|
By V. Arakan
In the beginning of twentieth century,
nationalism swept across Asian countries to free colonized
countries from the oppressive colonial nations. Colonialism
produced nationalists such as Mahatma Gandhi in India, San
Yet San in China, and U Ottama in Burma. In India, Mahatma
Gandhi, a moderate nationalist, led the Indian National
Congress to free India. In Burma, U Ottama introduced
radical nationalism that provoked the passive Burmese to
fight for their freedom. Maung (1980), a Burmese diplomat,
characterized U Ottama as “Mahatma of Burma” who flamed
nationalism in every town and village.
In the early twentieth century, nationalism in
Burma was planted by young educated Burmese laymen and
monks. Many scholars such as Mendelson (1975), Maung (1980)
argued that Young Men''s Buddhist Association (YMBA) was the
first organization that initiated political movement in
Burma. However, it does not mean that there were no freedom
movements in Burma. Prior to the formation of YMBA and
political awakening led by educated young monks and laymen,
there were pongyis and other lay people who fought against
the British colonial government. In 1930s, there were
outbreak against the British colonial power in Arakan and
Tenasserim (Mendelson, 1975). then, in 1886, U Ottama (Not
to be confused with U Ottama, twentieth century
nationalist), a pongyi, attacked British government with
three thousand men in Minbu district. He was hanged by the
British government in 1889 (Mendelson, 1975), which could be
counted as an ongoing armed resistance against the British.
The systematic political awakening occurred in Burma after
educated monks started attacking the British government from
constitutional framework.
U Ottama started his political-nationalism movement by
writing for the Thuriya (the Sun), which was one of the only
few pro-nationalist papers. According to Maung (1980), U
Ottama was not admitted to monastery because of his
involvement in politics and not observing vinayas, but the
Sun installed him and supported his nationalistic views. As
he had political experiences by associating with Indian
National Congress, Japanese and traveling extensively, he
turned political problems into religious problems. Meldelson
(1975) quoted Cady, "U Ottama did for nationalism in Burma
part of what Ghandhi did for it in India by transforming an
essentially political problem into religious one...turned
the hatred of the people against the foreign government, the
police and courts, tax collector and even the village
headman. The weapon of boycott was widely advocated." Since
Burma has been literally Buddhist country, it was easy to
instill nationalism in people mind by turning political
problem into religious problem. After First World War, urban
population was more pro-democracy and independence and the
rural population valued the pre-colonial institution and
practices (Silverstein, 1996). The urban educated young
people were more supportive to the British. As a result,
instilling nationalism in rural population and conservative
Burmese was the best tool for U Ottama and many other
pongyis.
U Ottama was born in 1897 in Rupa village in Arakan State in
western Burma. His childhood name was Paw Htun Aung, and he
had one brother and one sister. He studied at Anglo-Burmese
primary school at Sittwe. He was brilliant and extraordinary
student. According to Mendelson (1975), he passed fifth
standard within two years. Mendelson further stated that U
Ottama torned up his second prize for not getting the first
prize. The school official gave him second prize because he
visited to restroom during the examination (1975). He was
selected to be educated in England. The English clergyman
wanted to adopt U Ottama and educated him in Calcutta and
England. However, His parents pulled him and his brother out
of school because his parents regarded western education as
the skill to serve the government. According to Mendelson
(1975), his mother had a dream in which U Ottama would
become monk.
At the age of 15, U Ottama became a novice. He studied in
different places in Burma, and then he went to Calcutta with
the help of a wealthy Shan Woman. He studied three years in
Calcutta until he passed tenth-standard examination (Mendelson,
1975). After studying at Calcutta, he returned to Burma.
However, he went back to Calcutta, and he later became
lecturer of Pali at the Bengal National College in Calcutta
(Mendelson, 1975). At that time, Calcutta was the
destination for education, and administrative capital of
British. Moreover, it was also the epicenter of national
movement because many nationalist Bengalis were based in
Calcutta. Moreover, the anti-British agitation was going on
in West Bengal that made the best place to horn his
political skills. It was through U Ottama that Bengali
nationalists and Burmese nationalists kept close contact
(Bhattacharya, 2004).
He planned to go to Tibet after he heard of rahant yet he
could not get contact with any of them. Then, he toured
India, Egypt, France and other European countries (Mendelson,
1975). Mendelson further stated that U Ottama returned to
Burma for short stay in 1907 and went to Japan via Singapore
after hearing Japan victory over Russia at the Russo-Japan
War. Mendelson (1975) also quoted one of U Ottama biography
as stating, “The Japanese were smaller in stature than the
Russians, they ate rice instead of wheat, and they were
Buddhists, a religion, according to Europeans, of the lower
rung of humanity.” In Japan, he faced hardship in getting
alms food. Thus, he wrote to chaplain of Buddhist College in
Tokyo, who told him to learn Japanese (Mendelson, 1975). In
the same year, he taught Pali and Sanskrit at the Academy of
Buddhist Science in Tokyo without any pay (Mehden, 1968).
According to mehden, he was impressed by the unity of Japan,
and the role the emperor played. He became respected leader
of Indian community in Japan (1975). While he was in Japan,
he made arrangement for the Maharajah of Baroda of India to
meet with the Japanese government. According to Mendelson
(1975), U Ottama persuaded the Ministry of Industry to hold
royal party for the maharajah of Baroda.
After living in Japan for three years, he toured Korea,
Manchuria, Port Arthur, China, Annam, combodia, Siam
(Thailand), Ceylon and India (Mendelson, 1975). While in
India, he alluded polices who were looking for him. When he
reached Burma, no monastery would not admitted him or
welcome him. He was rejected by monks. But, U Ba Pe, a
nationalist, let U Ottama stayed at the Sun newspaper office
(Mehden, 1968), and made him wrote views on patriotism at
his newspaper. At the same time, U Kyaw Yan from Mandalay
also supported U Ottama and let him spread nationalism
through his newspaper called the Burma Star (Mendelson,
1975). He wrote patriotism and nationalism at various papers
such as Thuriya, Myanma Alin, and Pyinna Alin. According to
Mendelson, “he wrote and spoke about the wanthanu rekhita
taya-the points of law to be observed by
nationalists-including the wearing of homemade cloth and
boycott the tinned and other foreign foods” (Mendelson,
1975). Then, he fired the British government with his open
letter to the governor. “Graddock Go Home” was published by
the Sun. Maung (1980) stated, “From the day he became a
national hero, he was invited out to various towns and even
villages, to address gatherings organized by the YMBA to
inspire the people to protest against the Craddock scheme
and demand more extensive reforms.” YMBA was founded by
Rangoon College students such as Maung Ba Pe, Maung Maung
Gyi in 1906 (Maung, 1980) that became platform for U Ottama
to lunch his political career. Moreover, the Thuriya was
founded by Maung Ba pe, owning to no nationalist newspaper
that could publish people agitation against the British
colonial power. In 1921, he was arrested for one of his many
speeches, and he was sentenced for 18 months in prison.
Moreover, he was the first one in British Burma to get
imprisonment by making political speech. According to Maung
(1980), between 1921 and 1927, U Ottama spent more time in
prison than outside.
Many pongyis gradually took up nationalism. U Ottama pleaded
the sangha not to keep aside the problems faced by people.
As Buddhism was not recognized by the British, it became the
tool to inspire pongyis and many others. According to
Mendelson (1975), Sir Edward Sladen, a resident of Mandalay,
proposed to the then Chief Commissioner not to interfere
with religion in Burma. Mendelson (1975) further quoted
Sladen as saying that Burmese would welcome British “if only
we did not interfere with religion so seriously as we have
done since we took possession of [Lower] Burma. We have
studiously refused to recognize the Buddhist ecclesiastical
code…The result…is that the power of the priesthood to
regulate church affairs is almost nil, their influence for
good has vastly deteriorated.” It was necessary to unite and
involve pongyis in politics to awaken nationalism. U Ottama
advised Sangha:
Sanghas in Burma as members or as non-members of sanghas
Samaggi (Sangha Associations) are found trying their outmost
to become renowned preachers or to specialize on the three
Pitakas, namely, suttanta (Discourses of the Buddha), Vinaya
(Code of monastic regulations) and Abhidhamma
(Psycho-ethical-philosophy). Some sanghas with the ulterior
motive of receiving offerings of Kyaungs, Zayuts (preaching
halls) and other properties of value, polish their skill as
vocalists or singers. To rival these artists they (sanghas)
with great enthusiasm get their sermons rhymed into
melodious tune. Likewise and no less determination, sanghas
should study the histories of Konbaung, Talaing and
Arakanese dynasties. Attemps should be made to become
conversant with the Indian Penal Code and British
Administration so that the (sagha) may teach these to
laymen….Rural administration Acts and the like should be
thoroughly mastered and such knowledge should be
communicated to the peasants so that they may be enlightened
upon the fact that their labors are lsot and abused by
irresponsible government officials. Sanghas should do
research in comparative studyof government, such as the
extent and amount collected on land tax, poll tax, municipal
tax and other taxes. They should record how much government
enjoys from the Excise Department yearly (on controlled
drugs) as against the increase of opium and alcoholic
addicts each year and what amount the government collects in
taxes on fisheries and meat vendors every years, on the tons
of rice and timber, liters of crude oil, kerosene, and
petroleum and loads of ores like silver and other precious
stones that are exported;…etc” (Mehden, 1968).
He was a good orator.. Maung (1980) says, “ U Ottama had in
his public speaking a very direct, forthright, and powerful
style. He could make difficult ideas easy for simple country
folk to grasp.”
U Ottama was the leader behind the curtain in formation of
the General Council of theSangha Samettgyi (GCSS). There was
Young Men’s Buddhists Association in which majority of its
members was laymen. Thus, the GCSS was the parallel
association for the monks. In 1920s, the members were
estimated to be 60,000 (Houtart, 1976). It would not be
wrong to say that the GCSS brought unity among pongyis.
Mendelson (1975) quoted Sladen as saying, “Buddhism…is
broken up into numerous sects and schisms, without and
beyond all ecclesiastical control. The worst of it is, that
the members of all these sects divided themselves socially
as well as religiously, and the domestic relations of life
have in many cases been materially disconcerted.” Under the
guidance of U Ottama, pongyis got influences over Burmese.
People looked up at pongyis for guidance. He also founded
Wunthanu Athins at every place he visited (Maung, 1980).
Wunthanu means protector of national interest or family,
race and lineage. The Wunthanu Athins were led by pongyis.
Unfortunately, Wunthanu Athins were the target of government
because it instilled nationalism in people mind. Maung
further stated that police officers would lecture villagers
in order to dissuade them from participation in Wunthanu
Athins. In addition to ordinary people, pongyis were
influential in political arena. Politicians needed pongyis
for elections. Pongyis were used as propagandists. Without
any support from pongyis, no candidate would win an
election. Mehden (1963) says, “The pongyis operated on both
the local and national level. In the villages, where their
influence was strongest, they often endorsed nominees,
supported favored politicians, attended and spoke at
political rallies, published propaganda, directed
agitation…” During colonial era, all of the three prime
ministers had to have supports from pongyis. Hobbs (1947)
quoted Dr. Ba Maw, the prime minister of British Burma:
“Sanghas can best serve the State in the field of
propaganda. Sanghas make very good propagandists as all of
us know.”
During the British colonial era, laws and orders were
maintained by suppressing outspoken nationalists or
politicians. Radical nationalists were more likely to keep
in prisons or hang until death. For instance, Saya San, a
radical ex-pongyi, who led the 1930 rebellion were captured
and hanged (Solomon, 1969). Saya San was influenced by U
Ottama. U Ottama, though he was not hanged for any of his
political speeches, he was kept in prisons for many of his
times. The imprisonment of U Ottama caused the involvement
of pongyis in politics less influential until his release
from prison in 1929 ( Mendelson, 1975).
U Ottama was not only inspirer and torch bearer of
nationalism for pongyis and ordinary citizens, but he was
also the inspirer for students’ community. In 1920, the
British Burma government planned to establish a university
of elite type that could be used as recruitment center for
civil services (Silverstein & Wohl, 1964). As a result, many
students were displeased with the government, and they were
on the strike. As soon as he heard of the strike, U Ottama
sent telegram, which was suppressed. The strikes of students
in Rangoon were published in newspapers and Calcutta, and U
Ottama rushed to Rangoon to inspire students (Mendelson,
1975).
Although he was the breeder of nationalism in Burma, there
was less evidence to show him of holding any top post in any
organization. Following the foot step of Mahatma Gandhi, U
Ottama did not hold any post in any organization. However,
he would lead any agitation, strike or rebellion to awaken
nationalism in Burma. He represented India National Congress
at the funeral of Dr. San Yet Sun. The only time he held the
post was leading the All India Hindu Mahasabhas as president
in 1935 (Maung, 1980).
He started his life with full of light- from brilliant
student to national leader of Burma. He got respect from
every walk of life- from ordinary and elite citizens of
Burma to the Maharaja of Baroda, politicians and leaders
from across Asia. However, he died as a poor man who had no
family and no well-wishers. Maung, former Burmese diplomat
and politician, concluded the semi-biography of U Ottama in
his book:
“He lived in great penury, begging for food…rejected by his
old colleagues in politics, who had brought him back from
Calcutta to garner votes for them in the 1936 elections… it
can truly be said that Burmese politics was fathered by U Ba
Pe, but then inspired and led by Sayadaw U Ottama… His
personal example alone was enough to inspire the people, no
matter whom they were, peasant, intellectual, student or
sangha, into great sacrifices” (Maung, 1980).
The great hero who sacrificed his life to Burma died in
1939. Although many scholars characterized him as the “the
first martyr of Burmese nationalism” (Solomon, 1969) and
“Mahatma of Burma” (Maung, 1980), U Ottama had not got his
due recognition. U Ottama surely deserves recognition from
the government of Burma and its people for his great
contribution to Burma.
References
Bhattacharya, S. (1994, July). A close view of encounter
between British Burma and British Bengal. Paper
presented at the 18th European Conference on Modern South
Asian Studies, Lund, Sweden.
Hobbs, C. (1947). Nationalism in British colonial Burma. The
Far Eastern Quarterly,6(2), 112-121.
Houtart, F. (1976). Buddhism and politics in South-East
Asia: Part One. Social Scientist,5(3), 3-23.
Maung, M. (1980). From sangha to laity. Columbia, MO: South
Asia Books.
Mehden, F.R. (1963). Religion and Nationalism in Southeast
Asia. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Mendelson, E.M. (1975). Sangha and state in Burma: A study f
monastic sectarianism and leadership. London: Cornell
University Press Ltd.
Silverstein, J. (1996). The idea of freedom in Burma and the
political thought of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Pacific Affairs,
69(2), 211-228.
Silverstein, J., & Wohl, J. (1964). University students and
politics in Burma. Pacific Affairs, 37(1), 50-65.
Solomon, R.L. (1969). Saya San and the Burmese rebellion.
Modern Asian Studies, 3(3), 209-223.
|
