(Poster for 969 movement in Burma)
A recent Time magazine article reported on the radical, anti-Muslim views being preached by the Burmese monk, U Wirathu. A vocal minority, however, still supports this man masquerading as a peaceful, Buddhist monk. There are those who say that U Wirathu isn't personally involved in any violence but he certainly is stoking hatred among some in the 969 movement with his speeches and sermons.
The 969 movement is a Buddhist-nationalist movement that promotes sectarianism by encouraging Buddhists to avoid Muslim-owned shops. This extremist group is being blamed for burning Muslims businesses and even mosques leaving their "969" symbol painted on the burned-out buildings. To be sure, not all Buddhists, nor members of the 969 movement are engaging in violence, but to think Wirathu's Muslim hate-speech has no influence on fueling hateful violence against Islamic communities is to live in denial. So, what do I mean by "hate-speech?" Read further.
I watched a video of a sermon by Wirathu and several times he referred to Muslims using the racial slur, "Kalar." I addition, he referred to Buddhists in Burma as "Burmese" while calling Burmese Muslims, "Muslims" or "Kalars." The conclusion being that Wirathu doesn't see Burmese Muslims as worthy of being Burmese. Enlightened monks do not use racial slurs. Compassionate monks do not use racial slurs. Listen to his own words:
Wirathu claims that spending money at Muslim shops will eventually lead to the destruction of Burma's Buddhist population. As quoted from Global Post, "We Buddhists allow them to freely practice their faith," Wirathu said in the same February speech. "But once these evil Muslims have control, they will not let us practice our religion."
How is calling Muslims "evil" not hate speech? Wirathu then says that Buddhists shouldn't allow Muslims to practice their religion freely, or else Islamic Burmese will essentially destroy Buddhist. Well, it's not difficult to understand then how such bigoted words would incite hatred and violence by some radical, Buddhists when a, "respected" Buddhist monk says that Buddhist will be destroyed by Muslims if Burmese Buddhists allow them to practice their religion.
This isn't anything new for Wirathu. In 2003, he was arrested for spreading anti-Muslim leaflets. Including calls to expel all Muslims from Burma. This according to the International Business Times (link). In the Myanmar Times, Wirathu claims he's only doing what President Obama has done fighting Islamic extremists, except Obama doesn't refer to Muslims using racial slurs, nor target average, Muslim businesses simply for being Muslim. Additionally, President Obama isn't a Buddhist monk. I don't believe Obama is behaving in the same way as Wirathu, but even if I did, monks should be held to higher standards than politicians. Otherwise, what's the point of taking vows as a Buddhist monk to live like Buddha in a peaceful, tolerant and kind way? I'm not saying that monks shouldn't have political views, but they certainly shouldn't be inciting hatred or intolerance of non-Buddhists.
It should be troubling, as well, that now the Burmese dictator, Thein Sein has defended Wirathu. That according to the Democratic Voice of Burma. This is a calculating move by the government to exploit Buddhist suspicions of Muslims in Burma to stoke the government's on-going campaign against minority populations in the Asian country. Whipping-up anti-Muslim sentiments within the Buddhist community in Burma fits the government's agenda. If you can exploit divisions within a country, it makes it easier for a despotic regime to maintain its grip on power because the people are busy fighting among themselves.
Some defenders of Wirathu claim that criticism of extremist Buddhists such as Wirathu equates to attacking Buddhist itself. I beg to differ. The condemnations haven't been aimed at Buddhist itself, but rather one monk, and some of his supporters. He is only using Buddhist as a cover to incite hatred and violence. He might be a decent monk when talking about other issues, but in my opinion, he loses all credibility as a monk when he begins using racial slurs and hate-filled words directed at a small group of Muslims--a minority group in Burma.
One of the more troubling aspects to Wirathu's words is that they are poisoning the minds of younger monks studying at his monastery. On the Global Post news site we hear from one of those monks, a 27 year-old. "They're brutal. They rape girls. They're kalar." (The word "kalar" is a highly insulting Burmese term often applied to Muslims, particularly those with dark South Asian complexions.)" Their may be a few Muslims who are rapists, but the same could be said of Buddhists. Rape isn't a crime associated with one religion, race or people but is rather a crime that is a scourge within all communities worldwide, whether in the religious or secular communities. Luckily, however, there are those in the Buddhist community in Burma who are trying to oppose Wirathu's sectarianism.
According to the independent Burmese media group, "Democratic Voice of Burma" the beloved and well-respected democracy icon, Aung San Suu Kyi has spoken-out against violence against Muslims in Burma, "Democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi today finally threw her voice into the debate, calling for the perpetrators [who commit violence against Muslims] to be held to account in accordance with the rule of law. She added that "the majority of the people in a society should have sympathy for the minority."
I realize that not all Muslims are peaceful and accepting of other faiths, and I acknowledge that some Muslims in Burma might be behaving in criminal ways. However, just as it would be wrong to attack all Buddhists for what Wirathu is saying, it is wrong to attack all Muslims for the actions of a few extremists. I know that the vast majority of Buddhists in Burma are peaceful, accepting people and that's why I speak out against Wirathu, and some in the 969 movement. I do so to expose a vocal minority in the Burmese sangha who are intolerant and straying dangerously far away from Buddha's message of compassion and loving-kindness. Let me be clear, I am not against the Burmese people, nor Burma. I do not dislike Burma. In fact, I hope to one-day visit. I am merely speaking-out against a small minority of Buddhists in Burma. The vast majority in Burma are good people. Burma is a great country. A country that is better than religious sectarianism.
I am a fellow Buddhist--not some outsider looking to sully the image of such a noble religion. It is because Buddhist is so noble that we should speak-out against anyone who uses the title of "monk" to spread anything other than the Dharma. It's hard for me to imagine that Buddha would support such sectarianism. I can't imagine him using racial slurs or spreading hateful messages about another religion. I suggest we all look to the non-sectarian example of King Ashoka. It is my hope that Buddhists and Muslims can live peacefully together in Burma. I personally believe that Buddha would support such tolerance of diversity. ~i bow to the buddha within all beings~ Read More @ Source
Comments
Post a Comment