Thich Quang Duc burned himself alive in 1963 in protest of South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem's anti-Buddhist policies. This photo was taken by American journalist Malcolm Browne. |
Introduction:
Much like our pathetic lives, fire is a fucked up, beautiful thing. Throughout history, people have used fire to do all sorts of stuff: cook, smoke weed, become warm, set cotton balls ablaze and throw them across the room because who needs an entire bag of eighty cotton balls (cotton fairies?). While I'm not nearly as familiar with prehistory as I would like to be, Wikipedia tells me that the earliest definitive evidence of human control of fire dates to the early Middle Paleolithic age (400,000 to 200,000 BCE), specifically at a site called Swartkrans about 20 miles away from Johannesburg in present-day South Africa. Definitely have to drop by there one day and say sup.
One of the more interesting ways humans
have decided to use fire is in the practice of self-immolation. Most
people are familiar with self-immolation as a protest method,
particularly as practiced by certain Buddhist monks and especially as
employed in the famous example of Thích Quảng Đức in 1960s
Vietnam. Mohamed Bouazizi of Tunisia, whose self-immolation was the
impetus for the Arab Spring, also comes to mind.
Of course, these types of incidents
raise an important question: why the fuck would anyone light
themselves on fire? Seriously, when people talk about the worst
ways to die, being burned alive and drowning to death routinely top
the list (sidenote: I always feel bad for people accused of witchcraft because
being burned at the stake sounds fucking awful). But why, then, would
someone deliberately light themselves on fire as a form of suicide,
as a form of protest? Why not do something less unbearably agonizing
that accomplishes the same goal? Who thought this was a good idea? Is self-immolation popular simply
because it gets people's attention, because its so extreme, so visceral?
Partially, yes. But there's much more
to it. While the word self-immolation today is associated with
lighting oneself aflame, that's mostly because Western and English
media were introduced to the term after the Thích Quảng Đức incident in
1963. It's actual definition is simply killing oneself as sacrifice,
either through starvation, jumping off a cliff, seppuku, or whatever
you're into (just do you, dude). It generally had the connotation of
martyrdom, and it is rooted in the Latin word “immolare”, which
means – astonishingly enough – “to sacrifice”.
Suicide in Hindu and Buddhist Doctrine:
The history of self-immolation is long
and rich, and seems heavily rooted in various Indian and Chinese
doctrines. Hinduism in general frowns upon suicide, and many consider
it a violation of the concept of ahimsa, or non-violence. Killing
oneself through violent means is considered as equally sinful as
violently killing another person. Some even believe that death by
suicide results in an individual becoming a sort of ghost-spirit,
wandering the earth until the time when one would have otherwise
died. Suicide is only accepted under the practice of prayopavesa, or
fasting until death, as this is non-violent and therefore does not
violate ahimsa. Even then, people prefer that prayopavesa be limited
to the elderly who no longer have any ambition or responsibilities.
Similar, dying in battle to save one's honor is also an acceptable
form of suicide.
The spooky ghost you become if you kill yourself. |
Buddhism's attitudes toward suicide are
more open-ended. Similar to Hinduism, Buddhism views suicide as a
form of violence, as destruction of life, something forbidden under
the Five Precepts of basic Buddhist ethics (i.e. do not kill, do not
steal, do not engage in sexual misconduct, do not lie, and do not
imbibe alcohol). However, Buddhism only condemns suicide done for
negative reasons, such as out of anger or depression, believing that
if you kill yourself at a point of such negative spiritual energy, you'll be reborn into a
very sad, very unpleasant realm that reflects your final, negative thoughts. But when suicide is an act of positivity, such as
self-sacrifice or as a means to otherwise achieve non-attachment to the
realm of physical things, then it can actually place one closer to
enlightenment. It can represent the rejection/acceptance of the temporal nature of the physical body.
Self-Immolation in India:
In fact, suicide by self-immolation
pops up periodically in Buddhist mythology (note: “mythology”
used here in the same sense as one would use Christian mythology or Islamic
mythology; just because it's a dharmic religion doesn't mean Buddhist
beliefs, stories, etc. should be regarded as somehow less valid or
believable, on the same level as Greek or Norse myths or whatever;
get dat orientalism outta here). In the Jatakas, a body of Buddhist
literature that concerns the past lives of the Buddha, there are several
tales of princes, kings, and what-have-you sacrificing themselves
(i.e. self-immolation) to save their loved ones or even a relatively
insignificant creature such as a dove, only to be rewarded for their
sacrifice with blessed reincarnation (or sometimes they just stayed
dead and it was whatever). Likewise, Bhaishajyaraja, the “Medicine
King” is described in the Lotus Sutra as drinking oils, wrapping
his body in oil-soaked cloth, and lighting himself on fire as an
offering to Buddha. He burned for 1,200 years, and was reincarnated
numerous times over the following centuries. By the end, his flesh miraculously healed,
representing the healing power of the Buddha and enlightenment.
Certain non-Buddhist cultural groups in
India also practiced self-immolation, most notably the Charan. The
Charan are a caste living in Rajasthan and Gujarat, who are often
considered divine by greater Indian society. The men are respected
for their warrior prowess, while the women are equally as respected
as mother goddesses or otherwise holy figures. While it has become
uncommon in modern times, the Charan used to be well known for
practicing a form of self-immolation called tragu. As far as I can
tell, tragu was pretty much the best way to win any argument. When
the Charan would get into conflicts they could not win, they would
burn themselves alive to humble their adversaries. The assailants, suitably humbled, would then leave the families, loved ones, villages, etc. of the
self-sacrificed Charan alone, apparently. However, it is kind of hard to find a
lot about Charan tragu, and I can't guarantee the complete accuracy
of what I just said. Sorry about that.
Painting of a sati ceremony. The practice was outlawed in British Raj in 1829, and was not officially outlawed by independent India until the Sati Prevention Act of 1987. |
Related to self-immolation is the less
religious, more cultural practice of sati. Here, a widowed woman is
expected to throw herself upon the burning funeral pyre of her
deceased husband. While most dharmic religions forbade suicide, sati
was viewed as a form of honorable self-sacrifice, and was therefore
acceptable. Of course, this was generally a pretty horseshit expectation. Women shouldn't be expected to throw themselves into burning flames because the men in their lives are so anazing. Really, no one should be expected to throw themselves into a fire. It's a pretty unreasonable thing to demand of someone. Hinduism, it seems, like most major religions, made exceptions to its
rules when the rules enforced institutionalized misogyny. Though more accurately, the
practice of sati is a nuanced topic in the history of India and
greater Asia. It seems to have come and gone, and taken many forms in
many places in many times. Likewise, given that Hinduism is hardly a
standardized belief system, and that Asia is home to dozens of
different religions, it seems quite misguided to make universal
claims about the continent's attitude toward women. Regardless, in her famous
essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?”, Gayatri Spivak discusses how
sati was one way Hindu law regulated women's role in society in pre-colonial India. I haven't read
nearly as much of her work as I would like, but everyone should check
out Spivak if they get the chance. Beautiful mind, beautiful woman.
Likewise, the Wikipedia page about sati seems to address the topic across a
variety of contexts, which is useful/interesting. There's also a loosely related practice among the Rajput clans called jauhar, in which royal women and queens would burn themselves alive after their city had fallen to invaders.
Self-Immolation in China and Beyond:
Self-immolation was prominent in
Chinese Buddhism, as well. The definition of self-immolation in China
is far more expansive than its Indian counterpart. The Chinese words
that relate to self-immolation actually conjure up some beautifully
poetic mental images: wangshen (“lose the body”), yishen (“forget
the body”), and sheshen (“give up the body”). These terms can
refer to a broad range of extreme acts of self-inflicted agony,
including feeding your body to insects, slicing off parts of your
flesh, burning your fingers or arms, burning incense on your skin,
starving yourself, drowning yourself, leaping to your death, feeding
your body to wild animals, self-mummification, and – of course –
lighting your entire body on fire. Most of these practices have no counterparts in
Indian Buddhism, and historians suggest that self-inflicted injury
was a feature of medieval Chinese culture as a whole, not just of
Buddhism. For example, Taoist officials had been known to burn their flesh
through prolonged exposure to the sun.
Luang Pho Daeng, a living Buddha of a Thai monk on display in southern Thailand. Possibly the most famous example of a living Buddha. He was so chill, that even in death he wears sunglasses. |
Nonetheless, a distinctly Chinese
flavor of Buddhist self-immolation did emerge. Monks would gradually
burn off each of their fingers while reciting incantations or textual
passages. They would recite incantations while their body burned,
resulting in an “unburned tongue”, in which the tongue remained
pink and moist while the body was black and charred. It is said that
some monks even managed to mummify themselves to death, slowly
starving themselves, drying out their flesh, and removing the air
from their bodies. While the science behind self-mummification
is questionable, mummification was not uncommon in Chinese Buddhism,
despite the contradictions that may have arose with Buddhist doctrine
vis-à-vis rejection of the physical/temporal realm. In many cases it
occurred naturally, by accident, long after the monk in question had passed away. Sadly, many of these so-called
Buddhist mummies (also known as living Buddhas) have been destroyed
or even stolen over time, which is a little bit weird, because who
would steal a shriveled up human carcass? What do you even gain from
that? Where would you put that shit? Maybe there is an underground
warehouse somewhere filled with centuries-old Buddhist mummies,
awaiting discovery by some gaggle of starry-eyed adventurers. We can
only hope.
Additionally, self-immolation sometimes
occurred elsewhere, usually in a Christian context and to a far
lesser extent than in India or China. When Jesuits revived
self-flagellation and mortification of the flesh in the 16th
and 17th centuries, self-immolation was not uncommon,
although death was not the goal. They often chose instead to burn
parts of their arms and hands to symbolize the stigmata of Christ.
Likewise, after the Raskol schism in the 17th century that
split the Russian Orthodox Church into the official church and “Old
Believers” who practiced the former doctrine, entire villages of
Old Believers burned themselves to death in an act known as “fire baptism”. Why, I'm entirely not sure, but I imagine it made sense to
them at the time. Fuck, even teenagers these days are into
self-immolation. The “fire challenge” is the latest incarnation
(and by latest I mean literally this year, 2k14, glorious year of our lord) of a
semi-classic high school party trick in which you spray Axe or some
other flammable liquid on your skin, light it on fire, and watch it
burn for a little bit. However, nowadays kids are putting it on
Youtube and Vine or whatever. And also a lot of them are dying or being sent to the
hospital. So that's not good.
1 2 3
No comments:
Post a Comment