Two Sides of the Sangha

[News_Editor]

The now ubiquitous emblems of the radical anti-Muslim 969 campaign glare at you from Burma’s shop fronts and taxi windscreens. Bootleg DVD sellers hawk discs featuring the sermons of prominent 969 monks alongside the bestselling Korean soap operas. But despite the obvious prominence of the campaign, its radical teachings promoting segregation of Buddhists and Muslims are far from being embraced by everyone.

The Irrawaddy spoke to a 969 leader, MyananSayadaw U Thaddhamma, and an anti-969 monk, U Pantavunsa, to learn more about this controversial movement.

 

‘It’s naïve to say 969 is behind the unrest’

An Interview with MyananSayadaw U Thaddhamma

 

Myanan Sayadaw U Thaddhamma (Photo – JPaing / The Irrawaddy)

What is the 969 movement?

The central tenet of Buddhism is the Three Gems—Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. If they are not in the hearts of Buddhists, the faith will be gone. 969 represents all three. We’ve invented the numerical logo as an emblem of Buddhism, just as a reminder to all Buddhists to contemplate the attributes of the Three Gems, and to promote the religion among those who are not very interested in it.

How long have you been promoting the 989 movement?

I’ve been working on propagating Buddhism for a long time, but just six months on 969. It’s the brainchild of Buddhist scholars who have been studying and teaching the Buddha’s doctrine to hundreds of monks in Mawlamyine. After several meetings and thorough discussions, we launched our mission.

Your ‘mission’ is widely regarded as anti-Muslim. Do you have any comment to make about this?

It’s just speculation. We have nothing to do with saying “no†to other religions. We are just working for Buddhism. People may have different views on what we are doing. We are not trying to defeat other faiths, just strengthen our own.

During recent anti-Muslim riots, 969logos were sprayed on the walls ofdestroyed buildings. Was 969 behindthis?

You should keep in mind that it depends onhow people use our emblem. There mightbe some people who use it as a pretext topromote their cause. But our goal is not likethat. Let me remind you that 969 originatedin Mawlamyine. If we masterminded allthose conflicts, Mawlamyine would havebeen the flashpoint. No religious conflictshave been reported so far in southern Burma and the Irrawaddy delta, where we gave our talks about 969. Given all thesefacts, we are guessing that some peoplemisused our logo.

If people are misusing your logo, doyou have a message for them?

Three Gems is like water that can bringpeace of mind to people. We are likesomeone delivering that water. But if somepeople mix it with poison, it has nothing todo with us. I have to say they’ve misusedit. We have to blame their stupidity. It’sreligiously inaccurate to use our emblemimproperly. It’s also naïve to say that 969 isbehind the unrest. I want to warn them notto use religion as a pretext for their interests.They will only end up with bad results.

Have you ever thought that yourcampaign may spark religiousconflicts?

Honestly, no. It has never crossed our minds. As I’ve mentioned before, we are likewater deliverers. If you impose a ban on thedelivery due to its negative consequences, itshows how unwise you are. What happenedduring the unrest was something thatshouldn’t have happened.

During your 969 sermons, you urge Buddhists to shop only at Buddhist-ownedbusinesses. Don’t youthinkthat is an act of discrimination?

I’ve never urged my followers not to tradewith people of different religions. I onlyencourage Buddhists to help and take care ofeach other. Since members of other religionsoften only patronize their own businesses,why shouldn’t we support our Buddhist-ownedbusinesses? If they [Muslims] havethat kind of discipline, we should have ourown discipline for ever-lasting Buddhism.

Is Buddhism under threat?

Burma is the only country in the worldwhere Theravada Buddhism flourishesvery well. When our Buddhists are lessinterested in the faith, our religion will beunder threat. Apart from Buddhists, whoelse will take care of Buddhism? That’s whywe are working hard to make people moreinterested in the religion.

Do you have any response for thosewho say 969 is religiously narrow-minded?

They are just saying that without studyingour mission closely. Since the campaign isled by scholarly monks, you can take forgranted that our vision isn’t religiouslynarrow-minded. It’s not mastermindedsinglehandedly. What I want to tell the worldis that, like the example I gave, we are justdelivering water, the water of the ThreeGems.We havenothing to dowith saying‘no’ to otherreligions.We are forBuddhism.

‘Monks are being used’

An Interview with U Pantavunsa

 

U Pantavunsa, leader of the Saffron Monks Network, which works to prevent the spread of racial and religious conflicts. (Photo – JPaing / The Irrawaddy)

Do you believe in the 969 campaign?

I no longer believe in it. If the campaignis just for meditation or to propagate Buddhism, it’s OK. But what is happeningnow is some people staged religious attacksusing 969 as a pretext, and sparked racialand religious conflicts. This totally deviatesfrom its mission. We still have four majorreligions all over the world. It’s nonsensein this globalized world to encourage peopleto discriminate against one religion in favorof another. That idea also diverts from ourdemocratization process. It will prevent uscatching up with the rest of the world froma human rights point of view. According toTheravada principles, we just have to followwhat the Buddha taught. He never taughtanything like what the 969 campaignersare saying now.

Did the Buddha instruct his followersto support Buddhism?

Never. He had some rivals with verydifferent convictions, but he never spokeagainst them. There is a well-known storyof a rich man who previously supported oneof the Buddha’s rivals, but who later becamea lifelong disciple of the Exalted One afterhearing his teachings. But even then, theBuddha told his new follower to continuesupporting his old mentors. It shows thathe never lectured his disciples to be againstothers who have different beliefs.

Although the 969 campaign is spearheadedby monks, I’m sure they have no intentionto see destructive consequences sparkedby their sermons. They are just scapegoatsused by some people who want to destabilizethe country.

If they are being used, who is usingthem?

It’s beyond my knowledge, but if you studythe patterns of recent riots, you can’t deny the fact that they were well organized andthere must have been someone behind them.Thirty-thousand copies of a DVD with 969talks in Mon State have been distributedin Rangoon. So, it’s very evident that theyhave a sponsor to distribute them on a largescale. There are several possibilities: cronieswho would be comfortable doing businesswith the former military regime or somehardliners reluctant to undergo reform whomight secretly finance them. Who knows?

But don’t you think that what themonks are preaching is fueling anti-Muslim sentiment?

Of course, I do. Their actions are againstthe instructions issued by the SanghaMahaNayaka, the state-controlled monasticcouncil. What we are not pleased with isthat the government used excessive forceto crack down on protesters, includingmonks, of the Chinese-backed Letpadaungcopper mine, while they are not botheringto open fire on rioters who were looting,torching and beating Muslims right beforetheir eyes. That makes me feel very uneasy.On the other hand, what those 969 monkspreach makes it more difficult for peacefulco-existence between the two communities.In the past, they banned some monks whospoke out about democracy and AungSan SuuKyi from speaking in public. Whydon’t they take action this time, too?

Why has the 969 campaign becomeso popular?

Because the authorities concerned haven’ttaken the necessary action. Plus, eventhough most of the  Burmese are tolerant,there is underlying anti-Muslim sentiment.It’s quite similar to what happened in thepast when we heartily supported anyonewho said anything bad about the military.

Why has the government failed to stopthe spread of the violence?

They might have thought the violencewould not have spread that much. Maybethey didn’t take 969 seriously. In spite ofthe president’s request for all-inclusiveapproaches to prevent unrest, we havefound that, to our dismay, some officialsworking on the ground are still reluctant toimplement them. They keep complainingthat they are just waiting for orders. Inshort, I blame the mismanagement of thegovernment.

This story appeared in the June 2013 print issue of the Irrawaddy magazine.

Source: Irrawaddy.org