Bell tolls for antiquated traditions

Should the temple’s early morning bell ringing stop, or should it go on? This is a topic that emerged on social media polls yesterday following a citizen’s request for a quiet night and, probably, a nice deep sleep.

The polls were held on Facebook pages following the revelation that an unnamed condominium resident, who had complained to City Hall about the noise of the bell ringing, had won the fight for a bit of peace and quiet.

The temple, Wat Sai in Bangkok’s Rama III area, has agreed to turn the volume of its century-old tradition down after receiving an official notice to do just that.

About 90% of the votes on the social media polls were in favour of keeping the bell ringing as it is — or rather, as it was.

So why the lack of sympathy? Probably because in Thailand, finding ways to accommodate established traditions is normal; challenging or questioning them is not.

In a city where almost everyone has to tolerate some form of noise pollution, from television screens on city trains to outdoor loudspeakers at ceremonial activities, it seems many people prefer to tolerate the din; so much so, in fact, that they wince at plaintive voices begging for the right to not have your eardrums hammered at unholy (or perhaps in the case of the temple, holy) hours.

“You should be aware of traditions or cultural practices that have been around for centuries,” one Facebook user posted in a condemnatory note to the beleaguered condo resident.

The temple has for years been ringing its bells from 3.30am to 4am to wake resident monks from their slumber so they can prepare for their morning alms walks and other routines. Put simply, it’s an age-old alarm clock, invented and practised for over a century.

Such a tradition was arguably more relevant in older times, when people were more closely attached to religious activities and their lives less hectic. It’s still relevant today, though, especially in rural settings.

Yet critics argue that this, along with a number of other traditional religious activities, have become less relevant to city slickers in places like Bangkok, where people relish a good sleep so they can battle through work the next day, deal with the city’s often-frustrating traffic conditions, and other concerns.

In this case, the abbot did not say how turning down the volume has affected the morning routine at the temple, but surely he would be able to find other, more modern ways of waking the monks.

In such a (highly likely) eventuality, why should we oppose the move to allow local residents to get a good night’s kip?

Moreover, this can be viewed as a progressive move: It implies that traditions, culture and religious activities can evolve, assimilate and absorb the ever-changing social context in which they operate, and still stay relevant.

Several other religious activities also involve the use of loudspeakers, which can be heard as far as 5 kilometres away.

One example would be when a novice is ordained. The activity usually starts at 5am with a battery of loud music. In the past, the noise was meant to wake up neighbours and let them know the activity was starting so they could come by and offer their help.

But as time passes, so the social context inevitably changes. People are less connected about temple affairs. Many would not even be invited to the ordination of a neighbour. Yet the decibel level maintains the same. I suspect many people are frustrated by the noise that accompanies this important rite, but rarely would someone dare to negotiate a compromise akin to what the condo resident attempted.

The same holds true for morning prayers at mosques in the city. They also use loudspeakers as a call to prayer. Many cities, including those in Muslimmajority countries, have either banned or restricted their use outside the mosque, however.

Also, lowering the volume of religious activities at temples and mosques makes them more peaceful, tranquil and conducive to introspection.

Thailand has regulations to curb noise levels and restrict such disturbances.

If the condo resident had complained about a karaoke bar on the street below their bedroom window, she would likely have gained more public support. But does this mean we should impose the law on certain establishments, while granting exceptions to religious venues?

If religious activities fail to change with society, conflict is likely. But religions and communities should support one another. After all, everyone is entitled to a good night’s sleep.