No comments here?
Is it because PMSamak is already bound for merely a footnote in Thailand’s political and democratic history? An irrelevant, irritating fly that can be easily squashed against the dark wall of Thai democracy? At the end of day, he can never be his own man as he commands no respect and no one listens to him in the PPP government? PMThaksin runs the show here and poor PMSamak can only vent his frustrations at the media and through his cooking show (which is now also canceled)…
PMThaksin, impatient as usual, is now speeding the end game – as his MPs have now tabled the new draft constitution, which will white-wash him of all allegations and wrongdoings, to parliament (this may not be related, but I heard rumours that a soothsayer said it’s the opportune time for PMThaksin).
Even if the cases go to courts, the long arm of PMThaksin’s money can arrange an ending favorable to him (easily I say, we are already seeing developments in the cases that suggest that). But this is both time consuming (many years) not to mention the ruin his (and his family’s) reputation as evidences (incriminating enough for the public, but not judges in PMThaksin’s pockets) will see the light of day. He predictably chose to play a high-rolling game taking big risks to preserve his interests.
Many in NM who harboured hope for PMThaksin to spearhead a republican movement will now feel betrayed like fans of ManCity. PMThaksin is consciously putting distance between himself and any elements within his supporters dabbling with the idea. Jakrapob Penkair looks to be on his way out, as PMThaksin wants to minimize any justification for another military coup (the only threat remaining to his power – anti-Thaksinites will experience his wrath in time).
For anyone seeing PMThaksin as a ‘saviour’ of Thai democracy against an oppressive network monarchy (a figment of many in NM’s imagination I say), be careful what you hope for…
Even master opportunists like PMSamak and PMBanharn are left scratching their heads… (PMChavalit is about to be fooled again it seems)
As an aside – none of the people highlighted in that SMH article were, as far as I have seen, the offspring of top leaders. This is not to say they aren’t important – it is just that they (probably) fill some of the lower rungs in the system…
As I understand it, SPDC offspring have tended to study in Singapore. And so do the children of other really substantial regime-associated figures.
As an example, after last year’s uprising in Burma (and the new round of sanctions against individuals), Htet Tay Za, son of Tay Za (of Htoo Trading, Air Bagan, etc, fame) had pictures of himself at his elite Singapore boarding school splashed all over the world. And there have always been rumours about the offspring of very high-ranking military figures flying their grandchildren to the most expensive Singaporean schools. It does seem that it is in Singapore (and in Thailand?) that there is a real story about education and the Myanmar regime.
Schools and Universities inside the country are in such a dire condition that those who can afford it (and not every “regime figure” can) hope to send their children abroad. Singapore is an easy option, of course. And with so much Burma business going through the city-state it makes sense (if other members of a family need to commute for business, medical treatment, etc) that they will use Singapore as an international base. Education is just one part of the package that is available to those with $100,000s to spend avoiding the grim Burmese system.
So perhaps the better questions here focus on Singapore. Family members from the top rungs surely end up at flagship institutions. Places like NUS?
It would be great to hear from New Mandala readers who know more.
Most Thais are neither Buddhist in spirit nor democratic. They are dictatorial and narrow-minded in their outlook, still suffering from something like the stench of the dark ages. So there is no sense at all in the wishful thinking about democracy for Thailand. Be realistic! Just look at how the different power groups in Thailand go on quarreling over trivia.
Stephen: “Despite the diversity, as far as I understand it, Buddhism has a clear internal measure of legitimate practice; and this measure is whether an action is “wholesome” and leads to a “cessation” of attachment to the self and the related suffering which such attachment entails.”
I find it difficult to see how grand statements like “Buddhism has X” or “Buddhism believes X” are even possible. All that I’ve ever seen is plural hybrid Buddhism*s*, Buddhism mixed with something else, a local culture. Based on discussions, many westerners seem to believe that they practice a universal culturally sanitized version.
Perhaps the influence and example set by monks for lay people is important for “wholesomeness” and “cessation of attachment to the self” among lay people. The book by Kamala Tiyavanich above describes monks mixing a with lay people before rigid standards were imposed by the “reformed” urban center (which also enforced exclusion of women from the Sangha). This mixing with lay people is certainly something completely missing from modern urban Bangkok, where after work all one finds are a completely unwholesome mixture of massage parlours, luxury department stores, and bars. I find it hard to see how a highly cloistered Sangha that does not actively mix with lay people is conducive to mindfulness among lay people. They leave a large gap for Christian missionaries.
Peter Skilling despite being such a mild-mannered guy, presents some rather radical theses (albeit discretely and politely) about localised but connected intellectual lineages in Buddhism:
Peter Skilling, “Geographies of Intertextuality: Buddhist Literature in Pre-modern Siam ” Aseanie 19 (2007).
Peter Skilling, King, Sangha, and Brahmans: Ideology, Ritual, and Power in Pre-modern Siam, In Buddhism, Power and Political Order / ed. by Ian Harris. – London: Routledge, 2007 – (Routledge Critical Studies in Buddhism)
Things I’ve learned from Skilling’s papers and talks he gave at the Siam Society: Many of the murals in temples at Pagan, Burma were influenced by strains of thought from Nalanda University and the Pala dynasty as was Tibetan Buddhism. In fact, the oldest Thai commentary was originally written in Sanskrit but now only exists in the Tibetan language. Local lineages were certainly connected and communicating, enforcing some universal Budddhist standards.
Bernard-Henri Levy: …The generals hate their own people…The generals are crazy…The generals are monomaniacal….The regime is autistic….The generals stay focused, too….The generals are mafialike….The regime is stingy…..Finally, the regime is grotesque…It is rare to see a dictatorship functioning in such a chemically pure manner…
How about adding: over the last 20 years the Burmese generals have won **because** all that people like Bernard-Henri Levy can do **is talk**
Lanna Proverb: Kam Kii, dii kwa Kham Tot
Solid cr*p in the hand, is better than farting words…
Education is a ‘noble’ investment so it is already relevant even when only one or two come to know what one might come to know…. I would teach all kids who have made it to my class too. All international students have to meet the admission requirements. They also have to perform up to a standard to earn their degree. You might hate it if they are children or relatives of those criminals. You have to work on that. At the end of the day, if we don’t believe in education what is there to hope for… rather idealistic, I know! I can only speak from experience. Queensland saved me! I probably would have been more liberal, had I gone to ANU 🙂
AusAID used to have a merit scholarship program that students applied and processed with the embassy directly. Many students from rural Thailand went through this excellent program during the 90s. Some of them do have what it takes. I’d like to see more direct support for grass root level. Rather than scrap the whole thing because of their government.
Liberal education saves lives! Look at all the people with BA’s not fighting wars. They say no to war and listen to the pixies and get haircuts that are metaphors for … well I dont know, but Im sure those haircuts are metaphors.
Maybe the biggest problem with foreign undergraduates studying in Australia is that there is little inter-cultural mixing for that irreverence to be properly soaked up. I can tell you it’s fairly irreverent when you do place yourself in the blender. On a scale of irreverence where 0% is Palestine and Israel and 100% is the Korean DMZ, I’d say Australian undergraduates are at least 50% irreverent.
Maybe it’s this irreverence that allows for some Australian academics to be unflinching when it comes providing an educational option for whomever finds their way to whatever institution. If Hitler obtained a BA instead of dropping out to dwell on the psychology of his grandmothers irreverence, then dare I say speculatively, only one million lives would have been lost during World War 2. On the other hand, imagine where the USA would be today if Bill O’Reilly hadnt obtained an MA? That’s right, they wouldnt be at all because Bill would have killed it. The MA has restrained him.
If Pauline Hanson obtained a BA, she was from the fish and chip shop culture by the way.. maybe we wouldnt have gone through that terrible episode of Australia possibly being dominated by a stagnating culture of protestant yocalism.. Pauline Hanson did have the option of obtaining a BA — so if your going to be admitting people from that sort of background, the department for education cant be denying people from a military junta. It would be hypocritical.
The status quo will continue and you dear Bob, or should I say Luke Skywalker, are only one man elaborating on your elitist anti elite position. If you were in power, you’d be elite. It is the nature of power. The mistake people not in power make is believing that power is the be all and end all…
It is hypocritical to ask for those potentially benevolent, altruistic offspring of corrupted parents to be known, as though you are assuming that they are driving around in Mercedes and living lives of luxury. You have no faith in the potential of being good spirited, but you have faith in breaking the status quo? Wouldnt a way to break the status quo for these offspring be by having the same mentality as you? You say that they shouldnt have a liberal education, but you use liberal concepts to determine that they arent liberal and say you would deny rights, which are liberal concepts, to those who arent liberal? Do you see that this is not logical? You make many assumptions — again, that’s not so liberal either. Same as the Junta really!
And unearned privilege breeds unearned privilege, malevolently wielded in this case.
There’s plenty of other tyrants whose offspring I wouldn’t teach either. The long bow that I just might do them some good is just too much of a stretch. But I can possibly deny them one of the many “rights” their parents deny their countrymen and women. That might give them pause to ponder. Or not. At least I won’t be left wondering that I’ve contributed to their countryfolk’s future misery.
Are you not prepared to draw a line ? Is there no one you wouldn’t teach ?
Of course I’d be happy to hear of all the examples of privileged offspring of malevolent dictators rendered benevolent by a liberal western education, to the betterment of their less privileged countryfolk.
Finally … “openness, irreverence and democratic sentiments of the
Australian academic scene” ?? … for any foreign undergraduate studying in Australia today, I think that’s an overly rosy view of what they absorb during their time here.
For the kids of tyrants whose privileged position depends on the maintenance of the status quo back home, their time here is most likely directed towards gaining skills for that very aim.
Always the best stories are born out of terrible tragedies. So thankyou, this post is great, but I dont want to say anymore than that because of the situation.
“But is this such a bad thing? …exposing members of Burma’s junta-youth to the openness, irreverence and democratic sentiments of the Australian academic scene may lead to some broadening of political and social viewpoints.”
I agree. I know Burmese exchange students who have a rather jaded opinion of **both** the regime and the long-term failure of the opposition to affect any change at all in their country. Their original unthinking patriotism, which is pretty normal in Burma as it is in every other country, probably changed from witnessing opinions outside their country.
“If there is a scandal here it is that many more Burmese are not studying in Australia.”
Yes, yes, yes. The real scandal is that educational bureaucrats can’t find someway to shortcut **poor Burmese** getting a foreign education!
It would be virtually impossible for a son or daughter of a **poor Burmese farmer** to jump through all the bureaucratic hoops, visas, expensive entrance exams, application fees, letters of recommendations, scholarship applications, etc, etc…that are required to get admission into western universities. (I even find this impossible and I’m working in Bangkok on a middle class Thai salary)
Years ago, I employed a bright young research assistant from Yangon University (waiting for the university to reopen after one of its numerous closures) for 1.5 years whose father was a farmer near Mon Ywa. Later on he got work in a UN library.
***Why can’t big rich powerful western educational institutions do this sort of thing? What is it that makes them so clumsy and incompetent?***
Well Gordi, PhD, I just checked and it seems Burma/Myanmar is still fairly reculsive. Is his thinking that because the internet is such a huge media, foreign policy is more easily determined by the masses?
Maybe Gordi, PhD has learnt a lesson himself about internet shame? The 10p tax rate cuts u-turn? Classic case of projection.
This is as void as his comments about Lebanon, Syria and Zimbabwe. It’s a pity the altogether more alive David Milliband has to stick up for this incompetent, manipulative buffoon.
Jon, thanks for the book recommendation. I see what you say about the overt reference to nibbana being infrequent in cases, especially in the Thai forest tradition which you mention. Perhaps one of the reasons why Ajahn Chah’s teachings are so popular are their everyday focus on mindfulness, rather than the seemingly distant goal of nibbana. However, Ajahn Mun, one of the grand daddies of the Thai forest tradition, did make an explicit vow “not to be reborn again.” While the many “local variants or lineages” are plentiful, it still seems as though there are limits to a cultural relativist approach to Buddhism. Despite the diversity, as far as I understand it, Buddhism has a clear internal measure of legitimate practice; and this measure is whether an action is “wholesome” and leads to a “cessation” of attachment to the self and the related suffering which such attachment entails. Within these limits, however, there is plenty of room for diversity and debate. But to suggest that any practice that would call itself “Buddhist” is a legitimately Buddhist “local variant or lineage”, seems to go a bit too far.
Thank you, Lleij Samuel Schwartz, for that link to an explanation of providing food for ancestors.
But the explanation in that book by a Pali scholar on Buddhist ethics, does not address local variants or lineages of Buddhism (such as Tai Yuan or Tai Lu), except for the Chinese Mahayana, in passing.
It’s this sort of book by western scholars that attempts to dictate authoritatively once and for all what is correct, without admitting the **fundamental contingent nature of most Buddhist texts**, that perhaps should be questioned a little bit more.
As for the fundamental contingent nature of Buddhist texts, **every successive reformation changed the textual corpus, and then asserted that the reformed product had eternal relevance**. Anne Blackburn (2001) goes into the process for the 18th century Syam Nikaya reform in Sri Lanka in great detail. I would say that overall this was usually a very **political process rooted in samsara**.
**Debate may well have been the initial natural norm between viharas**, which after all did begin as many decentralised and localised communities. The behavioural rules of the Vinaya do not exclude intellectual diversity. There were periods of lively debate between several different schools of Buddhism at places like **Nalanda University or at the Abhayagiri Vihara** before Parakramabahu I’s assertion of Mahavihara hegemony. (see De Silva’s history of the Polonnnaruva Dynasty or Mahavamsa Tika).
Growing political centralisation may well have made unity within the Sangha essential, and then you find kings performing reformation, and asserting the one true practice and interpretation, but from a broader perspective, this itself **might** be samsara. Anyway, this is just one interpretation and broadly construed, there does seem to be a tremendous amount of diversity and tolerance within Buddhism.
Robert: “…the offering of merit to hungry ghosts is canonical. I can provide the actual sutta talking about that if interested. ”
I am.
Parittas to provide protection from danger, are routinely memorized by lay people in Burma, and are extremely important, and don’t seem to have much to do with nibbana. Also the Avadanas/Apadanas provide numerous of cases of small but sincere offerings that lead immediately to a better rebirth and in the long run to nibbana. John Strong’s article on the Avadanas is good to read. Lay Buddhists are important too.
The countries that DFAT promotes are always going to have sway over where AusAID gets to spend it’s budget. DFAT is a superior department and therefore will determine the overarching Australian policy objectives in development indirectly through whatever bilateral dialogs that are occuring.
You say that the kin of the Junta are here studying, that AusAID refuses to give money to Burmese for scholarships AND that there are legitimate concerns about AusAID sponsoring the Junta here. What? I am confused… and simple – never a good combination.
Yes I think it’s totally beyond the Australian government to come up with a better selection process. Not only that, but there are too many variables and legal considerations to take into account, and if a more objective policy was given authority, it would make many recent deportation decisions hypocritical (ie.. the mass exodus of some Zimbabweans who had ‘superior connections’ within Zanu PF.. but were expelled only in the lead up to the recent election, when Mugabe has been a DFAT certified nutter since 02…) and the Australian Ruddy government could hardly blame Howard, Downer and co because it’s been too long since they’ve been out. Not going to be a vote earner. However, I feel it is more that hypocrisy within foreign departments leads to long term bilateral damage as opposed to new policy being of particular consequence to elected officials which makes change, in what is really a small issue, impossible.
Moreover, as a student in Australia, I think it depends on what these parituclar students are studying. Imagine if the sons/daughters of senior Junta officials are doing business degrees… or marketing… or any of those so called degrees that inadvertantly encourage turning a blind eye to morality. If they are doing BA’s then sure, they should be here. This would see your notion that these particular students would be perceptive and reflective about what is going on in Burma/Myanmar, ensured.
p/s I would have thought that regime members who are supposedly so staunchly against the West would never send their children to Western universities?
Your subject line makes it appear that you want all of AusAIDS to rethink Myanmar but your recommendation is to change only one thing – the way that scholarships are allocated.
Anyway, my point is, that they are definitely **serious practicing Buddhists**, always observing the five precepts, and my mother in law the eight precepts sometimes, but apparently not preoccupied with “nibbana”
My perception (whether accurate or not) is that most laypeople in Buddhist countries don’t really see the point of nibbana and instead are basically shooting for higher rebirth by being virtuous and such. My personal guess as to why this isn’t the case in the west is that in the west only the people who see some point to nibbana get interested in Buddhism. The ones who don’t (and thus want to pursue “higher rebirth” in one form or another) end up following another more common religion that talks about virtue and essentially what amounts to higher rebirth.
One scholar divided de facto Buddhist practice as being concerned with three things: protective “magic” (evil spirits, etc), higher rebirth, and finally nibbana. I don’t remember the scholar’s name or the exact terms he used for these things. Does anyone know?
(And yes, the offering of merit to hungry ghosts is canonical. I can provide the actual sutta talking about that if interested. It is worth noting that this is only supposed to work, according to the sutta, for hungry ghosts, not other lower or higher forms of rebirth.)
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Samak’s talents!
No comments here?
Is it because PMSamak is already bound for merely a footnote in Thailand’s political and democratic history? An irrelevant, irritating fly that can be easily squashed against the dark wall of Thai democracy? At the end of day, he can never be his own man as he commands no respect and no one listens to him in the PPP government? PMThaksin runs the show here and poor PMSamak can only vent his frustrations at the media and through his cooking show (which is now also canceled)…
PMThaksin, impatient as usual, is now speeding the end game – as his MPs have now tabled the new draft constitution, which will white-wash him of all allegations and wrongdoings, to parliament (this may not be related, but I heard rumours that a soothsayer said it’s the opportune time for PMThaksin).
Even if the cases go to courts, the long arm of PMThaksin’s money can arrange an ending favorable to him (easily I say, we are already seeing developments in the cases that suggest that). But this is both time consuming (many years) not to mention the ruin his (and his family’s) reputation as evidences (incriminating enough for the public, but not judges in PMThaksin’s pockets) will see the light of day. He predictably chose to play a high-rolling game taking big risks to preserve his interests.
Many in NM who harboured hope for PMThaksin to spearhead a republican movement will now feel betrayed like fans of ManCity. PMThaksin is consciously putting distance between himself and any elements within his supporters dabbling with the idea. Jakrapob Penkair looks to be on his way out, as PMThaksin wants to minimize any justification for another military coup (the only threat remaining to his power – anti-Thaksinites will experience his wrath in time).
For anyone seeing PMThaksin as a ‘saviour’ of Thai democracy against an oppressive network monarchy (a figment of many in NM’s imagination I say), be careful what you hope for…
Even master opportunists like PMSamak and PMBanharn are left scratching their heads… (PMChavalit is about to be fooled again it seems)
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
As an aside – none of the people highlighted in that SMH article were, as far as I have seen, the offspring of top leaders. This is not to say they aren’t important – it is just that they (probably) fill some of the lower rungs in the system…
As I understand it, SPDC offspring have tended to study in Singapore. And so do the children of other really substantial regime-associated figures.
As an example, after last year’s uprising in Burma (and the new round of sanctions against individuals), Htet Tay Za, son of Tay Za (of Htoo Trading, Air Bagan, etc, fame) had pictures of himself at his elite Singapore boarding school splashed all over the world. And there have always been rumours about the offspring of very high-ranking military figures flying their grandchildren to the most expensive Singaporean schools. It does seem that it is in Singapore (and in Thailand?) that there is a real story about education and the Myanmar regime.
Schools and Universities inside the country are in such a dire condition that those who can afford it (and not every “regime figure” can) hope to send their children abroad. Singapore is an easy option, of course. And with so much Burma business going through the city-state it makes sense (if other members of a family need to commute for business, medical treatment, etc) that they will use Singapore as an international base. Education is just one part of the package that is available to those with $100,000s to spend avoiding the grim Burmese system.
So perhaps the better questions here focus on Singapore. Family members from the top rungs surely end up at flagship institutions. Places like NUS?
It would be great to hear from New Mandala readers who know more.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Thai style democracy – “Asian values” reborn?
Most Thais are neither Buddhist in spirit nor democratic. They are dictatorial and narrow-minded in their outlook, still suffering from something like the stench of the dark ages. So there is no sense at all in the wishful thinking about democracy for Thailand. Be realistic! Just look at how the different power groups in Thailand go on quarreling over trivia.
Scholarly comments on religion and the cyclone
Stephen: “Despite the diversity, as far as I understand it, Buddhism has a clear internal measure of legitimate practice; and this measure is whether an action is “wholesome” and leads to a “cessation” of attachment to the self and the related suffering which such attachment entails.”
I find it difficult to see how grand statements like “Buddhism has X” or “Buddhism believes X” are even possible. All that I’ve ever seen is plural hybrid Buddhism*s*, Buddhism mixed with something else, a local culture. Based on discussions, many westerners seem to believe that they practice a universal culturally sanitized version.
Perhaps the influence and example set by monks for lay people is important for “wholesomeness” and “cessation of attachment to the self” among lay people. The book by Kamala Tiyavanich above describes monks mixing a with lay people before rigid standards were imposed by the “reformed” urban center (which also enforced exclusion of women from the Sangha). This mixing with lay people is certainly something completely missing from modern urban Bangkok, where after work all one finds are a completely unwholesome mixture of massage parlours, luxury department stores, and bars. I find it hard to see how a highly cloistered Sangha that does not actively mix with lay people is conducive to mindfulness among lay people. They leave a large gap for Christian missionaries.
Peter Skilling despite being such a mild-mannered guy, presents some rather radical theses (albeit discretely and politely) about localised but connected intellectual lineages in Buddhism:
Peter Skilling, “Geographies of Intertextuality: Buddhist Literature in Pre-modern Siam ” Aseanie 19 (2007).
Peter Skilling, King, Sangha, and Brahmans: Ideology, Ritual, and Power in Pre-modern Siam, In Buddhism, Power and Political Order / ed. by Ian Harris. – London: Routledge, 2007 – (Routledge Critical Studies in Buddhism)
Things I’ve learned from Skilling’s papers and talks he gave at the Siam Society: Many of the murals in temples at Pagan, Burma were influenced by strains of thought from Nalanda University and the Pala dynasty as was Tibetan Buddhism. In fact, the oldest Thai commentary was originally written in Sanskrit but now only exists in the Tibetan language. Local lineages were certainly connected and communicating, enforcing some universal Budddhist standards.
Bernard-Henri Levy on the Burmese generals
Bernard-Henri Levy: …The generals hate their own people…The generals are crazy…The generals are monomaniacal….The regime is autistic….The generals stay focused, too….The generals are mafialike….The regime is stingy…..Finally, the regime is grotesque…It is rare to see a dictatorship functioning in such a chemically pure manner…
How about adding: over the last 20 years the Burmese generals have won **because** all that people like Bernard-Henri Levy can do **is talk**
Lanna Proverb: Kam Kii, dii kwa Kham Tot
Solid cr*p in the hand, is better than farting words…
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Education is a ‘noble’ investment so it is already relevant even when only one or two come to know what one might come to know…. I would teach all kids who have made it to my class too. All international students have to meet the admission requirements. They also have to perform up to a standard to earn their degree. You might hate it if they are children or relatives of those criminals. You have to work on that. At the end of the day, if we don’t believe in education what is there to hope for… rather idealistic, I know! I can only speak from experience. Queensland saved me! I probably would have been more liberal, had I gone to ANU 🙂
AusAID used to have a merit scholarship program that students applied and processed with the embassy directly. Many students from rural Thailand went through this excellent program during the 90s. Some of them do have what it takes. I’d like to see more direct support for grass root level. Rather than scrap the whole thing because of their government.
Peace everyone!
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Liberal education saves lives! Look at all the people with BA’s not fighting wars. They say no to war and listen to the pixies and get haircuts that are metaphors for … well I dont know, but Im sure those haircuts are metaphors.
Maybe the biggest problem with foreign undergraduates studying in Australia is that there is little inter-cultural mixing for that irreverence to be properly soaked up. I can tell you it’s fairly irreverent when you do place yourself in the blender. On a scale of irreverence where 0% is Palestine and Israel and 100% is the Korean DMZ, I’d say Australian undergraduates are at least 50% irreverent.
Maybe it’s this irreverence that allows for some Australian academics to be unflinching when it comes providing an educational option for whomever finds their way to whatever institution. If Hitler obtained a BA instead of dropping out to dwell on the psychology of his grandmothers irreverence, then dare I say speculatively, only one million lives would have been lost during World War 2. On the other hand, imagine where the USA would be today if Bill O’Reilly hadnt obtained an MA? That’s right, they wouldnt be at all because Bill would have killed it. The MA has restrained him.
If Pauline Hanson obtained a BA, she was from the fish and chip shop culture by the way.. maybe we wouldnt have gone through that terrible episode of Australia possibly being dominated by a stagnating culture of protestant yocalism.. Pauline Hanson did have the option of obtaining a BA — so if your going to be admitting people from that sort of background, the department for education cant be denying people from a military junta. It would be hypocritical.
The status quo will continue and you dear Bob, or should I say Luke Skywalker, are only one man elaborating on your elitist anti elite position. If you were in power, you’d be elite. It is the nature of power. The mistake people not in power make is believing that power is the be all and end all…
It is hypocritical to ask for those potentially benevolent, altruistic offspring of corrupted parents to be known, as though you are assuming that they are driving around in Mercedes and living lives of luxury. You have no faith in the potential of being good spirited, but you have faith in breaking the status quo? Wouldnt a way to break the status quo for these offspring be by having the same mentality as you? You say that they shouldnt have a liberal education, but you use liberal concepts to determine that they arent liberal and say you would deny rights, which are liberal concepts, to those who arent liberal? Do you see that this is not logical? You make many assumptions — again, that’s not so liberal either. Same as the Junta really!
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
> Prejudice breeds prejudice!
And unearned privilege breeds unearned privilege, malevolently wielded in this case.
There’s plenty of other tyrants whose offspring I wouldn’t teach either. The long bow that I just might do them some good is just too much of a stretch. But I can possibly deny them one of the many “rights” their parents deny their countrymen and women. That might give them pause to ponder. Or not. At least I won’t be left wondering that I’ve contributed to their countryfolk’s future misery.
Are you not prepared to draw a line ? Is there no one you wouldn’t teach ?
Of course I’d be happy to hear of all the examples of privileged offspring of malevolent dictators rendered benevolent by a liberal western education, to the betterment of their less privileged countryfolk.
Finally … “openness, irreverence and democratic sentiments of the
Australian academic scene” ?? … for any foreign undergraduate studying in Australia today, I think that’s an overly rosy view of what they absorb during their time here.
For the kids of tyrants whose privileged position depends on the maintenance of the status quo back home, their time here is most likely directed towards gaining skills for that very aim.
A special report from Yangon
Always the best stories are born out of terrible tragedies. So thankyou, this post is great, but I dont want to say anymore than that because of the situation.
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Holier than thou Bob, you don’t give any reasons?! Why is it wrong to teach someone? Prejudice breeds prejudice!
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
“But is this such a bad thing? …exposing members of Burma’s junta-youth to the openness, irreverence and democratic sentiments of the Australian academic scene may lead to some broadening of political and social viewpoints.”
I agree. I know Burmese exchange students who have a rather jaded opinion of **both** the regime and the long-term failure of the opposition to affect any change at all in their country. Their original unthinking patriotism, which is pretty normal in Burma as it is in every other country, probably changed from witnessing opinions outside their country.
“If there is a scandal here it is that many more Burmese are not studying in Australia.”
Yes, yes, yes. The real scandal is that educational bureaucrats can’t find someway to shortcut **poor Burmese** getting a foreign education!
It would be virtually impossible for a son or daughter of a **poor Burmese farmer** to jump through all the bureaucratic hoops, visas, expensive entrance exams, application fees, letters of recommendations, scholarship applications, etc, etc…that are required to get admission into western universities. (I even find this impossible and I’m working in Bangkok on a middle class Thai salary)
Years ago, I employed a bright young research assistant from Yangon University (waiting for the university to reopen after one of its numerous closures) for 1.5 years whose father was a farmer near Mon Ywa. Later on he got work in a UN library.
***Why can’t big rich powerful western educational institutions do this sort of thing? What is it that makes them so clumsy and incompetent?***
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Andrew said:
“Perhaps I am naive, or overly optimistic … ”
Sorry, but yes you are.
> Would I be willing to accept a son or daughter of a member of the Burmese junta into a course I teach?
> Of course.
My response … absolutely not.
“Coup de blogs”: Gordon Brown on “people power” and Burma
Well Gordi, PhD, I just checked and it seems Burma/Myanmar is still fairly reculsive. Is his thinking that because the internet is such a huge media, foreign policy is more easily determined by the masses?
Maybe Gordi, PhD has learnt a lesson himself about internet shame? The 10p tax rate cuts u-turn? Classic case of projection.
This is as void as his comments about Lebanon, Syria and Zimbabwe. It’s a pity the altogether more alive David Milliband has to stick up for this incompetent, manipulative buffoon.
A fat man with empty words is Gordi, PhD.
A special report from Yangon
[…] Mandala received a report from a correspondent based in Yangon, Myanmar. An excerpt of the account: “The […]
Scholarly comments on religion and the cyclone
Jon, thanks for the book recommendation. I see what you say about the overt reference to nibbana being infrequent in cases, especially in the Thai forest tradition which you mention. Perhaps one of the reasons why Ajahn Chah’s teachings are so popular are their everyday focus on mindfulness, rather than the seemingly distant goal of nibbana. However, Ajahn Mun, one of the grand daddies of the Thai forest tradition, did make an explicit vow “not to be reborn again.” While the many “local variants or lineages” are plentiful, it still seems as though there are limits to a cultural relativist approach to Buddhism. Despite the diversity, as far as I understand it, Buddhism has a clear internal measure of legitimate practice; and this measure is whether an action is “wholesome” and leads to a “cessation” of attachment to the self and the related suffering which such attachment entails. Within these limits, however, there is plenty of room for diversity and debate. But to suggest that any practice that would call itself “Buddhist” is a legitimately Buddhist “local variant or lineage”, seems to go a bit too far.
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Couldn’t they get the same thing by their internet connection – where I imagine they can bypass the censors given their privileged position?
Scholarly comments on religion and the cyclone
Thank you, Lleij Samuel Schwartz, for that link to an explanation of providing food for ancestors.
But the explanation in that book by a Pali scholar on Buddhist ethics, does not address local variants or lineages of Buddhism (such as Tai Yuan or Tai Lu), except for the Chinese Mahayana, in passing.
It’s this sort of book by western scholars that attempts to dictate authoritatively once and for all what is correct, without admitting the **fundamental contingent nature of most Buddhist texts**, that perhaps should be questioned a little bit more.
As for the fundamental contingent nature of Buddhist texts, **every successive reformation changed the textual corpus, and then asserted that the reformed product had eternal relevance**. Anne Blackburn (2001) goes into the process for the 18th century Syam Nikaya reform in Sri Lanka in great detail. I would say that overall this was usually a very **political process rooted in samsara**.
**Debate may well have been the initial natural norm between viharas**, which after all did begin as many decentralised and localised communities. The behavioural rules of the Vinaya do not exclude intellectual diversity. There were periods of lively debate between several different schools of Buddhism at places like **Nalanda University or at the Abhayagiri Vihara** before Parakramabahu I’s assertion of Mahavihara hegemony. (see De Silva’s history of the Polonnnaruva Dynasty or Mahavamsa Tika).
Growing political centralisation may well have made unity within the Sangha essential, and then you find kings performing reformation, and asserting the one true practice and interpretation, but from a broader perspective, this itself **might** be samsara. Anyway, this is just one interpretation and broadly construed, there does seem to be a tremendous amount of diversity and tolerance within Buddhism.
Robert: “…the offering of merit to hungry ghosts is canonical. I can provide the actual sutta talking about that if interested. ”
I am.
Parittas to provide protection from danger, are routinely memorized by lay people in Burma, and are extremely important, and don’t seem to have much to do with nibbana. Also the Avadanas/Apadanas provide numerous of cases of small but sincere offerings that lead immediately to a better rebirth and in the long run to nibbana. John Strong’s article on the Avadanas is good to read. Lay Buddhists are important too.
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
The countries that DFAT promotes are always going to have sway over where AusAID gets to spend it’s budget. DFAT is a superior department and therefore will determine the overarching Australian policy objectives in development indirectly through whatever bilateral dialogs that are occuring.
You say that the kin of the Junta are here studying, that AusAID refuses to give money to Burmese for scholarships AND that there are legitimate concerns about AusAID sponsoring the Junta here. What? I am confused… and simple – never a good combination.
Yes I think it’s totally beyond the Australian government to come up with a better selection process. Not only that, but there are too many variables and legal considerations to take into account, and if a more objective policy was given authority, it would make many recent deportation decisions hypocritical (ie.. the mass exodus of some Zimbabweans who had ‘superior connections’ within Zanu PF.. but were expelled only in the lead up to the recent election, when Mugabe has been a DFAT certified nutter since 02…) and the Australian Ruddy government could hardly blame Howard, Downer and co because it’s been too long since they’ve been out. Not going to be a vote earner. However, I feel it is more that hypocrisy within foreign departments leads to long term bilateral damage as opposed to new policy being of particular consequence to elected officials which makes change, in what is really a small issue, impossible.
Moreover, as a student in Australia, I think it depends on what these parituclar students are studying. Imagine if the sons/daughters of senior Junta officials are doing business degrees… or marketing… or any of those so called degrees that inadvertantly encourage turning a blind eye to morality. If they are doing BA’s then sure, they should be here. This would see your notion that these particular students would be perceptive and reflective about what is going on in Burma/Myanmar, ensured.
p/s I would have thought that regime members who are supposedly so staunchly against the West would never send their children to Western universities?
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Your subject line makes it appear that you want all of AusAIDS to rethink Myanmar but your recommendation is to change only one thing – the way that scholarships are allocated.
Scholarly comments on religion and the cyclone
My perception (whether accurate or not) is that most laypeople in Buddhist countries don’t really see the point of nibbana and instead are basically shooting for higher rebirth by being virtuous and such. My personal guess as to why this isn’t the case in the west is that in the west only the people who see some point to nibbana get interested in Buddhism. The ones who don’t (and thus want to pursue “higher rebirth” in one form or another) end up following another more common religion that talks about virtue and essentially what amounts to higher rebirth.
One scholar divided de facto Buddhist practice as being concerned with three things: protective “magic” (evil spirits, etc), higher rebirth, and finally nibbana. I don’t remember the scholar’s name or the exact terms he used for these things. Does anyone know?
(And yes, the offering of merit to hungry ghosts is canonical. I can provide the actual sutta talking about that if interested. It is worth noting that this is only supposed to work, according to the sutta, for hungry ghosts, not other lower or higher forms of rebirth.)