhism continue to erode public trust, with no effort from the clergy to address these problems.
This year, however, scandals involving monks -- ranging from wildlife hunting to corpse meditation -- have crossed new lines of controversy. Strict recruitment and training, as required by the Vinaya , the monastic code of conduct, are urgently needed. Financial transparency in temples is equally important.
According to the Vinaya, monks aren't even supposed to touch money, yet many disregard this rule entirely. With around 250,000 monks and nearly 45,000 temples across the country, the monkhood needs modern administration and management to ensure it aligns with Buddhist teachings. Currently, such systems simply don't exist.
The clergy still operates under a feudal, hierarchical structure. The Supreme Ecclesiastic Council, composed of senior monks in top positions, lacks a secretariat or the mechanisms needed to set goals or enforce policies. Meanwhile, the National Office of Buddhism -- a government body -- primarily serves as a middleman for distributing state funds to temples.
Traditional, top-down preaching by monks is increasingly out of touch with modern realities and concerns. By focusing on individual moral failings while ignoring the structural injustices that cause social suffering, the clergy is often seen as part of the status quo rather than a force for change. Combined with widespread temple corruption, recurring scandals, and the perception of senior monks as a privileged class disconnected from ordinary people, public faith in the clergy continues to decline.
This erosion of trust has fuelled the growth of lay Buddhist teachers and meditation movements, offering meaningful practices without the frills of temple theatrics. However, some of these movements have also been co-opted for personal gain. What should Buddhists do? It's worth remembering that authentic Buddhist practices are never about theatrics.
The focus should never be on novelty, shock value, or supernatural powers. Instead, it's about introspection. Simple methods like mindfulness of breathing, physical movements, or observing body sensations are timeless and effective.
They remind us that the answers aren't outside but within. Don't be swayed by sensationalism. Buddhism isn't about spectacle.
It's about shedding greed, lust, and delusion. And you don't need 70 corpses to do that. Sanitsuda Ekachai is a former editorial pages editor.
She writes on human rights, gender, and Thai Buddhism..
