When Loyalty Demands Dissent. Sulak Sivaraksa and the Charge of Lese Majeste in Siam 1991-1993

Citation preview

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Among those who trust (merely) in lineage, the King(ksafrii/a) is best; but best among gods and men is he of wise conduct. Digha Nikaya A universal monarch, a righteous and just king relys on the Dhamma. Respecting, revering and honoring the Dhamma as his sign and his sovereign, he provides for the proper welfare, ward and protection of his people. Anguttara Nikaya

WHEN LOYALTY DEMANDS DISSENT Sulak Sivaraksa and the Charge of Lese Majeste in Siam 1991-1993

Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute Ashram Wongsanit Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation Bangkok 22 August 1993

Drawing on the front cover by Preecha Arajunaka Photograph at the back cover by Grant A. Olson Note: Sulak is pictured here a f t e r having been made an honorary member of a North American Indian t r i b e . The tribal c h i e f then shared a peace-pipe d asked the great s p i r i t to grant him strenght in h i s s t r u g g l e

istributed by Suksit Siam 113-115 Fuangnakhon Rd., Opp.Wat Rajabopit, Bangkok 10200 FAX 662-222 5188

For Nilchawee Sivaraksa

The King has absolute power in everything. This principle is very good and very suitable for the country, as long as we have a good King. If the King is really an Elected King, it is probable that he would be a fairly good King. But this idea of election is really a very theoretical one, and in reality the Kingfs] of Siam are really hereditary, with a very limited possibility of choice. Such being the case, it is not at all certain that we shall always have a good King. Then the absolute power may become a positive danger to the country. Besides this, things have much changed. In olden days the actions of the King were hardly ever questioned. It would not have been safe to do so. The King was really respected and his words were really laws. But things began to change with the new order of things. In the days of King Chulalongkorn, the King was still very much feared and respected. Even then towards to [sic] the end of the Reign, there was a young party who began to criticize the King in many ways, but not openly. In the Reign which has just ended, things got much worse, for many reasons which I have no need to tell you, as you know them well enough. The King has become a person liable to be influenced by anybody who could gain the ears of a favourite. Every official is more or less suspected of embezzlement ornepotism. Fortunately the Princes werestill respected as being on the whole honest folks. What was very regrettable was that the Court was heartily des tested and in the late years was on the verge of being ridiculed. The birth of FREE PRESS aggravated matters still more. The position of the King has become one of great difficulty. The movements of opinion in this country give a sure sign that the days of Autocratic Rulership are numbered. The position of the King must be made more secure if this Dynasty is going to last. Some sort of GUARANTEE must be found against an unwise King.

King Prajadhipok’s Memorandum from The End of The Absolute Monarchy in Siam by Benjamin A. Batson,1984

pp. 287-288

Drawing by Adolfo Perez Esquivel Nobel Peace Laureat in 1980 from Argentina

1-

w Wi I 1I 1

Sulak being greeted outside the Criminal Court on 8 March 1993 when he was formally charged by the Public Prosecutor

V.*• 5 *

Contents

Drawing by Adolfo Perez Esquivel Preface Introduction : To Roses and Rotten Eggs

frontispiece XIII XVI

I . PRESS CUTTINGS FROM BANGKOK Sulak face charges of lese majeste, defamation Suchinda sues social critic Police issue warrant to arrest Sulak Sulak promised fair chance to fight charges Human rights agencies seek soft line on Sulak Japanese group warns over rights Groups: Axe charges or face disruption Wanted social critic turns up in Sweden Sulak fears for safety if he surrendered Letter from Alan Senauke Group petitions Anand to withdraw Sulak charge Prosecutors seek arrest warrant for critic Sulak Judges' issue deservedly controversial Sulak returns to fight Lese Majeste charge Friends stand by Sulak as he returns Sulak's ill health postpones hearing Sulak appears in court on lese majeste charge Sulak charged in lese majeste case Searching questions on Thai art birthday bash Appraising the ivory tower Maguire's efforts bring Sulak into the spotlight Sulak calls for reinvestigation of his case Other heroes need'friends’ too-Sulak Letter to Editor Letter from Amy Krantz Sulak loses first round in court Chulalongkorn cited for Sulak's defence Court delays hearing of Sulak charges

1 3 3 5 6 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 14 16 18 19 19 21 22 23 25 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

IL ARTICLES ABOUT AND INTERVIEWS WITH SULAK Sulak Sivaraksa: Tireless Truth Teller in Trouble Again Interview with Ajam Sulak Would This Man Dis The King? In Exile from Siam: An Interview with Sulak Sivaraksa Reconciliation in Buddhism Reflections on My Life as a Christian in Dialogue with Buddhism Thais in US commemorate democracy Interview of the week: Religion and Politics: Sulak Style Nomination of Sulak Sivaraksa for the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize Greedy for the Good Life

35 37 40 50 59 66 70 73 76 80 85

IX

Sulak : Chuan must defy bureaucracy Profile : Sulak Sivaraksa - Anglo-American Jacobin in Thailand Lese Majeste, Sulak and the Thai Generals

90 92 103

HI. PRESS CUTTINGS FROM ABROAD 107 Trouble in Thailand 109 Buddhist way of peace may bring harsh opposition 110 Rights top Asia issue Thai says 11 1 Sivaraksa's “radical conservatism” calls for generosity, awareness 112 Visiting writer stresses concepts of Buddhism 1 13 Thailand's effort to westernize harms environment, dissident says 1 14 Thai exile stresses Buddhist traditions 114 Buddhism and ecology in Thailand 115 Activist says protests are work of peaceful coalition 116 Thai dissident spreads message of non-violent protest 118 Exiled Thai writer sows seeds of peace 119 Buddhist targeted for criticizing Thai coup 121 When worlds collide : democracy's future in Thailand 123 Seeds of Peace -the future of Thai democracy 124 Justice for Thai exile 126 Letter from Kenichiro Mochizuki 127 Sulak Ready for Trial 128 Sulak on Trial 128 Thai Nobel nominee warns of west's way 129 IV. PETITIONS To the King Lord Avebury Jim O' Keeffe T.D. Gus Yatron Kenneth Kraft John May et. al. Tawit Chitsomboon et.al. Michael Baumann David L.Gosling David W. Chappell Datus C.Smith Jr. New York Chapter of the Buddhist Fellowship Charles F.Keyes Erich W.Reinhold Ryowa Suzuki 6 Nobel Peace Laureates Santikaro Bhikkhu To Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon Dianna Francis & David C. Atwood James Perkins Sidney Jones Staff of Parallax Press Adam Curie Kazuhiro Honda Congress of the United States United States Senate X

131 133 134 135 136 137 138 140 141 141 142 143 143 145 146 148 149 151 152 152 153 153 154 154 156

To PM.Anand Panyarachun Prof. Johannes Hoffman Maria Ekman Stephanie Kaza Don Luce & Linda Werthington Doug Hostetter & R.L. Deats M. Awards, P.Bogdonoff & L. Bamitz Tom Lantos

157 158 158 159 160 160 161

To PM.Chuan Leekphai Donald K. Swearer Michael Kirby Andrew C.Clark Proyecto Compartir et. al. Raja Dharmapala Ward Morehouse Suishu Koruna Sangha Sura Krishna Chakma Diakonisches Werk Der Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland Ken Jones ACFOD Council Meeting Amnesty International John Ralston Saul Sergio Orrao Edward Broadbent

V. TESTIMONIES In the Mirror : Literature and Politics in Siam in the American Era

162 163 164 164 165 166 166 166 167 167 168 168 169 169 170 171 173

Honours The English Centre of International P-E-N International Campaign for Tibet Council for a Parliament of the World's Religions The Naropa Institute Omega Institue Biography and Buddhism in Thailand

174 175 1 76 177 177 178

Greetings Hermann Graf Hatzfeldt Piyasilo V.Zuhlsdorff Institue for Asian Democracy & International Campaign for Tibet

180 181 183 185

To Whom it May Concern Paula Green Mikio Kato Bob Maat SJ & Liz Bernstein Charles F.Keyes Susan M. Darlington Adam Skaggs Dulyakasem, Hutanuwatara & Chamduang

VI. LECTURES & ARTICLES BY SULAK SIVARAKSA

185 186 187 188 191 193 198

209

The Need to be Aware of Other Traditions 21 1 Buddhism and Human Rights 218 Culture, Development and Democracy : The Role of Intellectuals 226 XI

VII.

Engaged Buddhism from A Theravada Perspective Buddhist Ethics and Modern Society : A Theravada Viewpoint Buddhism and Nationalism in the World Today Thailand at a Crossroad : 60 Years of Democracy

235 245 253 264

MISCELLANEOUS The Tale of Two Men The Material vs. the Mind Not Brave, Just Constant Book Reviews

279 281 281 283 285 285 289 290 293 294 297 299 299 301 303 305 306 307 307 314

SIAM

in crisis

SEEDS OF PEACE : A BUDDHIST

VISION FOR RENEWING SOCIETY

RADICAL CONSERVATISM : BUDDHISM FIVE CYCLES OF FRIENDSHIP BUDDHIST

IN THE CONTEMPORARY

WORLD

WITH SULAK SIVARAKSA

PERCEPTION FOR DESIRABLE SOCIETIES IN THE FUTURE

INNER PEACE, WORLD PEACE

Obituaries Soedjatmoko Carl Magnus Thornes Rev. John Curnow Martin Ennals A Library for Ladakh Letter from Ladakh Letter to P.M.Anand Panyarachun Buddhism, Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict VIII. CHARGES Charge sheet aginst Sulak Sivaraksa Opening Statement to the Criminal Court

319 321 327

IX.

331 333 335 335 336 337 338

APPENDICES 1. The Arrest and Trial of Sulak Sivaraksa 1984 2. Some Relavant NGOs Komol Keemtong Foundation Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development Santi Pracha Dhamma Institue Wongsanit Ashram 3. Announcements English Singhalese Swedish & German Italian Burmese Chinese Japanese

XII

340 341 342 343 344 345 346

PREFACE

By traditional Siamese reckoning, one's 60th birthday is regarded as a very important event as one has completed the 5th twelve-year cycle since birth. As Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa has many friends and admirers -as well as having numerous foes-they produced a volume each in Siamese and English to mark his 60th birthday anniversary on the 27th of March 1993. Both were collected personal opinions or accounts of friendship with the birthday boy. Sulak on seeing it wittily remarked about the English volume entitled Five Cycles of Friendship that “Obituaries are usually written when people are dead. However, since I am rather unusual I asked my friends to write obituaries for me on my 60th birthday, and collected them in one volume... I asked the writers not to praise me but to recollect his or her past experiences in being my friend, and to offer me criticisms. In this volume however there may be more positive points about me than negative ones which is understandable (under the circumstances). If I was not being prosecuted with the lese majeste case, these writers may not have been so generous towards me. Yet all my friends have been very kind and patient with me including those who did not have the time to write or whose writings never reached me... I would like to take this opportunity on the auspicious occasion of completing the five cycles of the Siamese calendar to thank you (all of my friends), especially for your friendship, your hospitality, your thoughtfulness, your advice and your encouragement - all of which have helped to sustain me during my times of adversity. Your friendship has given me much joy and happiness. As a Buddhist, one is taught that good friends (kalayanamitta) mean more than anything one possesses externally. 1 have been lucky to have many good friends, who I consider as part of my family.” Some of Ajarn Sulak's friends and followers would like tooffer him another volume of solidarity writings — a festschrift — as Sulak is, among other things, a very concerned scholar especially in the field of Engaged XIII

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Buddhism. In 1984 Sulak was coordinator of a sub-project for the United Nations University on Buddhism and Desirable Societies in the Future. He organized a scholarly symposium on the subject as well as commissioning leading Buddhists and scholars on Buddhism to write various articles on the theme. The Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development thus proposed to publish the resulting articles to honour his 60th birthday. He liked the idea, but proposed instead that the volume be published to mark the centenary of the birth of his late spiritual mentor, the Ven. Phra Bhadramuni, the former Abbot of Wat Thongnoppakhun monastery (see Buddhist Perceptions for Desirable Societies in the Future'). The year 1984 was a significant year for Sulak in another respect - it was the year that he was first arrested on charges of lese majeste. At that time an English volume (of his collected writings and articles on his arrest) was published to mark the event of the case being withdrawn. (See Siamese Resurgence.) Several volumes of a similar nature in Thai were also published at the time as well. Many of us feel that the lese majeste case brought against Ajarn Sulak right now should be made known to a wider circle of people despite the fact that the charges will not be withdrawn as easily as in 1984. Sulak himself has written an account in Siamese of his case, describing events since he gave his fateful lecture against the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) on the 22nd of August 1991, including the issuing of the warrant for his arrest, and his self imposed exjje abroad etc. This is now being serialized in the Thai weekly journal TlQHLPItt. The contents of the lecture has been published in Siam and in the USA. It was translated into German and published by Frankfurter Rundschau on 9th October 1991. The English version was widely circulated in the British Parliament by Lord Avebury, chairman of the Parliamentary Human Rights Group. It was also published by the Student Federation of Thailand (SFT) and Movement for Democracy and Civil Society (MODEM) for the World Bank / IMF meeting in Bangkok which was held on the 14th of October 1991. In the USA the lecture was also published as an appendix in his book Seeds of Peace: A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society (Parallax Press, Berkely, California 1992). We would like to show those interested in democracy, freedom of expression and human rights in Siam, that a man like Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa is loyal to his king, country and religion - while at the same time he must take the liberty to, indeed has a responsibility to, state his dissent. Hence the title of this book. Since there are so many articles, interviews, news items and petitions regarding his arrest and the delicacy of the case both in Siamese and foreign languages, we felt that we should collect those in English and publish them in one volume as we have done here. We also felt we should include some samples of the written concern that has been expressed on his behalf, as well as some of his own statements since his self-imposed exile in September 1991 up until the time that he first confronted the public prosecutor's first witness in the court on the 2nd and 17th of June 1993. We hope the book will be published on the 22nd of August 1 993 to mark the second anniversary of his lecture at Thammasat University. It was here that the ball started rolling against Sulak personally, (leading him XIV

Preface to hiscurrent predicament visa vis the courts). Sulak's court case may drag on for months or even years. We are glad that there are a few factors in the situation that are at least a little more favourable to his case. This time it is a criminal court and not a military tribunal in which he is being tried. The trial is also open to the public, and he has the right to appeal. (At least under democracy these human rights are honoured!) Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa's lecture was a potent one —as well as bringing trouble on himself — it might have in fact ignited the public consciousness against the dictatorship that led to the events of May 1 992. Indeed, Sulak's friends and admirers, especially those in the peace movement and non-violent struggles, played vital roles during that crucial period. May we say that according to the Buddhist Law of Dependent Origination, Sulak's lecture would have led both directly and indirectly to the downfall ofGeneralSuchindaKraprayoon, the man who had lesemajeste case brought against him. Although we now have only an imperfect form of democracy in Siam, it is still better than dictatorship. We all hope and will continue to struggle nonviolently for real democracy. This is what our institute stands for: Santi, Pracha and Dhamma -peace, people's participation, and righteousness. In other words justice and peace with freedom of expression. The institute works for political rights and tries to educate people for social concern as well as training and research on democracy as derived from indigenous cultural concepts. The AshramWongsanit , which is affiliated with it, is a place forspiritual growth in a proper natural environment. Here we can retreat to establish peace within and to develop the inner strength to work for social justice with proper concern for natural environment. These two organisations together with a few others which appear in the appendix, regard Sulak Sivaraksa as a good friend (kalayanamitta) to members of the younger generation, encouragi ng them with his example of idealism, dedication, sacrifice and real concern for his fellow sufferers. We would like to thank our foreign friends who helped us in editing this volume, especially Vince Giorno, David Arnott, Wendy Wank and Kenneth MacLean. Our Siamese colleagues have also been very helpful in various ways, especially Mr Nibondh Chamduang, Miss Ladda Viwatsuravej and Miss Narumol Jantharasri. Proceeds from the sale of this book, along with those from Five Cycles of Friendship and its Siamese counterpart volum t IWOHWltP) are to be collected to fight the lese majeste charges that have been brought against Sulak. Many friends both at home and abroad have contributed much already for legal fees etc but costs involved for such a fight, lasting many months or years, needs more money. I hope some readers may help either financially or giving him your moral support in any other way. When we told Ajarn Sulak that we wanted to dedicate this volume to him, he said no - it should be dedicated to his wife who suffers more than he. Indeed, he said, she has endured many hardships during his long sojourn abroad and really deserves to be honoured more than him. Anant Viriyapinit Hon. Secretary Sathirakoses Nagapradipa Foundation XV

INTRODUCTION TO ROSES AND ROTTEN EGOS

Sulak's trial is political. The actual charges are defaming the King of Thailand and a former general, along with his associates; but there seems little doubt to one who has read the charges and the speech which gave rise to them, that the real issue is that Sulak's attack caused serious damage to the Thai military. For many years, at least since 1947 in Thailand, the military has either been in power, or has been the real power behind a thin veneer of civilian pol iticians who were, in most cases, former generals anyway. Sulak attacks the base of their influence and must therefore be silenced. The story starts on 22 August 1991 in Bangkok when Professor Sulak Sivaraksa, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Southeast Asia representativeof Peace Brigades International, patron of the Burma Peace Foundation, founder of a cluster of non-governmental organisations, publisher and internationally-acclaimed author of more than a hundred books, and one of the most reputed theorists of a socially-engaged Buddhism, made a speech at Thammasat University. At the time the country was in the hands of a military junta, the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) which had taken power in a coup six months before. The speech is a rousing call, 9 months before the May '92 Democracy Movement which brought down the NPKC, for the revitalisation of the students' and people's movement for democracy, and an analysis of the psycho-historical reasons for the suppression of that movement. He develops this into a sustained, forceful, humorous and carefully-crafted critique of hierarchical power as such, the military in general and the NPKC in particular. He hits the NPKC and the military where it hurts most - in their legitimacy-by discussing the four historical sources of the legitimation of power in Thailand: Nation, Religion, Monarchy and Constitution. Hegoes carefully and systematically into these areas, arguing that the military is XVI

Introduction (1) destructive and dismissive of nine-tenths of the people who comprise the nation; (2) insincere and uncomprehending towards religion; (3) disloyal to the King; and (4) anti-Constitutional. He is saying that in fact and in law, the military has no political legitimacy whatsoever, and the sooner it returns to the barracks, the better. This, and the example he might give to others to resist authority, is his crime. A few weeks later the junta charged him with defaming the King and the coup leaders. The defamation of the generals carries a maximum sentence of 2 years prison, but defaming the King, the charge of Lese Majeste, is much more serious, and carries a maximum 15 year jail sentence which for a man of 60 is no light prospect. It is worth noting here that after the junta fell in 1992, following the bloody suppression of the Democracy Movement, those responsible for the killings were given an immediate royal amnesty, and although their decrees were subsequently declared by the courts to be null and void, the charges against Sulak remain. The reasons are not hidden too deeply: the military still retains its political power, although it is nominally back in the barracks, and Sulak's attack is still potent. This is the context in which the present volume is published. There are cuttings from the Thai and foreign press which indicate the range of global interest in Sulak's case. There are letters and pleas to the Thai authorities, and testimonials and articles in his defence (representing only a fraction of those written) from an astonishing range of people and organisations. They are from diplomats, judges, anthropologists, sociologists, ecologists, Buddhist scholars and political scientists, Nobel Peace Laureates, US Congress members and Buddhist monks, from peace organisations, human rights organisations, children's organisations, the British aristocracy, Bangladeshi tribal leaders, Third World grass-roots and religious organisations, Western and Thai Buddhists and many more. They are from Thailand, Japan, India, Sri Lanka, Australia, Europe, and from North and South America. They demonstrate a high degree of respect and affection for this man who is the epitome of the loyal opposition: an enthusiast for popular participation who is also a radical, but not uncritical supporter of the Thai monarchy; a devout Buddhist who criticises Buddhist monks, a Thai traditionalist and Buddhist philosopher familiar also with modern Western thought. Someone who is as willing to criticise Western consumerism as Asian asceticism, whose constant theme is the need to keep the human scale in an increasingly soul-less and mechanical world. Among the testimonials and letters there is one exception to this chorus of enthusiasm. This is the article (pp. 92-103) on Sulak published in the Executive Intelligence Review of June 1 992, a month or so after the Thai Democracy Movement. According to diplomats, this article was very influential in military circles, and has contributed to the unwillingness to XVII

When Loyalty Demands Dissent drop the charges against Sulak. The Executive Intelligence Review is published in the United States by the Lyndon H. LaRouche organisation. Lyndon LaRouche is a former Trotskyite currently serving a 15 year jail sentence for fraud, whose global fantasies identify himself as the leader of a Platonic “humanist” elite battling a centuries-old conspiracy of oligarchs bent on subjugating the planet; they identify Henry Kissinger and Queen Elizabeth 11 of England as involved in the international narcotics trade. Other targets include the United Nations, the Ford Foundation, environmentalists and, not surprisingly, the “synthetic” Thai Democracy Movement which is seen as having been organised by US AID, the Ford Foundation and other conspirators, whose “point man” was the ‘ ‘Jacobin” Sulak Sivaraksa. Since the article has, apparently, been taken seriously, we include it in the anthology of testimonials. (Those interested in further information of the Review and its parent organisation should read Dennis King's Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism (Doubleday, New York 1989). We hope that this selection of letters and articles will not only help inform people about Sulak and his trial, but also about some of the vital issues facing today's world, which are in a real sense, focused on this event.

XVI11

I. Press Cuttings from Bangkok

"There can be no doubt, of course, that criticism is good for people and institutions that are part of public life. No institution - city, monarchy, whatever should expect to be free from the scrutiny of those who give it their loyalty and support, not to mention those who don't. But we are all part of the same fabric of our national society and that scrutiny, by one part of another, can be just as effective if it is made with a touch of gentleness, good humor and understanding." From the Speech of Queen Elizabeth II at the Guild Hall, London, to commemorate the fortieth anniversary of her ascension to the throne. Quoted in the New Yorker 28 December 1992-4 January 1993.

SULAK FACES CHARGES OF LESE MAJESTE, DEFAMATION Special Branch Police has launched an investigation into charges of lese majeste and defamation against well-known social critic Sulak Sivaraksa. Police Chief Gen. Sawat Amomvivat said yesterday the charges were filed recently at the Chana Songkhram police station. Mr. Sulak is alleged to have mentioned the monarchy and others in an unfavorable manner while delivering a speech at Thammasat University on “Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council : Tragedy in Thai Society”. Pol. Gen. Sawat said there were grounds for the allegation; and he had ordered Special Branch Police Commander Pol. Maj.-Gen. Yothin Matayomnand to investigate the matter in coordination with Chana Songkhram officers. Pol. Maj.-Gen. Yothin said he would ask for a tape of Mr. Sulak's speech to assess his real intent. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Pol. Lt.-Gen. Viroj Pao-in said he had also appointed Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Pol. Maj.-Gen. Sophon Waratchanond to head a committee investigating the case. Police are now collecting evidence, he said. Army Chief-of-Staff Gen Viroj Saengsanit said Army Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon had filed a complaint with police after Sulak reportedly alleged during the speech that Gen Suchinda had sought logging concession rights from the Burmese government. Mr. Sulak was also alleged to have said that Supreme Commander Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong and Gen. Suchinda had sought advice from Burma's Gen Saw Maung on how to stage a coup, he said. Assistant Army Chief-of-Staff Lt.-Gen. Yuthana Khamdee said Gen. Suchinda had filed the complaint to clear himself of the allegations. It depends on the court to decide if Mr. Sulak is guilty as charged, he said. The Bangkok Post 5 September 1991 SUCHINDA SUES SOCIAL CRITIC A police committee was set up yesterday to investigate Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon's lawsuit against wellknown writer and social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, whom he assured of allegedly committing lese majeste and defaming him. Police Director General Suwat Amornwiwat said Suchinda's lawsuit had grounds and that Special Branch police were looking for Sulak yesterday. The police chief, however, said no warrant had been issued for Sulak’s arrest.

4

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Suchinda's lawsuit, lodged with Chana Songkhram police, quoted statements made by Sulak on Aug. 22 during a political debate at Thammasat University. Army Secretary Maj Gen Anusorn Krissanaserani and Lt. Col. Suksan Singhadej, an army legal officer, filed the complaint on Suchinda's behalf. The complaint said that during that debate on “Democracy and Coup d'etat’ ’( or “ S i x Months of the National Peace Keeping Council : Tragedy in Thai Society”), Sulak's comments on proposed legal amendments were tantamount to insults to the monarchy. It said Sulak also accused the military of being a spoiler of democracy. A tape cassette recording of Sulak's statements was handed over to the police. Sulak said during the debate that the National Peace Keeping Council had failed to fulfil any of its proclaimed objectives of the Feb. 23 coup and proved to be worse than the toppled Chatichai administration. He accused the NP KC of being involved i n irregularities concerning arms purchases, persecuting permanent government officials and interfering with the constitution-making process. He charged that Suchinda and Supreme Commander Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong visited Burma to seek “logging concessions” and learn “lessons about coups’’ from Rangoon strongman Saw Maung. Police said they were examining the tape in order to confirm whether Sulak was the speaker. Sulak was charged with lesemajeste in 1 984 after his interview was published by the Komol Keemthong Foundation. Public prosecutors dropped the charge later that year. The new lawsuit could warrant renewal of the 1984 case, said Special Branch Police Commander Pol. Maj. Gen. Yothin Mattayanan. Yothin said investigators might have to summon those who attended the debate at Thammasat University. The police committee set up to investigate the case is headed by Pol. Maj. Gen. Sopon Waratchanont, Assistant Metropolitan Police Commissioner. “ W e want a senior officer to handle the case, ” Metropolitan Police Commissioner Pol Lt. Gen Viroj Pao-in said. Lt. Gen. Yutthana Khamdee, Assistant Army Chief of Staff, meanwhile, denied that the military was picking on its harsh critics. ‘ ‘ Criticism is part of democracy, but there must be limits. Aggressive remarks hurt people badly, ” Yutthana said. Army Chief of Staff Gen Viroj Saengsanit said Suchinda did not visit Burma this year so Sulak's remarks were groundless.

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

5

“This is a very sensitive case,” said Lt. Col. Naret Noinart, Chief Inspector of Chana Songkhram police. Sulak could not be reached for comment yesterday. The Nation 5 September 1991 POLICE ISSUE WARRANT TO ARREST SULAK SOCIAL CRITIC ON DEFAMATION CHARGE Police have issued an arrest warrant for leading social critic Sulak Sivaraksa on charges of allegedly committing lese majeste and defaming the Army Commander-in-Chief , said the Police Department Director General yesterday. Pol. Gen. Sawat Amornwiwat said the arrest warrant was issued last Friday. He added that he directed the Immigration Department to intercept Sulak if he tries to leave Thailand. It was rumoured that the outspoken social critic was already abroad. Early this month, Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon lodged a complaint with police, alleging that Sulak on Aug. 22 made defamatory comments against him and the monarch during a political debate at Thammasat University. The complaint alleged that during a debate on “ Democracy and Coups d'etat” (Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council : Tragedy in Thai Society), Sulak's comments on proposed legal amendments were tantamount to insulting the monarchy. It charged that Sulak also accused the military of being a spoiler of democracy. The complaint also alleged that Sulak had charged that Suchinda and Supreme Commander Gen. Suthorn Kongsompong visited Burma to seek “logging concessions” and learn “lessons about coups” from Rangoon strongman Saw Maung. After the complaint was filed against him, Sulak, vowing to fight the case in court, described Suchinda's lawsuit as an attempt to ‘frame ’ him. Sulak, who appeared unperturbed by the charges, said earlier that the complaint against him might have resulted from the military's dissatisfaction with having its power challenged. Reputed as being the Siamese Socrates, Sulak said: “ 1 am willing to die to speak the truth.” Concerning the lese majeste charge, he said the law had always been abused by ‘ultra-right people’ to persecute the innocent. The NPKC, said Sulak, did commit lese majeste by toppling the government who act as the king's servants. He said earlier that police might be afraid that he would try to escape. “But don't worry, I will never flee the country.” Sirod Sukoinvo The Nation 18 September 1991

6

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

SULAK PROMISED FAIR CHANCE TO FIGHT CHARGES Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa will be treated fairly when he surrenders to fight lese majeste and defamation charges, according to Special Branch Police Commander Maj-Gen Yothin Mathayomnan yesterday. Mr. Sulak recently told the British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) he wanted to surrender so he could clear himself. A warrant was issued for Mr. Sulak' s arrest after Army Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon asked Chana Songkhram police to take legal action against the social critic for statements made at a panel discussion at Thammasat University. Gen. Suchinda claims that some of Sulak's remarks damaged a member of the Royal Family and defamed him also, by saying he went to Burma to seek advice on organizing a coup from Burmese strongman Saw Maung. Pol. Maj.-Gen. Yothin said his superiors would decide whether Mr.Sulak should be released on bail after he surrenders. Interior Minister Issarapong Noonpakdee said yesterday Mr. Sulak need not be afraid as the authorities would abide strictly by the judicial procedures to ensure that justice prevailed. Gen Issarapong said he was unaware of Mr. Sulak's whereabouts or even if he was still in the country. The Bangkok Post 20 September 1991 HUMAN RIGHTS AGENCIES SEEK SOFT LINE O F SULAK Two well-known international human rights organizations have expressed grave concern over the Thai authorities move in issuing a warrant to arrest leading social critic Sulak Sivaraksa on charges of lese majeste and defaming the Army chief. London-based Amnesty International (Al) sent telexes dated Sept. 19 to His Majesty the King , Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun, Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon and Interior Minister Gen Issarapong Noonpackdee. Al said the arrest of Sulak for his alleged remarks about the monarchy “would be a violation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression proclaimed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The organization appealed to the Thai authorities not to arrest the social critic for lese majeste, and said that Sulak should receive a fair trial if he is to be arrested on the charge of defamation. The California-based Buddhist Peace Fellowship described the charges against Sulak as “without any substantial basis” and called on Gen Suchinda “ to immediately withdraw the charges against Sulak.” The group also said it would seek the cancellation or postponement

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

1

of the upcoming World Bank conference in Bangkok if charges are pressed against Sulak. Al also expressed concern about reports that there are fears Sulak may be “ill-treated if he is detained by the military.” There was a report that Sulak had quietly flown to Germany shortly after he delivered a lecture at Thammasat University on Sept. 6. Internationally well-known, Sulak had been invited to deliver lectures regarding Buddhism and human rights issues in several countries around the world. Sulak is scheduled to give a speech in England on Oct. 2. It is not clear whether he intended to leave Thailand for fear of the military's persecution. Sulak reportedly said earlier that he would never flee the country and vowed to fight the case in court. The arrest warrant for Sulak was issued on Sept. 13 after Gen. Suchinda lodged a complaint with police alleging that Sulak on Aug. 22 made defamatory comments against him and the monarch during a political debate at Thammasat University. The complaint alleged that during a debate on “Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council : Tragedy in Thai Society”, Sulak's comments of proposed legal amendments to the new constitution were insulting to the monarchy. It charged that Sulak also accused the military of being a spoiler of democracy and alleged that Suchinda and Supreme Commander Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong had visited Burma to seek “logging concessions” and learn lessons about staging coups from the Burmese junta. Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun said yesterday everybody can express their opinion, but there should be a limit. Anand said, however, that Sulak's case would be handled according to judicial processes. “Khun Sulak is my friend and 1 respect him personally,” said Anand seriously. In an interview with the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) recently, Sulak said he would like to surrender himself to police but feared possible persecution from some figures with a “dark influence”. The Nation 21 September 1991 JAPANESE GROUP WARNS OVER RIGHTS A Japanese Buddhist group yesterday expressed grave concern for basic human rights in Thailand after arrest warrants were issued for wellknown social critic Sulak Sivaraksa and environmentalist monk Phra Prachak. Ina message addressed to National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) deputy leader Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, dated yesterday, the International Network of Engaged Buddhists— Japan, warned that if basic human rights were violated, it would urge Tokyo to review its relations with

8

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Thailand. “ As your government violates the basic human rights of respectable Buddhists by arresting Mr. Sulak and Phra Prachak, we are ready to ask our government to seriously reconsider our relations with Thailand, ’’ the letter said. An arrest warrant was issued for Mr. Sulak following a speech at Thammasat University on August 22, when he evaluated six months in poweroftheNPKCafterthe military takeover oftheChatichaiChoonhavan administration last February. Mr. Sulak was accused of defaming the military through statements claiming close relations with the Burmese military junta and of lesemajeste. He has been in hiding since the warrant was issued. The warrant for Phra Prachak followed his attempt to help protect villagers in Buri Ram province from eviction from a national forest reserve. The same Buddhist group had earlier written to Japanese Emperor Akihito urging him to postpone his scheduled visit to Thailand on September 26 until democratic elections are held in the country as promised by the NPKC. The Thai Coordinating Group for Religions in Society, and the Coalition for Peace and Development, the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development, the Coordinating Committee for Rural Development, and Amnesty International, Thailand, also co-signed the letter to the emperor. Concerning Mr. Sulak, Emperor Akihito was told that “this kind of harassment against such a leading public figure and social reformer is a message to the Thai people that any such open criticism of the NPKC will not be tolerated and furthermore will be met with forcible silencing.” The letter also stated that “in the past weeks, Thai people have witnessed the arrest of Phra Prachak, violence against resistant villagers and the forced relocation of villages. “Once again, this violence by the NPKC against itsown people, the arrest of religious authorities, and the silencing of all criticisms, marks a disturbing precedent in the provisional rule of the NPKC,” the letter said. All groups also stated in their letter to the emperor that they did not urge Japan to interfere in the internal affairs of Thailand. “ W e simply ask that as a nation of considerable power and influence, not only within the region but in the world, we think you can make a powerful statement to this regime by postponing your visit to Thailand until they fulfil their promise to the Thai people by restoring an honest and legitimate government .” “ I f not for the people of Thailand, then for your own reputation as one of the world's leading democracies, we hope you will make the ethical

Press Cuttings from Bangkok choice to postpone your visit to Thailand until democracy is restored to this nation.” Meanwhile, in an open letter also addressed to Gen. Suchinda, the California-based Buddhist Peace Fellowship said it found the charges against Mr. Sulak “without any substantial basis.” The group also called for the immediate withdrawal of both the charges against Mr. Sulak and Phra Prachak, warning that it would do its utmost to see that the scheduled World Bank and International Monetary Fund meeting in Bangkok next month be cancelled or postponed. Meanwhile Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun, commenting on criticism lodged against Thailand by Amnesty International concerning Mr. Sulak's case, said that these instances (comments and criticisms ) occur regularly. The criticisms can't be helped, Mr. Anand said. He said that each individual had the right to express their opinion but views must be expressed within the limits of the law. The prime minister said he still did not know all the details of allegations against Mr. Sulak. Mr. Anand said Mr. Sulak is a friend who he “ likes and respects” but that the issue is a matter for the judicial process. The Bangkok Post 21 Sept. 1991 GROUPS : AXE CHARGES OR FACE DISRUPTION Overseas Buddhist and human rights groups have threatened to disrupt the World Bank-IMF conference unless the Government and NPKC drop charges against Sulak Sivaraksa and Phra Prachak Kuttachitto. In letters to Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun and National Peace Keeping Council Vice-Chairman Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, the groups from the United States, Europe and Japan condemned the charges against social critic Sulak and the conservationist monk as acts of persecution and suppression of human rights. Many of the groups reportedly threatened to mobilize campaigns seeking the postponement or cancellation of the World Bank-IMF meeting in Bangkok unless all charges against the two were dropped. The letters, ail dated towards the end of last month, were also sent to the World Bank and other national leaders, including Japanese Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu. The following organizations sent letters: International Voluntary Services (Washington DC) Asia Watch (New York), Albert Einstein Institution (Massachusetts), International Fellowship of Reconciliation (Netherlands), Swedish PEN Centre, Quaker Peace & Service (London), International Network of Engaged Buddhists— Japan, Nonviolence International (Washington DC) , Japan Buddhist Council for Human Rights

10

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Issues, Parallax Press (California), Kanina Centre (Greenfield, Massachusetts) Buddhist Peace Fellowship (Berkeley), Fellowship of Reconciliation (New York), Buddhist Relief Mission (Japan) , Traprock Peace Centre (Massachusetts), Buddhist Cable News Network (Japan), Lehigh University 's Religious Studies Department (Pennsylvania) and the Osaka University Student Council. The letters cited details of the cases against Mr. Sulak and Phra Prachak and condemned what they said was a violation of human and democratic rights. The International Fellowshipof Reconciliation (Netherlands) said its members had read the transcript of Mr. Sulak's speech and believed “ h i s remarks are well within any normal standards protected by free speech. Prof. Sulak has the right - some would even argue, the obligation in a democracy - to voice his opinions.” It also said: “ Therecent arrest of the Venerable Phra Prachak and other community leaders, and the reports of violence against unarmed villagers make the international community wonder if this relocation is really voluntary or not.” The International NetworkofEngagedBuddhists-Japansaid in its letter to Japanese Prime Minister Kaifu: “Though theThai military junta announced that they would hold a national election early next year and return power to a democratically-elected government, suppression of freedom of speech and violation of other basic human rights by the Thai military junta in recent weeks make us doubt whether they really have any intention to return power to the people.” The Albert Einstein Institution (Massachusetts) threatened: “ I f you do not drop the charges against these men, we will do our best to have the World Bank postpone or cancel their meeting in Bangkok.” The Bangkok Post 3 October 1991 WANTED SOCIAL CRITIC TURNS UP IN SWEDEN Sulak Sivaraksa, one of the country's best known social activists who is wanted by police on charges of lese majeste and libel, has turned up in Sweden, Swedish officials told Agence France Presse yesterday . A Swedish Foreign Ministry official in Stockholm said Swedish officials met Sulak Sivaraksa but insisted that the question of political asylum had not been discussed. “ H e said he came to Sweden because of problems at home,” the official said. According to Swedish officials Sulak, who is believed to have made arrangements to give lectures in Europe, will be leaving Sweden for Britain and Germany shortly. Last month the international human rights group Amnesty Interna-

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

11

tional issued a statement expressing concern that Sulak might face mistreatment if detained by military. The Bangkok Post 4 October 1991 SULAK FEARED FOR SAFETY IF HE SURRENDERED Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa said he fled Thailand for Sweden because he was concerned for his safety if he turned himself to the authorities to face charges. In an interview with the BBC (Thai service) broadcast last night, Sulak said some of his friends had advised him not to surrender to the authorities and also warned him something unexpected might happen to him. “If something happened to me, they (the National Peace Keeping Council) might say they don't know anything about it. “Some people may say that I'm a famous person and a well-known figure and it is unlikely something might happen to me, but nobody knows,” he said. Sulak faces charges of lese majeste and defamation against NPKC deputy leader Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon arising from i lecture at Thammasat University marking six months since the Februar/ 23 military takeover. He stressed he is ready to fight the charges in court but not under current circumstances in which the power-holders could interfere in the country's judicial system. “ I f there is no interference in our country's judicial s/stem then I would go back and fight the case in court . But not now.” He said in the current political situation it is better for him to leave the country temporarily. Criticizing the NPKC for announcing that it would take strong action against anybody who stirs up trouble during the World BankInternational Monetary Fund meeting, Sulak said it is a statement by ‘hooligans’ who cannot stand opinions which differ from their own. Sulak said he had good intentions for the country, just like the NPKC which has much concern for the country and wants to resolve the issue of ‘rotten’ politicians but “they still have not done anything on the issue”. “They have had a chance to do it but they have not. I have warned them but they accused me of stirring up trouble.” He said he will have nothing to do with any incident that might occur in the country during his absence. The Bangkok Post 5 October 1991

12

When Loyalty Demands Dissent FROM THE COORDINATOR O F THE BUDDHIST PEACE FELLOWSHIP

12 JuJy 1992 Dear Sir, Thammasat University once refused to grant an honorary doctorate to its founder, Dr. Pridi Banomyong. But many years later, in 1992 - the 60th anniversary of Thai democracy- Thammasat redeemed itself by offering an honorary degree in Political Science to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the brave leader of free Burma. For the first time a Thai university has acknowledged openly that it supports moral courage, human rights and democracy in Burma, issuing a direct insult to Burma's military junta, SLORC. Indeed, the university decided this while the NPKC was still powerful in Thailand. Hence it should even be more praised for its moral courage, appropriate to Thammasat - t h e University of Moral and Political Sciences. In Thailand, Big Su - the former Prime Minister and Army Commander-in-Chief - is still at large, by courtesy of royal amnesty, while in Rangoon, Suu is still under house arrest after three years of isolation. The Thai government would do well to follow Thammasat's example, and support freedom and human rights in its own country that claims a long history of independence and a sixty year democratic tradition. The longer Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa is not allowed to return home, the more his position resembles that Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma. The Thai government, with all its public relations touting foreign tourism and investment, will be more and more equated with the dictatorial regime of Burma. Human rights and freedom of expression are the basis for a democratic regime. Well- meaning technocrats and general elections are just not enough. If the king and the administration don't encourage open discussion and full participation in government, despite the best will in the world, such a regime will always fail. We know that in Thailand no one is allowed to speak openly about royalty and the military. Thebloodyeventsof May resulted directly from abuses of power by few top military leaders. Had these men been accountable to the people, today we would have Thai people living in dignity, not a wounded state within a state. To preserve the monarchy, no one should be allowed to use the throne for their own political benefit. The monarchy must be accountable to the people, and open disagreement with His Majesty should be encouraged. We soon hope to hear Sulak Sivaraksa in his own land, one

Press Cuttings from Bangkok voice among many, speaking freely in a democratic Thailand. Yours sincerely, Alan Senauke Berkeley, California from Seeds of Peace Vol.8 No.3 September-December 2535(1992) GROUP PETITIONS ANAND TO WITHDRAW SULAK CHARGE A Group of Thais based in Germany have petitioned Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun to withdraw the lese majeste charge against wellknown social critic Sulak Sivaraksa. In a letter dated August 12 to the Prime Minister the group, which calls itself the Confederation of Thai Democracy in Germany, defended Sulak, saying he is truly dedicated to the country and loyal to the monarchy. He is also a rare social thinker and critic who has the courage to speak his mind in a straightforward manner. The group contended that the charge brought against Sulak defied the basic principle of the rule of law. The lese majeste charge was lodged against Sulak by former Supreme Commander and Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon last year following a speech made by the critic at Thammasat University on the topic “Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council: A Tragedy in Thai Society.” Defamation charges were also brought by Gen Suchinda against Sulak, who alleged that the general had sought logging concessions from the Burmese military junta and sought advice from Burma's strongman Gen Saw Maung on how to stage a coup. The Confederation of Thai Democracy in Germany noted that while the arrest warrant against Sulak, who spoke out of good faith, is still in force, an amnesty decree was promulgated absolving those responsible for the bloody military crackdown on pro-democracy protesters last May. The group urged the Prime Minister to take steps to withdraw the charge against Sulak so that he could return home “as an innocent and be free from intimidation by an illegitimate force.” Mr. Sulak left for Sweden shortly after the charges were brought against him, saying that his life would not be safe if he turned himself in to face the charges. He is currently in Seattle, the United States. A family source said yesterday the Prime Minister had already instructed legal experts to study the lese majeste case and was told that the charge could not be withdrawn. Mr. Sulak, however, can return to Thailand if he wishes but he will have to stand trial, said the source. The Bangkok Post 16 August 1992

14

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

PROSECUTORS SEEK ARREST WARRANT FOR CRITIC SULAK Social critic and academic Sulak Sivaraksa is being prosecuted by the Office of the Supreme Attorney on charges of lese majeste and libel, according to a reliable source. The Office also told the police to issue a nationwide warrant for the arrest of Mr. Sulak who fled arrest when sought by Chana Songkharm police for questioning. The prosecution was ordered last week on a recommendation made last year to Chana Songkhram police. The Army secretary at the time, Maj.-Gen. Anusorn Krisanaserani, and Lt.-Col. Suksan Singhadej, a military judicial officer, on September 2 last year lodged a complaint with Chana Songkhram police against Mr. Sulak. They alleged that Mr. Sulak, during a panel discussion on “Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council: A Tragedy of Thai Society”, held at Thammasat University on August 22 last year made a lese majeste remark and accused the military of being plagued with corruption. Police Chief Gen. Sawasdi Amornvivat told police to investigate the allegation amid reports that Mr. Sulak had fled abroad. On October 4 last year, BBC radio broadcast an interview with Mr. Sulak in Sweden. He said he was warned by well-wishers not to surrender to the police because he might “go missing” the same way as labour leader Thanong Pho-arn. The Bangkok Post 23 August 1992 JUDGES' ISSUE DESERVEDLY CONTROVERSIAL SIR: This issue of the judges versus the former Prime Minister on the last royal decree before Mr. Anand Panyarachun left office is deservedly controversial. It may help some of your readers to read the following quotations: The first is from Leonard Woolfs Downhill AllThe Way. You must realise that Woolf started his career in Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon). As a British colonial administrator, he had to be a magistrate too. This is what he said in his memoirs: “ 1 have always felt that the occupational disease of judges is cruelty, sadistic self-righteousness, and the higher the judge the more criminal he tends to become. It is one more example of the absolute corruption of absolute power. One rarely sees in the faces of less exalted persons the sullen savagery of so many High Court judge faces. Their judgments, obiter dicta, and sentences too often show that the cruel arrogance of the face only reflects the pitiless malevolence of the soul”. (p.136)

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

15

Then Woof turns to address judges directly: ‘ ‘The fascination to me consists largely in the curiously complicated state of mind into which you, as a judge, have to get if you are to be a good judge. “Your mind, like Caesar's Gaul, has to be divided into three parts and yet, like Gaul, maintains its unity: first your mind must work intellectually with great quickness and concentration upon the facts, for the first essential is that the judge should understand and interpret the facts, which are often connected with spheres of life and activities of which the judge has no previous experience... secondly, no one can be a good judge unless he can combine, with the quick intellectual understanding of facts, an initiative sensitivity to human witness and their evidence Often it is only by hearing and, as it were, feeling a witness that you can accurately interpret and access the value of his evidence... The third requisite of a good judge is, perhaps, in some way the most difficult - it is complete and unfailing impartially. Complacent prejudice is the occupational disease of judges. It can make the judge incapable of understanding and interpreting the facts, or judging the character of a witness and the value of his evidence. On the bench one has to be perpetually on one's guard against oneself, to prevent one's previous belief and prejudices interfering with one's acceptance or rejection of facts and arguments. But still more necessary is to consciously watch and thwart one's own instinctive prejudices for and against persons.” ( pp. 210-211). Now let us turn to Daniel and Philip Berrigan, the two American Jesuits who were imprisoned for destroying the draft card - not unlike our Phra Prajak who ordained the trees to preserve the forest. In this case the two Catholic priests tried to save those drafted to kill or to be killed in Vietnam. In The Trial of Catonsville Nine, Philip Berrigan has this to say: “Neither at the Custom House nor at Catonsville do I wish my actions reduced to a question of acquittal or conviction. Rather 1and all of us desire to communicate with the bench, with the prosecution, with our country. We have already made it clear our dissent runs counter to more than the war, which is but an instance. ...This trial is yet another. From those in power we have met little understanding, much silence, much scorn and punishment. We have been accused of arrogance. But what of the fantastic arrogance of our leaders, what of their crimes against the people, the poor, and the powerless? Still no court will try them, no jail will receive them. They live in righteousness. They will die in honor. We say to them: Lead us. Lead us injustice and there will be no need to break the law. Let the President do what his predecessors failed to do Let him obey the rich less and the poor more. Let him think less of the privileged and more of the poor ... Let lawmakers, judges and lawyers think less of the law, more of justice, less of legal ritual,

16

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

more of human rights... you men of power, you have told us that our system is reformable. Reform it then, and we will help with all our conviction and energy in jail or at oppression” Lastly, Daniel Berrigan addresses the judge directly: “Your Honor, we are having great difficulty in trying to adjust to the atmosphere of a court from which the world is excluded, and the events that brought us here are excluded deliberately by charge of the jury . Our moral passion was excluded. It is as though we were subject of an autopsy, were being dismembered by people who wondered whether or not we had a soul. We are sure that we have a soul, that got us in trouble. It is our concept of man. But our moral passion is launched from this court. It is as though the legal process were an autopsy. Your Honor, you spoke very movingly of your understanding of what it is to be a judge. 1 wish to ask whether or not reverence for the law does not also require a judge to interpret and adjust the law to the needs of people here and now. I believe that no tradition can remain a mere dead inheritance. It is a living inheritance which we must continue to offer to the living. So it may be possible, even though the law excludes certain important questions of conscience, to include them nonetheless, and thereby to bring the tradition to life again for the sake of the people,” (pp.1 14-1 15). The Bangkok Post 4 October 1 992 SULAK RETURNS HOME TO FIGHT LESE MAJESTE CHARGE Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, who has been in self-imposed exile since September last year, returned home yesterday to fight lese majeste and defamation charges. Upon arrival, he was whisked from Don Muang airport by police and handed over to the Office of the Supreme Attorney-General, where he was freed on 300,000 baht bail. “ I decided to come back to fight the charges because I believe the Chuan Leekphai Government, which was democratically elected, is different from the previous government, which was an instrument of the National Peace Keeping Council. “This is a good chance for me to confirm that I am a royalist and that 1 have been falsely accused by those in the NPKC who exercised power only in their own interest. The May crack-down proved their intentions,” he said. Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Pol. Maj.-Gen. Sophon Warachnond, head of the police team handling his case, led three other police officers to pick up Prof. Sulak when he stepped off the Thai Airways International flight that brought him from Germany. They took him to Chana Sogkhram police station without the knowledge of reporters waiting for his return. Police said they took Mr. Sulak to an undisclosed location to inform

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

17

him of the charges and have two witnesses identify him. Mr. Sulak denied the charges. The two witnesses were Pol. Lt.-Col. Taksin Puang-ngen and Pol. Sgt. Somdej Boonluan, who were at Thammasat University during Mr. Sulak's speech on August 22, 1991. The speech, “ S i x Months of the National Peace Keeping Council: The Regression of Thai Democracy,” was organised by the Student Federation of Thailand inopposition to the military junta which overthrew the Chatichai Choonhavan government in a coup d'etat on February 23, 1991. Former army chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon filed the charges against Mr. Sulak, and threats were reportedly made against his life. Mr. Sulak, accompanied by a German friend, arrived from Frankfurt on a THAI flight at 6.20 a.m. Waiting for him were members of his family and lawyer Thongbai Thongpao. He is to report on December 24 for arraignment in the Criminal Court. Prosecutor Sueb Thavornyoo said he had set December 24 for arraignment because he could not finish the prosecution statement yesterday. “ T h i s is a highly-charged case. The Supreme Attorney-General’s Office has to handle it carefully,” he said. Prof. Sulak was accused by the Special Branch Police of insulting the monarchy and others in the speech last August. He also allegedly accused the Prime Minister Suchinda and NPKC chairman Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong of visiting Burma to seek logging rights and advice on staging a coup from the State Law and Order Restoration Council in Rangoon. Mrs. Nilchawee, Mr. Sulak's wife , said her husband called her on Saturday afternoon from Frankfurt to confirm he was returning. She said he chose to return home yesterday because it was the 1 05th birthday of the late Phraya Anuman Rajadhon , or ‘ Sathirakoses’, a respected author. One of Mr. Sulak's close aides, Santisuk Sophonsiri, said most of Mr. Sulak's relatives and aides had no knowledge of his return. He said Mr. Sulak's return would benefit nongovernmental organizations, who need advice from respected people. Mr. Sulak said he would continue his charity work, but his lawyer, Thongbai, had told him to keep away from controversial issues. “ He is legally free to speak or write, but if there is another legal case he would be arrested again,” Mr. Thongbai said. Amnesty International, the London-based human rights organization, issued a statement last week saying it considered the charge against Mr. Sulak a violation of his right to freedom of speech. It said that if he is arrested or convicted on these charges it would consider him to be a prisoner of conscience. The Bangkok Post 15 December 1992

18

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

FRIENDS STAND BY SULAK AS HE RETURNS Sulak Sivaraksa is assured a Christmas Eve like no one else as he faces charges of defamation and lese majeste. As most people are getting into a festive mood on Christmas Eve, controversial social critic Sulak Sivaraksa will find himself in court. He will be answering charges of defamation and lese majeste filed against him by Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon in September last year while he was the de facto head of the National Peace Keeping Council. The general charged Sulak with making slanderous remarks against him and the monarchy while delivering a speech at Thammasat University on “Six Months of the National Peace Keeping Council: A Tragedy in Thai Society.” Sulak disappeared soon afterwards and later surfaced in Sweden in an apparently self-imposed exile to escape arrest. He then went on a lecture circuit in several European countries and the United States. He returned a week ago to fight the charges, citing a more favourable political atmosphere now that the NPKC had exited in disgrace and a democratically elected government is in power. Well-known human rights lawyer Thongbai Thongpao will represent him in court. Last Saturday, former Public Health Minister Dr. Sem Pringpuangkaew led some 5 0 well-wishers to welcome him in the traditional Bai Sri Soo Kwan ceremony at Wongsanit Ashram, a retreat for social activists near Nakhon Nayok. “1 know Khun Sulak to be very loyal to the Royal Family. I'm still puzzled over how this thing could have happened,” said Dr. Sem, referring to the legal wrangle, in a speech before the ceremony began. “ H e is a historian and what he writes or speaks about usually is very useful,” Dr. Sem said. But, he added, Sulak at times might not have thought thoroughly enough about what he was saying while making speeches, and thus may have committed an error in judgment. Noting that it is important to consider the context and the speaker's intention to judge the content, Dr. Sem observed that Sulak's intention “probably was not a vicious one.” He cautioned Sulak to be fully self-aware when writi ng and making speeches in the future. “ I hope that this will be the last time that you have to suffer this karma,” Dr. Sem said, directly addressing Sulak. Having ended his speech, Dr. Sem began the ceremony by tying a white thread around Sulak's wrist while giving him blessings. A m o n g the well-wishers were poet laureates Angkhan Kanlayanaphong and Naowarat Phongphaiboon; Pibhop Dhongchai, Secretary of the Foundation ForChildren; ‘slum angel’ Prateep UngsongthamHata; painter and story-teller Teprsiri Sooksopha; political scientist Aphichai Phanthasen; and literary critic Duangmon Jitjamnong. The Bangkok Post 23 December 1992

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

19

SULAK'S ILL HEALTH POSTPONES HEARING Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa’s ill health yesterday earned him a postponement of preliminary court proceedings on a charge of lesemajeste. Public prosecutor Sueb Tavornyu said Sulak's wife Nilchawee and his lawyer Thongbai yesterday submitted a doctor's letter certifying to his bad health. The preliminary hearing had been rescheduled for March 8, hesaid. Sulak is facing lesemajeste and defamation charges filed by former army chief Suchinda Kraprayoon after he delivered a political lecture entitled “ S i x Monthsofthe National Peace Keeping Council: A Tragedy in Thai Society” at Thammasat University in August 1991, six months after the Feb. 23, 1991 coup. He returned from a one-year political exile abroad late last year to fight the case in court. The Nation 23 January 1993 SULAK APPEARS IN COURT ON LESE MAJESTE CHARGE The public prosecutor yesterday formally charged social critic Sulak Sivaraksa in the Criminal Court with insulting the monarchy and defaming the Feb. 23 coup-makers. The 60-year-old activist was immediately released on Bt. 100,000 bail and is scheduled to attend the first hearing on April 8 when state witnesses will testify. The prosecutor, Silp Tangpriyanon, charged that Sulak had made defamatory comments against His Majesty the King during a lecture at Thammasat University on Aug. 22,1991. Among other things, Sulak allegedly said during the lecture that Chulalongkorn University students were too obsessed with the commencement ceremony, Silp told the court. H.M. the King usually presides over the ceremony. Sulak also allegedly said that members of the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) as the coup-makers called themselves, were involved in corruption involving arms-purchase kickbacks from China and had vested interests in associating with the Burmese military junta, according to the suit. It quoted Sulak as saying that one of the key coup-makers, Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, had visited Burma on occasion to conduct business with the Burmese military junta. Sulak went into self-imposed exile in Europe when the charge was initially brought against him in 1991 by then Prime Minister Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon. Sulak returned to Thailand in December after the democratically elected Chuan government had been in office for about three months. He

20

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

surrendered to police on Dec. 14, saying he was sure he would get a fair trial under the Chuan Government. The case came to court a day after Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai said Sulak had pleaded with the government to ask the public prosecutors to drop the lese majeste charges. Chuan said on Sunday that he rejected Sulak's request because he had no authority to interfere with the prosecution. Sulak yesterday would not comment on Chuan's comments but on Sunday he denied that he had ever made the plea for the government's intervention in the case. Sulak's lawyer, Thongbai Thongpao yesterday criticized the Office of the Attorney General for having not ordered a new investigation into the case as called for by the suspect. Thongbai said Sulak wanted the investigators to listen to testimony from witnesses on his side before wrapping up the investigation of the case and passing it on to the Attorney General's office. But Sueb Thawornyoo, chief of the criminal division of the Attorney General's Office, said police had already provided enough evidence and witnesses to prosecute Sulak. About 200 people, including student activists, members of some non-governmental organizations, saffron-robed monks and nuns in white arrived at the court earlier to wait for Sulak. The supporters put garlands on him when he emerged from the court. The controversial monk, Phra Prachak Khuttajitto, was among those who gathered to show moral support for Sulak. Phra Prachak, who won praise from environmentalists for his efforts to help protect forests, has himself faced three court sentences for forest encroachment and leading villagers to resist authorities relocation attempts. Sulak thanked the human-rights activists for their support. The social critic told the group that there are still many laws in Thailand which restrict freedom. Nobel Peace Prizewinner Mairead Maguire on March 5 nominated Sulak for the Nobel award, citing his “dedication to nonviolence and truth” in the quest for social and political change. Maguire was one of the Nobel Laureates who visited Thailand recently to campaign for the release of Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. The Nation 9 March 1993

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

21

SULAK CHARGED IN LESE MAJESTE CASE Social activist Sulak Sivaraksa yesterday was formally charged in the Criminal Court with lese majeste and defamation of a former military leader. The social critic was released on 100,000-baht bail. Prime Minister Chuan Leekphai said on Sunday that he has no authority to intervene in the judicial process over the lese majeste charge. Mr. Sulak, 60, accompanied by human rights lawyer Thongbai Thongpao, arrived at the court to hear the formal charges at about 10 a.m. The white-haired social activist showed up in a simple country folk outfit. At the court to give Sulak moral support were some 100 people, including Buddhist monks-from Nepal, Japan, Tibet, India and Bangladesh, representatives of the Confederation for Democracy and the Campaign for Democracy, and observers from human rights organizations. According to the lawsuit filed by prosecutor Miss Waraporn Tantiwong, Mr. Sulak made a remark, during a panel discussion on “Democracy and Coups” at Thammasat University on August 22, 1991, that was insulting to His Majesty the King. The court was told that Mr. Sulak in effect allegedly said that. we are all equal in a democratic society, and that certain ways of showing respect to the monarchy are out of place. The social critic reportedly said he disagreed with graduation ceremonies involving the graduates' kneeling and prostrating as has been a practice at all local universities, the court was told. The lawsuit said in reality there are no such practices at Chulalongkorn University's graduation ceremony. “ M r . Sulak's remark concerning the 1946-1947 coup event was also said to be damaging to His Majesty,” claimed the lawsuit. In another lawsuit, Mr. Sulak was charged with defamation involving his allegation that Gen Sunthorn Kongsompong and Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon, then NPKC leaders, had seized power on February 23, 1991 for self-interest. The embattled activist also allegedly claimed the two former Army leaders had made over ten million baht through irregular means, including illegal arms purchases. Accordingto the lawsuit, the critic alleged that the two former junta leaders had been on irregular NPKC payrolls. Accused of lese majeste by Gen Suchinda, Mr. Sulak went into self-exile in Europe. The social critic said upon his return in December that he believed he would get a fair trial under the Chuan Leekpai Government. Mr. Sulak said he has never asked Premier Chuan to intervene in

22

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

the judicial process on his behalf. However, he said he is disappointed with the Government's failure to investigate the rationale of the lawsuit against him. Previous lese majeste charges against Mr. Sulak in 1984 were dropped. Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire has nominated Mr. Sulak for the Nobel award, citing his “dedication to a nonviolent pursuit of peace and truth and for his advocation for social and political changes” Mr. Thongbai, Mr. Sulak's lawyer, said the lese majeste charge carried a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment; the lesser defamation charge two years. Mr. Sulak, freed on bail, said1: “ I am grateful for all the encouragement I have received from humanitarians and, particularly, for the Nobel Peace Prize nomination.” The London-based human rights group Amnesty International has said the 60-year-old Sulak would be considered a prisoner of conscience” if jailed. Another human rights group, Asia Watch, has also appealed to Thai authorities to drop the charges against Mr. Sulak. Prime Minister Chuan said Mr. Sulak has requested in writing that the charges against him be dropped. Premier Chuan said he has no authority to interfere in the judicial process. The Bangkok Post 9 March 1993 SEARCHING QUESTIONS ON THAI ART AT BIRTHDAY BASH Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, turns 60 on March 19. Friends and adherents are to hold a seminar to mark his birthday at the small auditorium, Thammasat University. Prof. Saneh Chamarik will give a speech at 9:15 a.m., followed by a poetry reading from Angkhan Kanlayanaphong and Dusadee Banomyong Boontasanakul. A panel discussion on “Intellectuals of Siam” will take place at 10a.m. with Nithi Aiewsriwong, Suchart Sawatsri, PongSengking, and Kasian Techapira as speakers, and Dr. Chanvit Kasetsiri as moderator. The afternoon session will begin with a speech by Dr. Praves Wasi at 1 p.m., followed by poetry from Naowarat Pongpaibul. At 1:30 p.m., Damrong Wong-uparaj, Wiroj Srisuro, Choltira Satayawatana, Sumet Junisai na Ayutthaya, and Suchit Wongtes will discuss “Thai Art and Culture: Unique or Ugly?” with Chermasak Pinthong as moderator. Wrapping the day-long seminar will be a lecture on “Buddhism and Sustainable Development” by Phra Depvedi at 3:30 p.m.. The Bangkok Post 15 March 1993.

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

23

APPRAISING THE IVORY TOWER Like that mythological figure Prometheus, who brought fire for the human race, the elite members of a’ society - the intelligentsia - are supposed to lead, or supply the catalyst for changes for the better. At a time when the Thai ivory tower seems silent, it is worth asking if Thai intellectuals have fulfilled the role they are supposed to play. Has society, in turn, acted in appreciation of their contributions? “The efficiency of intellectualscan be gauged from their ability to bring into society's focus critical issues, problems, questions, or answers, ’’ says AcharnNithi lawsriwong, a lecturer from Chiang Mai University and a panelist in a discussion on “The Efficiency of Thai Intellectuals”, held to mark the 60th Birthday of social activist Sulak Sivaraksa. Sulak, who is defending lese majeste and defamation charges brought against him by the disgraced Suchinda Kraprayoon, is founding editor of Sankhomsart Parithas, a magazine which provided a unique arena for exchange of opinions on politics, society, and culture, an unprecedented opportunity at its - and also this - time. The magazine gave birth to numerous young critics and writers who are at the forefront as intellectuals today. The publication, according to Dr. Charnwit Kasetsiri, Thammasat University Dean of Faculty of Liberal Art, was a melting pot of all intellectuals during that period and another option apart from reading Sayam Rat newspaper” Acharn Nithi says that overall, Thai intellectuals are performing better, more efficiently due to changes in society and culture. “From the time of Sangkhomsat Parithas till now, there is a change in the ‘customers’ of intellectuals. There is an expansion of the middle class and an increase in people's education and income”, said Acharn Nithi. More importantly, he added, Thai people, educated or not, are more unified in the sense that they now read the same books, watch the same news, and consume the same products. The more unified society enlarges the arena for intellectuals, enablingthem to appeal to more “customers”, he said. The burgeoning media and the enthusiasm both of intellectuals themselves and society in general to learn from various sources of knowledge and wisdom, also contribute greatly to the changing face of the society. “ W e tend to reap knowledge from sources we never thought of as existing, such as Buddhism and folk wisdom. A diversity of knowledge, which is also a trend in the Western world - inevitably influencing the thinking of Thai intellectuals- will reduce social domination by a certain way of thinking , ” said Acharn Nithi. Political freedom is another factor that enables intellectuals to

24

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

consummate their role. “Thai people have higher tolerance of differences of opinion. People can attack or question beliefs of institutions which have long been established in Thai society - not painlessly of course” said the Acharn, referring to the shooting of pro-democracy students during the October 6 uprising. Fertile ground for an intellectual renaissance lies in the fact that Thai society has followed the plans of the National Economic and Social Development Board and been led to an impasse, said Acharn Nithi. “People begin to question if being export-dependent is their ultimate goal in life. They begin to question if what is called ‘development’ is what they really want.” Regarding the calibre of today's Thai intellectuals compared to those of the post-uprising era, Acharn Nithi says it is difficult to measure personal capabilities unless it is on a case-by-case basis. However, he points out that today's intelligentsia is less familiar with Thai culture, especially that of villagers. “The ability of these intellectuals to communicate with villagers is not as good as with those in the 1960s. Look at the use of language, for example: there are intellectuals of the old days who can make a point equally appealing to both city and rural people. That quality is rarely found in today's intellectuals” Acharn Nithi adds that such familiarity with culture is an important tool, though in itself it is a two-edged sword which can be abused by those who manage to master it. Dr. Kasian Techapira, a political science lecturer at Thammasat University, says there are two ways for Thai intellectuals to look at themselves. “ A s theorists, Thai intellectuals have never distinguished themselves. The outstanding characteristic of Thai intellectuals is that they are cultural politicians who merge local and foreign cultures, shore up what is called the Thai culture and use it as a bait for power for themselves o r their group,” said Dr. Kasian. The history of Thai society is marked by a fight for what he calls ‘Thainess’. Assuming that ‘Thainess’ is things that resist change, he said, the role of intellectual is simply to restore or reproduce the past, while any move for political change becomes the responsibility of the middle class. Th is class has evolved from the Western-educated bureaucrats like Khanaras who transformed the country into a democracy, to mobile phone carriers today. “After World War II, there was the birth of the first group of against-the-wave intellectuals who through poetry, song, and writing , imported ideology such as Marxism,” Dr. Kasian said, citing as an

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

25

example a book by the then leading leftist intellectual Jit Phumisak, Chom Na Sakdina Thai (The Face of Thai Feudalism.) “These intellectuals,” Dr. Kasian went on, “went abroad or into the forest after the rise of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat. Into this vacuum camt such intellectuals as Sulak Sivaraksa, whose role is to bring the ‘Thainess’ monopolized by the powers-that-be back to intellectuals and people.” Sulak'sSangkhomsatParithasandPajarayasarn magazines helped bring about a social consensus at a time of intellectual confusion, said the lecturer. As an editor of the magazines and a social critic, Sulak has been mixing discourses, bringing every school of thought - left or right, old or new-together. “Identifying himself with secondary thinking in every school of thought, Acharn Sulak is an antithesis of Thai society. You may ask where is the synthesis? Acharn Sulak is not the synthesis. Thai society is lacking a consensus to link up different groups. It lacks a vision,” said Dr. Kasian. Commenting on the charges brought against Sulak, Dr. Kasian says that it is sad to see that, while the country badly needs a dialectic, a discourse mixer providing a junction for people to exchange opinions, the one person who has given the best service is under attack. “ I f this is not intellectual suicide, what else can it be called?” The Bangkok Post -OUTLOOK- 24 March 1993 MAGUIRE ' S EFFORTS BRING SULAK INTO THE SPOTLIGHT The Irish woman who is backing Sulak Sivaraksa for the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize shares various priorities with the embattled Thai intellectual, Sandy Barron reports. As Sulak Sivaraksa waits out the hot season before going on trial in June on lese majeste charges, international interest in the controversial social critic is on the increase. That's due in part to the efforts of Mairead Maguire, the Irish woman behind Sulak's recent nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. The Belfast-based activist was winner of the Peace Prize in 1976 and is still a major figure in international peace circles. Maguire, a devout Catholic with an interest in ecumenics, and Buddhist Sulak share many of the same priorities. Among the reasons she lists out for backing the Thai intellectual for the 1994 prize are counted Sulak's efforts to promote non-violent social change, socially conscious religion and his practical support for grass-roots groups. Sulak's prodigious output - more than a hundred books on culture, development, Buddhism, non-violence and humanitarian principles - is also listed. Although optimistic that Sulak will remain a free man after June,

26

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Maguire says in a recent report on her Nobel-related activities that plans are nevertheless being laid now in the event of his imprisonment. If he is jailed, international human rights groups and individuals intend to activate a campaign designating him a prisoner of conscience and putting pressure on the Thai authorities for his release, she said. Maguire's interest i n Sulak goes back a number of years and re fleets a growing international dimension to her work - in the last six months engagements have taken her to Holland, Geneva, the United States, and in February she came to Thailand. On that occasion Maguire, along with other Nobel winners, including the Dalai Lama, was part of a widely-publicized mission campaigning for the release of Burma dissident Aung San Suu Kyi, as well as the release of political prisoners and the restoration of democracy in Burma. The trip was organized by Oscar Arias with the Centre of Human Rights and Democratic Development in Quebec, and the Nobelists involved have since pledged to continue to work on the Burma issue on the international scene. In Geneva after visiting refugees on the Thai - Burma border, Maguire, along with Oscar Arias, Adolfo Perez Esquival, Rigoberta Menchu, Betty Williams and Elie Wiesel presented the Nobelists' recommendations on Burma to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. Maguire went on to attend a seminar on Burma held by the SwissBurma group, and on a March visit to the United States she held meetings on the country with a number of US congressmen as well as UN SecretaryGeneral Bourtros Boutros-Ghali. Her interest in Asian issues is also reflected in the recent work carried out with voluntary groups in Dublin campaigning on human rights problems in Tibet and East Timor. At aJanuary conference of minority peoples around the world in the Hague in Holland, she said she felt it was “important to speak and emphasize non-violence, as many of these groups are coming out of situations so unjust and cruel (Tibet, East Timor, etc.) it is important to help those who are using non-violent means to bring about change.” For this reason, she said, she had nominated for next year's Reebok Human Rights Award a young East Timor man who organized peaceful protests in his country and is now in exile, unable to return to his wife and child. One of last year's Reebok winners was Martin O'Brien of the Belfast-basedCommitteeon the Administration of Justice (CAJ), a human rights group Maguire helped found in the early 1 990s after nearly 1 0 years of the Northern Ireland “ T r o u b l e s ” . That was five years after Maguire's traumatic entry onto the world peace scene in 1976, as the aunt of three children killed by an IRA getaway

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

27

car in Belfast. Horror at that event sparked the formation of the Peace People led by Maguire, Betty Williams and Ciaran McKeown. Within weeks of its founding more than 100,000 people, many of them women, had marched in Belfast, Derry and London demanding an end to the violence. The Peace People did not, of course, succeed in halting the bloodshed in Northern Ireland and over the years it has shed its large-scale public activities in favour of a quieter approach. Core groups now work in both Catholic and Protestant communities on reconciliation, conflict resolution, prisoners' rights and on projects that bring children of both communities together. After more than 15 years working with the Peace People in grim Northern Ireland as well as around the world, Maguire still sees herself as a learner and is, for example, a member of a Belfast group studying nonviolence and social change. Later this month, Maguire visits Spain on Nobel-related work and in May the globe-trotting activist takes her campaigns on behalf of Sulak, Burma and East Timor to Switzerland and Austria. The Nation 16 April 1993 SULAK CALLS FOR REINVESTIGATION O F HIS CASE Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, who is facing a lese majeste and defamation case filed by former army chief Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, yesterday asked the court to reinvestigate the case against him. Human rights lawyer Thongbai Thongpao, who is representing Mr. Sulak, said that the case against Mr. Sulak was prepared when the National Peace Keeping Council was in power after staging a coup d'etat and the investigation in the case was not undertaken freely and was unfair to the defendant. The court accepted the appeal of Mr. Sulak and will consider it at the next hearing of the prosecution witness on June 2. Mr. Thongbai asked for a postponement of the first hearing of the prosecution witness yesterday since he was also the lawyer of Mr. Manoon Roopkachorn, who is facing charges of masterminding a plot to assassinate national figures, and Mr. Manoon's hearing was also scheduled for yesterday. The prosecutor of the Sulak case had no objections and scheduled the next hearing of Mr. Sulak's case for June 2 and 17. About 20 students and university lecturers, as well as seven monks, turned up at the Criminal Court to give Mr. Sulak moral support. Supreme Command Information Office Director Lt.-Gen. Anusorn Krisanaseranee was also on hand to hear the court deliberations. The case against Mr. Sulak was filed after the social critic, during

28

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

a discussion at Thammasat University, criticised the now defunct NPKC which had staged a coup to oust an elected government on February 23, 1991. Gen. Suchinda was NPKC deputy leader and Army chief at the time. Mr. Sulak fled overseas reportedly because threats were being made against his life. He returned to face the charges in court at the end of last year following the ousting of the Suchinda government as a result of the May tragedy. The Bangkok Post 9 April 1993 OTHER HEROES NEED “FRIEND” TOO-SULAK The Friends of Anand group should extend its moral support to other “good people” in addition to former prime minister Anand Panyarachun who have contributed significantly to Thai society, social critic Sulak Sivaraksa aid yesterday. Sulak, who is standing trial on lesemajeste charges, said there were other people who had worked for the public good but had been largely ignored by members of the public, such as former MP Chalard Worachat. “Chalard Worachat, one of the most important protest leaders who helped the Thai people win back democracy, has not gotten the kind of moral support that Anand is getting” , Sulak said. A hunger strike led by Chalard to protest the rise of Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, a non-MP, to the prime ministership was one of the main rallying points that attracted thousands of pro-demonstration. The rallies culminated in bloodshed and the ouster of Suchinda last May. He said members of Thai society seemed to sympathize with and take more interest in the welfare of the rich and powerful while neglecting to show their concern for common people like Chalard. “Anand is one of the good people who significantly contributed to Thai society, but there are others who are still being ignored by the public,” Sulak said. Anand and three co-defendants - former Supreme Court chief justice Sawat Chotipanich, former justice minister Wichian Watankhun and former permanent secretary for justice Prasert Boonsri - are standing trial on charges of non-feasance in office. Anand and the co-defendants were accused by former Supreme Court judge Pravit Khamparat of neglecting to carry out their duties by not presenting a Judicial Commission's appointment of senior judges to H.M. the King for royal endorsement. The plaintiff, who reached the mandatory retirement age of 60 last September, said the defendants's alleged omission to perform their duties deprived him of an important promotion. The Criminal Court's acceptance of the charge against Anand has sparked public criticism of current leaders of the judiciary who were

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

29

regarded by some as being vengeful. The judicial leadership is dominated by members of a faction of judges who had engaged in a power struggle against the Anand administration, which had tried unsuccessfully to implement judicial reform. The Friends of Anand group, which has attracted almost 10,000 members, was formed to lend moral support to Anand. Among its founders are architect Sumet Jumsai and political science lecturer Sukhumbhand Paribattra. The Nation 9 April 1993 Berkeley 26 March 1993 To The Editor: Home again in California after four weeks in Thailand, I have some impressions to share with your readers. In early March I attended the fifth International Network of Engaged Buddhists conference at Wat Lakhouk in Damnoen Saduak. Following that 1 traveled north - first to Mae Hong Son, then to Mae Sai in the Golden Triangle - on a witness delegation to the Burmese border. I returned to Bangkok later in the month to meet with Sulak Sivaraksa and celebrate his sixtieth birthday and nomination for next year's Nobel Peace Prize. It was a busy time of joy and sorrow, vivid experiences of suffering, resistance and equanimity. Here are some images that stay with me. Sitting in the woods at Wat Lakhouk, with Phra Prachak Kuttajitto guiding a meditation on the interdependence of all life , Karenni children with swol len bellies at Camp 3 near Mae Hong Son- no food, no running water, no hope of return to their homes in Burma. Fourteen - year-old Shan girls in a Mae Sai brothel. In the shadow of AIDs, few of them will live to see thirty. The shining faces of girls at Mae Sai’s Daughters Education Project, rescued from being sold into prostitution. With education, self-awareness, and meaningful vocation, they face a brighter future. Newspaper photos of Generals Suchinda, Issarapong and their military ‘classmates’ playing golf, with no words of responsibility or remorse for the carnage of last May. Sulak Sivaraksa home from exile at last, poring over legal papers, meeting a steady stream of friends and visitors. The core teaching of Buddhism, dependent origination or patticca samuppada, reveals our world as an intricate web of life and action. Monks face jail as rural officials line their pockets and despoil the forest. Children sicken and die because a greedy SLORC regime plunders natural resources, wages war on its own peoples, and imprisons a nation. Bloodied generals frolic on the links while social philosophers must go to court for

30

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

telling the truth. Shakyamuni Buddha explained, “Because this is, that is; because this is not, that is not.’’ But his words are no justification for the status quo; our societies' balance can be found in countless ways for the betterment of all. Enlightened leadership cherishes the environment, saves the children, honors prophets, and puts away weapons. If the King and Prime Minister Chuan were to do such things they would deserve our highest praise and deepest recognition. The Nobel Prize would be too small an award. So I urgently ask of them the following requests: Drop all charges against Sulak Sivaraksa and set aside the convictions of Phra Prachak. End the empty policy of constructive engagement with SLORC's illegal regime in Burma. Hold the Generals of May responsible until every disappeared person is accounted for. Recognize the perfection of each child and prohibit Thailand's deadly and degrading flesh trade. I offer these suggestions with hope for the process of democracy and concern for Thailand's standing in the community of nations. Buddhism is a path of liberation, of freedom from the poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion. We Buddhists have a compelling responsibility to encourage those who rule and govern a Buddhist nation like Thailand. By standing up for all beings with courage and kindness like Phra Prachak, by speaking even uncomfortable truths like Sulak, we can help our leaders perfect the necessary and very human virtues of wisdom and compassion. In Peace & Dhamma, Alan Senauke National Coordinator Buddhist Peace Fellowship Seeds of Peace Vol.9 No.3 May-Aug. 2536(1993) BUDDHIST PEACE FELLOWSHIP New York Chapter 3 April 1993 Dear Editor, The King of Thailand has set up a foundation named after his father, Prince Mahidol of Songkhla, to promote public health in the world. This is indeed praiseworthy. Yet his subject, Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa, well known as a Royalist and Monarchist, is being charged with lese majeste, although his speech at Thammasat University, on August 22, 1991 , was simply a condemnation of the coup leaders who used the monarchy for their political ends. Those coup leaders later ordered the killing of the Thai people, in May,1992. It was only through the King's intervention that

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

31

peace and democracy prevailed. Yet the coup leaders who ordered the killings received royal amnesty, while Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa still stands trial. The longer this trial lasts, the more it will tarnish the image of the monarchy and country. Freedom of expression in Thailand will be threatened and people will doubt whether the present regime has any democratic substance. They will also question whether the present Thai government maintains the lese majeste law simply to silence opposition. Eight years ago, Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa was a victim of this law because of political rivalry between General Athit Kamlangek and General Prem Tinsulanada. His Majesty then ordered that the case be withdrawn. We wish that the King would show as much compassion for his subject, Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa, as he does by his concern for public health in the world, and we ask that the King would advise his government that the case of lese majeste against Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa be withdrawn. We ask the King to act magnanimously once more. Amy Krantz Seeds of Peace Vol.9 No.2 May-Aug. 2536(1993) SULAK LOSES FIRST ROUND IN COURT The Criminal Court yesterday rejected Sulak Sivaraksa's plea to reopen investigations into charges of lese majeste and defamation filed against him by former prime minister Suchinda Kraprayoon. After Sulak entered his plea of innocence, the Criminal Court began hearing the state's case against the prominent social critic. In his plea, Sulak said he had asked the court to review prosecution evidence, which he said was not substantial and prejudiced against him. Sulak said police had been unfair in their investigation in that they questioned one Somkiet Chansima, former president of the Students Union of Thammasat University, in the presence of soldiers from the Military Legal Experts Department, Ministry of Defence. Sulak said the witness might have been too afraid to speak the truth with the soldiers present. In fact, he pointed out under normal procedures, soldiers would be allowed to be present at any investigations only when soldiers were the accused. Moreover, the witness was asked leading questions to make him say that Sulak had committed lese majeste. The chief of the Criminal Court judges, Prachuap Patchanirattanakorn after considering Sulak's request, decided that a review of the case was not necessary because it had already been accepted by the court.

32

TVTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

Also, the Criminal Court could not review the case in which the public attorney was the prosecutor, according to Thai laws. The court could review only civil suits, the court said yesterday. Later, the court called the first prosecution witness, Lt. Gen. Anusorn Kritsanaserani, a former army secretary general, to the stand. Anusorn was Suchinda's representative in filing the lese majeste charge against Sulak at Chana Songkharm police station on Aug 30, 1991. The Nation 3 June 1993 CHULALONGKORN CITED FOR SULAK'S DEFENCE Social critic Sulak Sivaraksa, standing trial for alleged lese majeste, told the court yesterday his remarks against the traditional custom of kowtowing to Royal Family members were in line with King Chulalongkorn's reform attempts. Former army secretary Anusorn Krissanaserani appeared in the Cri minal Court yesterday as a witness for the prosecution i n the lese majeste suit filed by ex-prime minister Suchinda Kraprayoon. Anusorn faced questioning by Sulak's lawyer Thongbai Thongpao” during the hearing. In the court, Sulak, 60, presented a 1873 royal announcement by King Chulalongkorn that changed the traditional custom of kowtowing to the king to standing and saluting or bowing. Lt. Gen Anusorn, replying to Thongbai, said he had never known that was such an announcement, otherwise he would have complied with it long ago. Thongbai said Sulak simply wanted to convey in his lecture that those kowtowing during a royal audience did not comply with King Chulalongkorn's wish. Sulak, charged on March 8, allegedly said during a lecture at Thammasat University on Aug. 22, 1991, that Chulalongkorn University students were too obsessed with the commencement ceremony. H.M. the King usually presides over the event. Details of the lecture were not available. Thongbai told the court that Sulak, in mentioning Chulalongkorn students kowtowing to car tyres, was referring to freshmen welcoming party at which some students were forced to do so. He described the action as “inappropriate” Sulak did not therefore mean to refer to the royal family, he added. When the defence counsel asked if Sulak's remark during the lecture that “the nation is like a house and the military are like its white ants” meant that the military is the destroyer of democracy as charged, Anusorn remained silent.

Press Cuttings from Bangkok

33

The former army secretary lodged the complaint against Sulak on behalf of Suchinda at the Chana Songkharm Police Station in 1991 . Sulak, according to the lawsuit, also allegedly said that members of the National Peace Keeping Council, as the coup-makers called themselves, were involved in corruption accepting arms-purchase kickbacks from China, and had vested interests in associating with the Burmese military junta. The court yesterday adjourned until Aug 9, when Anusorn will again be examined by Thongbai. The court will also sit on Aug 13 and 17. Opas Boonlom The Nation 18 June 1993 The lawyer was in fact Vasant Panij, since Thongbai was attending the UN Human Rights meeting in Vienna.

COURT DELAYS HEARING OF SULAK CHARGES The Criminal Court yesterday postponed hearings on lese majeste and defamation charges filed by the Army against social critic Sulak Sivaraksa to August 17 and October 4 and 6. The third hearing on the two charges, set for yesterday, was cancelled because a plaintiffs witness, former Army Secretary Anusorn Krissanaseranee, had an official function and could not come to the court. A representative from the Geneva-based 1nternational Com mission of Jurists(ICJ) was in attendance at the resumption yesterday of the trial of Mr.Sulak. 1CJ representative Lim Hong Nian, a Malaysian solicitor, had been given permission by Thai authorities to attend the trial because the organisation was concerned about the case. Mr. Sulak, 60, a prominent human rights campaigner and social critic, is facing charges of lese majeste and defaming the military. The charges stem from remarks he made at a political debate at Thammasat University in August 1991 when the National Peace Keeping Council was in power. Mr. Sulak went into self-exile in Europe after the charges were filed, returning to Thailand last December. His trial began in March. The proceedings were adjourned yesterday after a prosecution witness, Armed Forces Information Office Director Lt-Gen. Anusorn Krissnaseranee, requested a postponement because of other duties. Lese majeste carries a maximum sentence of 15 years imprisonment, while the lesser charge of defaming the military carries two years. Mr. Sulak, who is also a respected Buddhist scholar, has been nominated for the Nobel peace prize by Mairead Maguire, a northern Irish peace activist who won the prize in 1976.— AFP Bangkok Post, 1 0 August 1993

When Loyalty Demands Dissent 34

Artist, Taweesak Uchugta none! , offered Sulak's portrait to him as a moral support before the Criminal Court on 17 June 1993.

II. Articles About and Interviews with Sulak Sivaraksa

The crown is of no party. Its apparent separation from business is that which removes it both from emnities and from desecration, which preserves its mystery, which enables it to combine the affection of conflicting parties-to be visible symbol of unity to those still so imperfectly educated to need a symbol. The fancy of the mass of men is incredibly weak; it can see nothing without a visible symbol, and there is much that it can scarcely make out with a symbol. Nobility is the symbol of mind. The English Constitution Walter Bagehot;1894

SULAK S1VARAKSA : TIRELESS TRUTH TELLER IN TROUBLE AGAIN One tends not to think of one's friends as refugees. That in itself helps to explain why the world crisis in which massive movements of peoples are driven from one region to another continues and grows more serious each year. “Refugee” is a faceless word . For those of us who live in industrialized countries, the term conjures up numbers of powerless people on the move, people we don't know. If, on the other hand, you meet someone, exchange ideas with him or her, share a meal and laugh together, that person becomes human, merits a space in your address book and a place in your life. If that person's safety is endangered, you rouse yourself and others to action in order to protect the one who has become your friend. This all seems very basic and yet it is the guiding principle of powerful international networks that cooperate to bring about change in, and sometimes even help to transform, repressive societies in the world today. Often the person who has become known to many is the spokesperson for a larger group, one who is willing to make himself or herself vulnerable by raising obvious but dangerous issues in countries where such practices are unacceptable. Sulak Sivaraksa is such a person. Professor Sulak is a rare combination of scholar, activist, social critic, writer, editor, teacher, even administrator - of the Thai Inter-Religious Commission on Development in Bangkok. Known in religious circles as the founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, Professor Sulak is an enthusiastic supporter of inter-religious dialogue. His fervent belief in speak >ut about injustice has landed him in jail more than once in Thailand. His public charges against the present Thai government have once again placed him in jeopardy. Thailand, or Siam, as Sulak prefers to call it (because Thai refers to one specific ethnic group and was an i rh posed name, whereas the ancient name Siam is general) has not had an elected government since February 1991 when forces in the military seized power in a bloodless coup. Immediately following the coup, Supreme Commander General Sunthorn Kongsompong and Army Chief General Suchinda Kraprayoon set up the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) as the ruling authority, abolished the 1978 Constitution, dissolved the Senate and House of Representatives, imposed martial law, banned political gatherings of more than five people, ordered newspapers to submit articles to the NPKC for pre-publication approval, ordered trade union leaders to report to them, and generally held the country in its grip. Since then, a provisional government has been installed with a new Constitution and restrictions have eased somewhat, at least superficially, but promised elections have yet to take place.

38

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

On August 22, 1991, to mark the six month anniversary of the coup, Sulak Sivaraksa delivered a lecture at Thammasat University in Bangkok. “ W h y , ” he asked, “did the coup in the Soviet Union fail in less than sixty hours, and why does the coup in Thailand show no sign of ending six months later?” He rebuked the Thai people for not being interested enough in democracy to claim their rights, but he blamed the military for brainwashing them into their state of powerlessness. “Those who have resisted the military-many of the leaders of the farmer's movements and labor unions - have been arrested and killed,” he said. Not one for mincing words, Sulak accused “Big S u ” (Army Chief Suchinda Kraprayoon)and “ B i g J o d ” (General Sunthorn Kongsompong) of having learned from the Burmese how to pull off a military coup. Calling the NPKC a dictatorship, he reviled the NPKC-appointed senators for being “more dictatorial than dictators because they are subservient to dictators.” He accused the NPKC of preparing “one of their own” to be the next prime minister so they can stay in charge, when and if elections are held, from behind the scenes. As a Thai expatriate living in Sweden , remarked, the Thai government has become nothing but “ a game for gangs.” In his social criticism, Sulak Sivaraksa does not tread lightly. He admits that he was influenced by his western education, as a youth in Wales and later as a law student in England. Before returning to Thailand to start a magazine and to work on development projectsand democracy-building, he worked at the BBC and taught at the London School of Oriental andAfrican Studies. He says of himself that while he is a staunch advocate of nonviolence and peaceful means, he believes his “words against the unjust powers need to be violent.” For, he says, “If we believe in social justice, bodhisattva - dharma, and the compassionate power of the Buddha, then we must be willing to be hurt and harassed. While they (the NPKC) violate the law, intrude into the forests, and manhandle the villagers, how can we be silent and submissive?” Sulak speaks out of the urgency of the moment in Southeast Asia when he asks, “How can I be silent while the Burmese students are being killed, refugees from Khmer, Laos and Vietnam are being oppressed and exploited? What about the increasing child labor and prostitution among our own people? The status of the clergy is also deteriorating, not to mention the decline of education and development.” He accused the Thai government of working in collusion with the much despised and feared Burmese SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) to destroy the forests through corrupt logging deals, and of displacing villagers. All of this has resulted in a catastrophic threat to the environment as well as taking a tremendous human toll on peasants who have lived in the region for thousands of years.

Articles and Interviews

39

Sulak closed his rousing speech to the university audience in praise of democracy. Students, for whom he has played a prophetic role for a few decades, continue to count on his leadership. He warned them that the price for being submissive and passive would be six more years of the NPKC. Chiding the Thais for being too submissive and not being interested enough in human rights, he predicted that Aung San Suu Kyi would receive the Nobel Peace Prize, just as she had received the Human Rights Award from the European Parliament, citing the need for Thais to find their moral courage. He encouraged his audience to speak out , to think, to write and to cooperate in bringing down the present government. In spite of Sulak' s notion that the Thai government would not take note of what he said, his words proved too inflammatory to be overlooked. A warrant for his arrest was filed on chargesoflesemajeste( offense against the crown) and defamation, charging him with criticism of the Army Chief and the National Peace Keeping Council leader, and lack of respect of the monarchy. In 1984 Sulak was arrested on similar charges. Supporters in Thailand say it was theoutcry from friends in the international community that helped significantly in gaining his release from a top security detention center where he was held for twelve days. Ten years earlier, Sulak was arrested in absentia when the army claimed his office was the headquarters of the communist party. He planned to turn himself in until he heard he wouldn't qualify for bail and the word spread that the General was making noises about not being held responsible for what might happen to Sulak in prison. Several months earlier, a union leader, Thanong Bho-aan, “disappeared” after warning the NPKC not to abuse its power and threatening to expose them at an international labor meeting he was to attend. In spite of his wife's pleas for an investigation into his whereabouts, Thanong has not been heard from since. Sulak decided to go underground rather than to face years taking his case through the courts. He took refuge in the German Embassy in Bangkok, then made his way to Laos and appeared in Sweden at the end of September, thanks to assistance from friends and colleagues. The wear and tear, both emotional and physical, had not dimmed his amazing vitality and zest for life. At a small dinner in a Stockholm restaurant, he held forth, somehow managing to get himself into lotus position on a stiff German settee. He was intensely serious when he described the plight of his friend, Phra Prachak, a Buddhist monk who was also forced underground for daring to speak in support of villagers and monks who were being driven from their homes and monasteries to make way for the government loggers. At other moments, Sulak exuded a spirit of joviality - and relief, to be able to catch a breath of freedom. It seems as if he looks forward to

40

WTien Loyalty Demands

Dissent

lecturing and traveling in Europe and the United States, having the opportunity to renew old ties and inform people about what is happening in Thailand. The Thai government was said to be wavering in its intention to pursue the charges. But Sulak had decided not to return until the case against him is dropped. As the evening grew late, he donned his dark green coat. “Here's a story.” he said. “When my friend Gunnar lost his luggage last winter in Thailand, I gave him my coat to wear home to Sweden . Now , when I had to run away, and winter is coming , here was my coat, waiting for me in Stockholm. You see the importance of international networks!” Virginia Baron Life & Peace Review , Sweden Vol.5 No.3 1991 . INTERVIEW WITH AJARN SULAK In January of this year, Sulak Sivaraksa visited Seattle, Washington, in the United States, and the University of Washington under the sponsorship of Prof. C.F. Keyes. The following are excerpts of an Interview with Prof. Keyes' son, Nick Keyes, who lives and works in Bangkok. NK. Did the event of the past six months come as a surprise to you? SS. Yes, they did. NK. Could you give us some details of the events leading up to your leaving the country last October? SS. Well, at first I didn't want to leave the country. I heard, however, that the Commander-in-Chief of the army was sending two army officers charging me on two counts - o n e against the King, and one against himself. At first I thought that I could fight the charges in court. Now, you see, there is a civilian court, not a military tribunal, so 1 felt I would have a good chance as I could appeal twice. However, people advised me that this would not be wise as many people in the army were opposed to me. People were afraid for my physical safety and thought I should leave the country. NK. How did you eventually leave Thailand? SS. I went first to Sweden because I did not need a visa to go there. From Sweden I was invited by Amnesty International to England, and then 1 was invited by the French Comite Catholique Centre la Faim et pour la Developpement (CCFD) to Paris. From there I went to the Irish School of Ecumenics in Dublin, Ireland. Then I was invited to visit quite a number of Christian organizations in Germany, in particular the Wolfgang Mozart

Articles and Interviews

41

University in Frankfurt, as well as to Norway to attend the Nobel Peace Prize honoring of Aung San Suu Kyi. So I was in Europe for almost two months visiting various countries before going to Honolulu and then, of course, coming here to Seattle. NK. When you actually left Thailand, what physical danger did you believe you were in, and why? SS. As 1 said earlier on, I was advised it was not wise to submit myself to the authorities because it had been learned through a very reliable source that 1 would be tortured. 1don't think the Commander-in-Chief of the army would want to do that, but perhaps people at the lower levels would have done so. I could not but be mindful of the way in which the leader of the labor people disappeared and many people believe that he died, either of torture or of maltreatment. 1 did not want to become a martyr or a hero. 1 did not want to die yet, or to be tortured! NK. You have been lecturing extensively in Europe since leaving Thailand. Could you tell us what you have been speaking about? SS. The topics have varied a great deal, depending on who invited me. For instance, in England 1 gave one lecture each at three different universities, namely Cambridge, Hull and London. Almost all of them dealt with Buddhism; sometimes they would be on Buddhism and politics, sometimes on Buddhism and the environment, and so on. 1 spoke on similar topics when 1 was in France, Sweden, Denmark and Germany; these were the issues that most universities were interested in. Then, of course, I happen to be involved with a lot of Burmese communities, so the Burmese also wanted me to talk on the subject of human rights in Burma, although sometimes I would also comment on human rights in Siam (or the lack of them). NK. This must have been a very stressful time for you. How have you and your family managed? SS. I think the main stress has been for my family and my co-workers. For myself, I would like to thank the Commander-in-Chief of the army for allowing me to enjoy myself abroad, because I am a man who always enjoys himself, you know. Without the arrest warrant I would have been suffering from the suffocating Bangkok weather and pollution, instead of which I have been able to enjoy myself in the cold weather of Europe. I have been able to teach at the East-West Center in Hawaii, and now 1 am visiting the Universities of Washington, British Columbia and so forth, so

42

IVTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

really I am having a wonderful time. And then, of course, on top of that I have had the chance to speak the truth about my beloved country. At home my voice would not be heard abroad in the way it can be here. For my family, of course, it is difficult, both being separated from me and the uncertainty of my being abroad and the question of when we might be able to be together again, but right now my wife is with me, which is a great consolation , and even my children may join me. Perhaps the Commanderin-Chief of the army or the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force would like to consider giving them free tickets so they can join me? After all, it is within their power to grant this. NK. Many of the comments you made in your speech at Thammasat University you have made before. Why do you think the powers-that-be decided to come down on you when they did? SS. 1 really do not know, but fear it is because they listen too much to those around them who show deference in hope of gaining favors. This is a great danger for those with unlimited power. I believe that if the present leaders really care for the country as they claim they do, they should be willing to listen to the voice of criticism. As you yourself say, this is not the first time 1 have criticized the powers-that-be. I criticized them when they first came to power; I criticized them even more strongly after they had been in power for one month; and I became stronger still after they had been in power for three months. Ironically, after they had been in power for six months, 1 was not very critical of them at all. Instead 1 gave what was in my opinion a good analysis of the situation from the coup of 1 947 up till the latest coup of 1991 , showing how the army had gone astray, and suggesting that unless it was willing to listen to criticism and give power back to the people, it would be in difficulty. I fear this has proved exactly to be the case. NK. Looking back, do you think there is any legal basis to the allegations General Suchinda made? SS. Well, there are two distinct charges. As to the charge of lese majeste, there is no basis for that charge whatsoever. You could argue there was some legal basis for that same charge when it was laid against me in 1 984, but this time there was absolutely none. Indeed, I made it very clear that I defended the monarchy. Rather, I stated that 1 felt the NPKC had committed lese majeste. I am sure it is not General Suchinda himself, but people who want to gain favors from him who twisted my words and made a case against me, but this could be shown in court. If the case were to go to court, 1 would stand only a 50-50 chance

Articles and Interviews

43

because I may have made a mistake in condemning him. If indeed I did so, then I am willing to apologize for it. Nevertheless, 1still stand by my main argument against the leaders of the 1991 coup, which is that they had no valid reason for carrying out the coup. Moreover it should be borne in mind that if the case went to court not only minor mistakes but sensitive issues which could be far more troubling to the administration could emerge and become public. NK. Burma seems a particularly sensitive subject for the leaders of the NPKC. Could you comment on why this is so? SS. As 1 explained in my lecture, SLORC and the NPKC are unfortunately very close. This is very bad for both countries, because SLORC has no justification to rule Burma and the NPKC has no right to rule Siam, even though the government which they put in power contains many able and well-meaning individuals. On top of that the two juntas are very close. Unfortunately not only are there serious violations of human rights in Burma, but also a lot of destruction of the environment and natural resources, some of which can be linked directly or indirectly with the NPKC in Siam. I think it is because 1 came out and said this that the Commander-in-Chief of the army is very upset with me. As some of you know, the Burmese junta has openly killed even some Buddhist monks. The monks in Mandalay refused to accept alms from members of the army or their families (what in Thai we call khwam baat) and refused to have anything to do with them. This upset the Burmese army. Hence it tried to legitimize itself by inviting our Sangharaja and senior members of our Mahathera Council to go to Burma to receive its highest honors. I was instrumental (along with several other people) in stopping our senior monks from going to Burma. The Burmese junta then tried to bring the honors to Siam to our senior monks; again we tried to stop them. This undoubtedly angered the NPKC, particularly those members who were very much involved with the matter. Unfortunately, after 1 left the country, the honors were in fact bestowed on the Sangharaja. I consider this a shameful exploitation of Buddhism by the two military juntas, both of which are supposed to be Buddhist and to uphold Buddhism in their countries. NK. What sort of changes will real democracy require? SS. You have to respect people at the grassroots level and you have to look into your own history and culture. 1 think we have made a mistake here. This year is in fact the 60th anniversary of our own democracy - in other words, it has now gone through five cycles. During these five cycles, first

44

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

we tried the Whitehall model of democracy - British parliament style. Then, after the year 2500 we tried the American method. Both have failed us because we have never tried our own method. Our own method involves looking to the Sangha. The Sangha is a model of democracy. You have egalitarianism in the Sangha. Everyone, from rich to poor, or from wherever you come is equal in the Sangha. It is a real fraternity, you become true brothers and sisters in the Sangha. And of course you work for liberation and for liberty. But liberty here, of course, is not Western individualism, but rather liberty from suffering. You work not for yourself but for the poor, you work to preserve the environment, you respect other people including people with different ideas. Here the Thai have a chance. Moreover when you look at the Sangha, it is not only a Thai model; it is also the Burmese model, the Singhalese model, the Khmer model, the Lao model - t h e model for the whole of that region. Nor does it mean that you have to be narrowly Buddhist. If you look at the Sangha as a model, you must also at the same time be broadminded and respect our Muslim brothers, our Christian brothers and sisters, even those who do not believe in any religion, including our hilltribes. This is where our indigenous culture can become a very important element in our democracy. Western democracy has its strengths and weaknesses, but when you import it wholesale, it just does not work. Even an imitation of Western democracy, however, is better than nothing at all. You start by having a kind of democracy: it may not be excellent, it may not work very well, but at least it safeguards people's right to speak, their right to express themselves, and the principle of one man or one woman/one vote. This provides a basis from which to developourown form of democratic system based on our own culture and history. We have a chance, because people are now serious about these issues, particularly people at the local levels. People in almost every province now have organized to protest the building of dams and to push for the preservation of forests. The monkhood is now awakened, and it is wonderful that young people now respect the monks in a way they never did before, and for the right reasons. Ten years ago NGOs, particularly in the North, Northeast and South considered themselves superior to the local villagers, to the local headmen, to the local abbots. Today they want to learn from the abbots. I think this is tremendous. NGOs in the Northeast respect thepw/a, respect the trees - 1 think this is wonderful. A lot of young doctors have now formed chumnum phaet chonnabhot (rural doctors) groups and allow traditional medicine into their hospitals. All these new ways of thinking will grow and produce real diversity, and lead towards true unity and democracy. Unfortunately these things of which I speak would not be understood by the junta or by the elite, some of whom have become so wrapped

Articles and Interviews

45

up with their PhD. that they have come to believe the common people are stupid and cannot do anything properly. As long as you have that mentality, you will never have sufficient humanity to look at your own shortcomings, but rather will take yourself too seriously. If instead you take the people seriously, then you will learn from them, and things will change in a very meaningful way along the humorous Siamese lines of

sanuk. N K. What about the upcoming elections? Do you think they could turn out to be a step in the right direction, or are you pessimistic? SS. I am neither pessimistic, nor do I think things will go in the right direction. Our friend General Chamlong may feel he will become Prime Minister, or my friend Mr. Chuan may want to become Prime Minister, but this is not a real issue. To become Prime Minister is not truly meaningful. Take my friend Mr. Anand, the Prime Minister: he is a wonderful person - all these are wonderful people - but as long as the NPKC has power, his position lacks real substance. 1 am not pessimistic because, as I said, some form of democracy is better than no form at all . If the people who are elected know that they have no real power, and if they avoid becoming corrupt, learn from the past, try to listen to the people and work with the NGOs, respect the monks instead of using them for political ends and understand instead that the monks have the moral and ethical values which could lead politics in a right and just direction, then I think we have something different. The 60th anniversary of our democracy would then be something new; it would be a new paradigm. Even if the NPKC sought to control matters and bend them in wrong directions, they could not do so, because no matter how much money, weapons or power you have, these mean nothing. Ultimately what counts is treating the people with righteousness, and I am very hopeful in this regard for the future of our country. NK. General Suchinda and Air Marshal Kaset have sworn that neither of them will seek to be the next premier. Do you believe, however, that the next premier will be a stand-in for a NPKC figure who would take over eventually? SS. 1 think in a way 1 have already answered this in earlier questions. I am not concerned about the roles of either General Suchinda or Air Marshal Kaset, just as I was not interested in those of General Prem or General Thanom - all these are figures to me. It is like in the masked play with Ravanaor Rama-theyarenotofgreatimportancetome. They think they are powerful, they believe they are great; but 1 cannot agree. My feelings

46

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

are always with the people, with the unspoken grassroots, and with history - a much longer period - and with culture, which is far more deep-rooted. So whoever gets in next March, it will only be for six months or one year, so why should 1 be concerned? 1 am interested in Prince Damrong or in King Chulalongkorn; they are far more meaningful to me. Only those w h o want money and power for the short term will be interested in who becomes the next premier. Over the course of history, who will remember such an individual? Who knows now who was the Prime Minister in the reign of Rama V or Rama IV ? I therefore have no interest at all in who will become Prime Minister. I am interested rather in the long term. NK. If you are looking not at individuals but at reconstituted political parties, do you see anything there to give you hope? SS. Again, you see, coming back to what I said earlier, you can change the Chat Thai to something else. You can change the Democrats and you can change the Phalang Tham - 1 am not interested in that . My interest is only in that whoever is elected, or whatever label a party may have, they must be aware that this is only a label and that they have no real power. If they cling to those at the top thinking that they have power, then they will make the same mistake that our politicians have been making from 1947 to 1991 . But if they change their direction and give power to the masses, those uneducated masses whom all too many M.P.s look down upon, then we have a new paradigm and a real democracy. N K. Looking at the big picture, is Thailand’s greatest need real ly democracy? Many argue that an appointed government of technocrats, such as the Anand administration, would be much more effective in combating environmental and social problems than an elected government that ends up only serving its own interestsand playing power politics. What is your opinion? SS. This is the usual elitist argument. Elites tend to admire power, and 1 don't blame them, because our whole education and upbringing teaches us to admire power, money and success at the expense of principles, at the expense of fundamental right and wrong. The Thai have to learn to go beyond that. Unfortunately many Thai still admire Sarit Thanarat, our strong man, although he was a very corrupt and wicked man who exploited many women and used the state. We have been brainwashed to admire power. We must undo that. We kowtow to power because we think that by doing so a little bit of it will rub off on us. Yet what makes human beings different from animals is our capacity to judge what is right from what is wrong. Those who grab power are wrong; we have to denounce them.

Articles and Interviews

41

Mr. Anand has admitted that he was appointed by the wrong group of people who have no legitimate right to power, but he felt that nevertheless he could do useful things for the country. With this, I beg to differ. He is a wonderful man, a nice man, but he can only maintain the status quo, which means that the rich will get richer and the poor poorer, although he could in fact do a few small but wonderful things such as kicking out all those who intrude into Khao Yai. The Thai have to learn that what is right is might, and that might never becomes right. Democracy, of course, has many weaknesses. If does not work in many countries, even in the West, but that form is better than any other form. It gives you the chance to say what is right; it gives you the chance to argue; it gives you the chance not to have to flee from your country for your safety. It means that a labor leader does not just disappear while in police custody, that a monk in full yellow robes (not to mention many [innocent] villagers) would not be put in jail. It means that students fleeing from other countries would not be sent back to their own country to be killed in order to gain teak concessions. If rulers are not righteous, the people suffer, and our people are suffering. Dictatorship helps the rich and powerful, and gives false hope to the middle class who aspire to be rich and powerful too. It never helps the poor. NK. You call yourself a social critic. Yet your own critics charge that while you are effective in pointing out Thai society's ills, you are short on realistic solutions or constructive plans of action. How do you respond to this? SS. Well, I never call myself a social critic. 1 have been called a social critic-this is one of the labels 1 have been given - and as such of course I criticize society. But I have many other labels- ones which do not come to the attention of the press. I am also a bookseller; I am also a publisher; 1 am also a teacher. And in fact I may claim that 1 have not only criticized my country's social ills but have also been responsible for reconstructing my society in my own small way. I have been involved with youth groups for over 25 years. Even when some of the students have died, we have formed foundations to keep their names alive, like the Kamol Keemthong Foundation. This Foundation is over 20 years old now. Its aim has been to encourage idealism among youth. Although we way not have achieved great results in two decades, we have achieved something. If people were to study the Kamol Keemthong Foundation seriously, they would find that has been one of my small contributions. I have also been involved with the Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation for 24 years. This foundation has certainly done something in the realm of the arts. If I may say so, it has done much more than the government has achieved. When the Phya

48

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Anuman centenary was celebrated, his work on Thai culture was exhibited throughout Europe, Asia, Australia and the USA without a single penny of Thai government money being spent on this. On the other hand, for Prince Wan's centenary last year, the government held exhibitions and sponsored lectures in only three places in North America and Europe, yet this cost the government 5 million baht. This is a small thing, but my role, although very modest, very small, and although I have not achieved anything of great distinction or success, has been always to try to work with the monkhood, with the underdogs, with youth, and with NGOs. 1 have worked with these groups not only in Siam but, also with similar groups in Burma, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia; because I am aware that in the future people must go beyond their nationalities. We must be proud to be Siamese, but we must also be proud to be brothers and sisters with the Lao, Burmese, and so on, particularly those of us who are oppressed by our own governments. Our governments may contain wonderful people, but knowingly or unknowingly they work with the superpowers, most of the time at the people’s expense. They work with the multinational corporations and follow the super powers blindly, often without even knowing it. This is also why they would not even allow the Dalai Lama to visit Siam - they prefer to placate the Chinese so they can buy arms from them. Thus a social critic must criticize those in power, but at the same time as citizens we must also work to empower people at the bottom. In our tradition you can only empower through non-violence, by following the Buddhist way, teaching ourselves not to hate those in power. That is why 1 feel very sympathetic to General Suchinda, Air Marshal Kaset, Mr. Anand and Co. I feel very sorry for them, because sometimes they mean very well, but deep down they do not respect the people at the grassroots nor understand the aspirations of those whose freedom has been denied. That is why none of our leaders have spoken up for Aung San Suu Kyi, who received the Nobel Peace Prize. None of our leaders feel deeply for those Burmese who have been killed by their own government. None of them care for the students killed in Tian An Men square in China, for the Tibetans, or for the Chakma in Bangladesh. For me, the future lies with the suffering people. N K. The last question is, looking back at your career over the past 20 years, do you think that the focus of social activism in Thailand should be different now than it was in the 1970s? And do you think what is needed of a social activist is different? SS. Oh, obviously. Time changes, and a lot of factors change. Let me speak as a Buddhist In Buddhism the law of dependent origination

Articles and Interviews

49

shows that things depend on the causes and depend on the conditions. In the 1 970s, the students felt they had won, that they were victorious agai nst the dictators. I think they were wrong; they got rid of three dictators, but the dictatorship system remains. They also thought that America was the enemy and that the Chinese were wonderful. Again, they were wrong, because they saw things too much in black and white terms. They also thought the revolution was at hand. They believed that they themselves were educated, whereas the people were not. On top of that, the Communist Party also came and interfered in the situation, not to mention other factors. Now, in the 1990s, things have changed tremendously. There is no longer a Communist Party of Thailand, state socialism has gone, and even China, Vietnam and Burma want to become capitalist. So obviously the students have become less powerful. They don't know what they are doing, which in a way I think is good. If you start not with the presumption that you know, but rather with a question mark, I think that is a good start. The students have now started with a question mark. They have learned to work with the NGOs. The NGOs are something new. In the 1970s there were very few ; now there are many. Of course the NGOs are not the answer to everything. They have their weaknesses, their internal quarrels and so forth , but one good thing about them is that they have no power, and they have now learned to listen to the people and have concluded that democracy is the answer. They have now seen that the environment is very important, and have come to learn that our own culture is very meaningful. In the 1970s they burned many valuable books and felt that Buddhism had lasted 2500 years already and had its chance. Now they take Buddhism seriously, they take Thai culture seriously, and so 1 think the NGOs and students, if they respect one another and don’t try to be leaders but followers, and if they unite together and learn from the monkhood, will be very good. The monkhood is very weak, but it is the only institution which represents the poorest of the poor. If the monkhood is aware, and if it wants to preserve the wonderful unique culture which we have accumulated over the last eight to nine hundred years and transform it for the modern world - get the essence of it beyond the formality and transform this into something unique which is non-violent, this will be very beneficial. Here, too, Buddhists in the West could help, because people in the West have also taken Buddhism very seriously. So the future to me is bright, if only people become humble, take their culture seriously, struggle non-violently by building peace within, by empowering themselves and unite against greed, hate and delusion. Greed, of course, comes very clearly in the form of consumerism, and hatred in the form of militarism. Delusion can even appear in the form of education if it renders you a slave by making you want to serve the system rather than freeing yourself.

50

IVhen Loyalty Demands Dissent

I think if you grasp that you will have a wonderful opportunity to develop an alternative way of liberation. That way you can find yourown form of democracy, which entails respecting other people, the small people, the grassroots people, taking them into your confidence so that they will have a chance to decide the future together with you and not exploit our neighbors nor exploit the natural environment. I think the Thai have a wonderful chance, and if people at the top would learn to be humble and listen to people at the bottom; they, too, will survive meaningfully. Otherwise, 1 am afraid they will have to be in exile much longer than I am. Nick Keyes 28 January 1992 Seeds of Peace Vol.8 No.2 May- Aug 2535(1992) WOULD THIS MAN DIS THE KING ? A Conversation with Sulak Sivaraksa A leader of the engaged Buddhist movement for democracy in Thailand (or Siam, as he prefers) discusses the past and present history of nonviolent protest in his country. He also explains how his respect for the King has earned him the charge of lese majeste. Fellowship: You call yourself a professional exile. What did you do to get that honor? Sulak: Well, my sin is that I like to speak the truth. My country is wonderful but they don't like to hear the truth. My latest sin is that I spoke on the 22nd of August 1991, against the coup d'etat which took place in February 1991 . And I gave my reasons why the coup was unnecessary. The coup leaders were hypocrites and they could be very, very rough on the people and they would destroy our religion, our monarchy, our nation. These three institutions are supposed to be very sacred in our country. So, one of the coup leaders became very angry with me and he filed a lawsuit against me. The worst thing was that I was supposed to have defiled the king. We have a law, a very serious law, that anybody who defiles the king may be imprisoned for three years minimum, fifteen years maximum. This is a dreadful law, it could be used against anybody. The latest case two years ago was a politician who campaigned for election and he just said “Had I been born in the Grand Palace, 1 would not be here. I could get up late, ten o'clock in the morning; four o'clock in the evening start drinking champagne and wine.” It was traditional, you know, people cracking jokes about kings and queens and so on. But his opponents brought the case against him and he got six years. Earlier, a journalist who wrote a social column in The Daily News,

Articles and Interviews

51

a Thai newspaper, wanted to end up with a quotation every day. One day he ended up with a quotation from Erasmus, not directly from the Latin phrase but from an English translation,-he put in Thai, that “ i n a country of the blind, a one eyed man is king.” He got seven years imprisonment. A country woman in the south, respectfully put the king's photograph on the wall, and as she was nailing it the police asked her what she was doing, and she said “ I am nailing it up there”. Referring to the king's photograph so it was defamation. She also got seven years. So, one of my missions is to campaign to abolish this law. Fellowship: But is it good or bad law? You said that the monarchy is very important to the people. Sulak: Precisely. My main argument is that the monarchy is very important but this law in the long run will destroy the monarchy because the powers that be can use the law against anybody. That country lady was not political at all; perhaps the policeman did not like her. And in my own case it's always a mystery when the law is used against me, and on a number of occasions to silence other people. So people are now afraid to say anything openly. Fellowship: Has there been a case where a person has disparaged the king and was, for lack of a better way of putting it, justly punished? Sulak: Well, the last case was in 1957 because at that time there was a political party that was really against the king, and they encouraged people to speak openly against the king. And the '57 coup was really dreadful for my country and the monarchy in my opinion. The monarchy was an absolute monarchy up to 1932, when it became a constitutional monarchy. We introduced parliament, a constitution, elections, free speech. Technically, everybody was equal, including the king. Prior to that the king was the lord of life, the lord of the lands, what he said was law. And of course members of the royal family had special treatment. So after 1932, the king was so unhappy he abdicated. He went to England in exile and died there. A coup, a people's party, they called themselves, elected his nephew to become king. That was the brother o f t h e present king. He was a minor, eight years old, who was away being educated in Switzerland. The revolutionary party made clear that the king must be under the thumb of the government and parliament, so that's why the monarchy became very popular. They felt that he didn't have power. This was interrupted by Sarit Thanarat, a general, who made the coup against the people's party in 1957. Unfortunately he was backed by the Americans.

52

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Fellowship: That happens sometimes. Let’s go into a stereotype if you will. What kind of misconceptions do Americans have concerning the role of the king? Sulak : Regarding the monarchy, the king, of course, most Americans would not understand, and I can't blame them. The King and /, just by the fact that [there is] a musical making fun of the Oriental and all that. That king in The King and 1 was a really good person, a great grandfather of the present king; he did wonderful things for our country. He was the first Oriental monarch to study English. He was a Buddhist monk for 27 years. Fellowship: That part was not in the musical. Sulak: Exactly. It was supposed to be light, nice, to crack fun at other's expense, you know, Americans love to do that . He learned English from American missionaries; he knew what was going on. He knew that the British were in control of the most part of India, also the British by then had half of Burma, and the British were flirting around Malaysia, and the British and other western powers divided China for their benefit, and even Japan was forced to open doors to the Americans, so when he became king he opened the country to the British. He knew if he didn't do that they would have shackled his country. So 1 think for that reason we owe him a great deal. He was a very wise king. But he was a human being; he made many mistakes too. In this country you don't think very seriously of any king. In my country they pretend to take the king too seriously. As a Buddhist I believe in the middle way, you know, I like to acknowledge what is negative and for that they punish me always. And I feel if we don't come out of that, we remain a country of hypocrites. Fellowship: Take us back a bit. You prefer the name Siam instead of Thailand. What exactly does Siam mean? Sulak: Siam, to tell you the truth, nobody knows really. But if you go back, the name was known to the west at least by the time the Portuguese came in 151 1. It was known before obviously; the Portuguese must have learned from the Indians. Siam, Ciam, Sayam is the Sankrit word meaning brown or golden. In fact that area is known as a golden land. It was known to the foreigners, and it was in our language, but it was not known officially as the name of the country. In our area a country is not known. We are known by city-states. And whatever is the most important city-state will become the capital. So we called ourselves Ayuddhya, which was the name of our old capital. Even now the Burmese call us Yodia, that was their pronunciation of our capital. This king of The King and I felt that the

Articles and Interviews

53

country was known to the west as Siam, so he officially stated that the country should be known as Siam. But Siam for me is much more neutral term. The Malays who are mostly Muslims, the Hmong, the Khmer, the Chinese; none of them wanted to be known as Thai; when we changed the name of the country to Thailand, in 1 939 we forced them to be Thai. And they forced people to become Buddhist, which is ridiculous. Fellowship: This is strange counterpart to engaged Buddhism; forced Buddhism! Sulak: On top of that they forced people to wear western dress. That is why I refuse to wear western dress. 1 don't like to be forced. And they forced women to wear hats because they felt that to be civilized you had to dress like Europeans. Eat with a spoon and fork and all that. That is why 1 refuse to use the name Thailand and even now the symptoms are still going on. You can see it in Bangkok- we all dress in western dress and we still salute the flag at eight o'clock in the morning and six o'clock in the evening, which is ridiculous. Fellowship: In the long run of history are you encouraged by the end of the Cold War, of breaking the old stereotype of east and west? Sulak: Yes and no. I think with the end of the Cold War people can aspire more for democracy but the response is not yet positive on how to do away with arms. Because the First World is still producing arms for sale in the Third World and the arms manufacturers are still very powerful and most politicians still listen to the arms manufacturers. I mean I am here in this country and I have not heard any political party say that they are going to reduce arms because they are afraid that people will be unemployed. That is number one, and numbertwo, people have not learned yet to limit greed. In my own country they all want to worship money , they now have no more Cold War so they all go to Cambodia to make money. They go to Burma to rape the Burmese forest. Fellowship: What money can you make in Cambodia? Sulak: Oh, in anything. My people always go for the old antiques and Cambodia has a wonderful mine for rubies. The Khmer Rouge are working very closely with the Thai army. You see many ways in which money can be made at the expense of natural resources, which should be preserved for the common people. But the common people are denied basic necessities. And these natural resources are used to fulfill the greed of very few people who have power, who have all the money; and these

54

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

people cooperate with the multinational cooperations and the superpowers. That is why the Chinese are really powerful and influential in Cambodia, in my country, and in Burma. I think most of the American public is not aware of this. This is why the American administration is very close to the Chinese, at one time the arch enemy. And now they sleep together. Fellowship: You don't sound like you have a lot of friends in that part of the world. Whatabout when you were growing up? What is your life story briefly. Sulak: Well, 1 was brought up in the fairly well-to-do middle class family, kind of an elite background, and 1 went to England for education and 1 thought 1 could end up by becoming a prime minister or something. That is why I was called to the Bar. In a traditional Siamese education if you want to be somebody you must be called to the English Bar. Fellowship: You thought you might be prime minister of England? Or of Siam? Sulak: No, of Siam. But luckily while I was in London I met a number of ex-politicians and the prince and princess whose ancestors had been running the country for 150 years. And 1 had great admiration for many of them and they were much more honest and sincere than the later politicians, and yet they felt that they had failed. Then it dawned on me - this is when Buddhism helped me - t h a t power is really a kind of illusion; the more you cling to power, the more you pretend to do good, is in fact to serve your ego. So from thereon 1changed my mind. Perhaps I could do something better, not to be involved directly with politics. 1came back from England in 1961-1962. 1 became interested in journal ism, startingasmall magazine that became very well known as the intellectual magazine of the day. The idea of this magazine was that in our culture - a mostly oral culture, not literary culture - 1 wanted to encourage people to write, to translate articles first and eventually we would publish books. Young people became attracted to the magazine so I started a kind of coffee club for them to discuss things. At that time it was entirely against the law. I was director of the first university press, so I thought the university would be a safe place, but even the university would not allow people to stay after five o'clock in the evening. And all the clubs were run by faculty members because they were afraid of students. I then thought the best thing to do was to start it in a Buddhist temple; it would be difficult for the police to go to the Buddhist temple, and the best temple for me would be the royal

Articles and Interviews

55

temple. I chose the headquarters of the reform movement in the Buddhist Church. So I went to the abbot and asked permission. I said if Buddhism is to be relevant to the young people it must offer them a chance to discuss freely anything they want. He agreed with me. He was a very nice man, in fact he is right now the supreme patriarch. Just like the pope of the Siamese Buddhist Church. So I opened a small club. If they wanted to learn English, if they wanted to discuss anything, I would find them a teacher or a speaker - t h e governor of the Bank of Thailand, a former cabinet minister, the lord chief justice etc. -because of my elite background and English education, I had a lot of connections. They loved it. And then of course their ideas changed. Up to that time our university only taught people to become civil servants. So the top intellectuals of the day for the first time saw that perhaps they could do something else. And this led to the 1 973 uprising. The hard core all came from my group and for the first time I became a real enemy of the state. The students, starting with eleven, all of whom were very close to me, demanded a constitution and elections. And do you know where they were going to teach people democracy? At my book shop. They were arrested and the charge was obstructing the traffic. Within two hours they changed the charge to treason, communist activities, which at that time was a most serious charge. Fellowship: So this was all your fault! Sulak: Yes, that is right. They accused me for all of it. After 1973 the students felt that they won. I told them that they hadn't won anything and that many of our people were dying and you must feel so sorry for them. But they did not believe in me anymore. They used to believe in the Americans and when the Americans were very bad to us, they had had enough of them. I said, all right if you have had enough of the Americans, don't follow their model of development. Use the Buddhist model of development. Oh no, they said. “ W e gave the Buddha a chance for 2,500 years and he did not improve our life very much. Enough of Buddhism.” The students said their answer was Mao Tse Tung and at that time there was no split between the Soviet Union and Red China and no split over Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh was their model. The Marxist, Maoist way, to liberation. But I said, be careful, you should learn about the Marxist way, the Maoist way, the same as we should learn about the American way but keep them a distance. You should learn from them and adapt it to our own indigenous culture. At least Buddhism has been with us for eight hundred years, nine hundred years. Why not do it that way?

56

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Fellowship: This is what we call engaged Buddhism. Sulak: Not only that, I published a book in honor or my teacher, who was a servant of the Buddha, on his eighty-fourth birthday. I called that book Radical Conservatism. On the one hand Buddhism was a conservative teaching for two thousand and five hundred years; it had to be conservative. You must preserve the tradition. But at the same time you must be very radical. Otherwise Buddhism or any religion could become oppressive. In order to be progressive, to be really caring for peace and justice, you must have that radical element all the time. 1 told them that, but they did not believe me, so unfortunately within three years most of my friends were punished, my book shop was invaded, most of my books were burned and I became bankrupt. Luckily I was not in the country, otherwise they would have tortured me. And the military came to my office, two big tanks, opposite my house. We had a small road and they closed the road, as if we had a big contingent or a regiment there. They climbed into our office with a television crew, and televised nationwide ‘ ‘This is the headquartersof the communist party of Thailand! ” At that time we were having a seminar with the Quakers, the American Friends Service Committee, opposing the Phamong Dam, which was supposed to be the biggest dam in the world, bigger than the Aswan Dam in Egypt. The Americans were involved in the Vietnam War and I think it was a leader of the Quakers, Kenneth Boulding, who proposed that instead of spending money on war the Americans should build the dam, and this would benefit Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and so on. Whyspendmoneyon war, spend it on peace. 1 think his proposal was well received by the American President. It is a wonderful idea, wecan do both: build a dam and we can carry on the war! Fellowship: Damned good idea! Sulak: That's right. And they spent a lot of money just to make a survey which was done in English and French, none of it in Thai. So 1 talked to the Quakers saying we must oppose it. So we held a seminar up country. At this meeting, the U.N. experts, Thai experts, high officials and farmers came together in discussing the big dam. And after the seminar we had a photograph taken. Later, the picture appeared with the then governor of the Bank of Thailand, a very respectable man, and myself with circle around my face and his face and I was supposed to be the secretary general of the Communist Party of Thailand and it was supposed to be taken in the jungle. They called the Quaker representative in Southeast Asia a Russian KGB agent. Luckily, as 1 said, I was not there when my house and office were invaded.

Articles and Interviews

57

Fellowship: But you went back? Sulak: Yes, after two years things became much better, I went back. I had to start again. I had to start the book-shop and the publishing again, and then I got more and more involved with the nongovernmented organizations. I have been involved particularly with the interreligous communities. The majority of people are Buddhist, but 1 appreciate our minorities and if we do anything without consultation with them it is for me real cultural oppression. So we worked with the Christians, we worked with the Muslims, and we worked on nonviolence because we felt that misery was very strong. We worked with the Quakers, the Mennonites, and some of our people were sent to be trained in Philadelphia and sent to Mexico. It became very useful in the demonstration last May, the hard core were our people who had been trained in the last fifteen years. That's why the demonstration was so peaceful, so nonviolent. We used prayer, we used fasting, we used meditation. It lasted seven weeks. Most mass media was not aware of that, you know, until the military felt they could not overcome it. That's why they brought in the tanks, they brought in people to throw bricks at them, to throw bottles at them, to start killing our people. Fellowship: Where do you see your country by the end of the decade- the best and the worst case scenarios? Sulak : The worst case first. After the May demonstrations, my country is the only country where the generals who ordered the killingof the people are being punished, not as severely as we would like perhaps, but at least they all have been removed. That did not happen in Burma, in China, and I think this inspired many people because this is what we did nonviolently. Unfortunately, many of our people died, but at least we achieved something and it inspired people in Burma, in China, and around the world and I think it is something significant. Havingsaid that, those people who were removed are very angry and they have a lot of money; they also have a lot of connections and if they stage a coup successfully; it is possible even before the election on September 13th, or immediately afterward, that there may be a coup. It may be the end of the monarchy or it may mean that we will be something like Burma, or worse than Burma or China. I may have to live abroad forever and my family may have to join me. Even if we avoid a coup, if we have elections nicely, civil government coming through the democratic process, the worst could still happen because our politicians, our entrepreneurs, with or without the military, are still greedy. We worship money. We worship greed. It means that we will go into Burma and Cambodia and destroy all the environment there and the gap between the rich and the poor will become higher. AlDs is going to spread, the drug trade is going to be intensified; this is the worst scenario.

58

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

But 1 hope it does not happen. In fact I was meeting with Gene Sharp at Albert Einstein Institute last week and tried to put our brains together because Gene Sharp is an expert nonviolence instructor and an expert on anti coup d'etat. We tried to send faxes to my country, to people to refuse the coup, asking the army to lay down arms, asking people in telecommunications not to cooperate. My dream is that we must have development, not economic development but human development first. And human for me is the spiritual being. And I think that is possible now in my country because we now have a movement. It isn't very strong, but [it begins with] the Buddhist monks, who are the poorest of the poor. The poor have no alternative but to join the monkhood and 1 have now worked with them so long that I have asked them not to use the monkhood merely for social mobility but to remember their roots. They have suffered so much, your family relations are now broken and your sister has had to become a prostitute. The monkhood could do a great deal if you have that social commitment, personal commitment. Buddhism teaches you to confront suffering, not to avoid suffering. And in my country there is a lot of suffering. Fellowship: Not everyone looks at Buddhism that way. Sulak: When I first came to this country, the American Buddhists only wanted to meditate. Which is wonderful, I had no trouble with that. But if you only have peace, then you become “all right’’. Have peace first, but then you must develop a critical self-awareness. In this way we work with the Burmese, the Cambodians, the Americans, the Japanese. Until five years ago, the Japanese would not work with us. I told them, if you don't work with people who suffer, your Buddhism is dying beautifully, gracefully, but it's dying . Because you don't deal with suffering . But now it's changing. And the Buddhists in America are also changing. Of course, we're not that strong yet; however we are a constructive force, a nonviolent force. And if the Buddha is right, if Christ is right, you overcome wickedness with truth, with love, with charity. And in my country that hope is becoming more and more real. The demonstration last May not have been a great thing, but it certainly gives you a glimpse of hope, not only for our people, but for the Burmese, the Tibetans, the Chinese, for many people in Asia. Fellowship: What about the King? Sulak: He'savery nice man, but he has no friends and he knows it. People surround him, flatter him, and so on. In Buddhism, the concept of a good friend is very important. And a good friend is someone who is willing to tell you the truth, willing to criticize you, telling you your weakness. As

Articles and Interviews

59

human beings, we all have weaknesses. And sometimes we know, sometimes we don't. So you have a good friend, he or she could be your other self. It' s known as paratoghosa, your other voice. And unfortunately, either with kingship or presidency or whatever, when you are so high up, people flatter you. And they flatter you so often you believe them. 1said 1 respect the king as a human being. He paints. I don't believe that what he paints is all beautiful. He plays music. 1 don't like his music. Yet my fellow countrymen cannot even say this openly, but 1 do. This is the price I pay. Fellowship USA Vol.58 N0.9. September, 1992 IN EXILE FROM SIAM An Interview with Suiak Sivaraksa In September 1991 , Suiak Sivaraksa was accused of lese majeste for remarks made at Thammasat University in Bangkok which were critical of Thailand's authorities. Under threat of arrest by Thailand's military junta, Suiak - a s he is known - f l e d his country and has since been in exile from Siam (the country's original name, which Suiak insists on using). One of Asia's leading social activists, Suiak is the founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. He has taught all over the United States, and his most recent publication is Seeds of Peace(Parallax Press). In April, he was interviewed at the Tricycle office by editor Helen Tworkov. Tricycle: Although you are of the Southeast Asian tradition of Theravada Buddhism, your life seems to exemplify the Mahayana bodhisattva tradition of selfless action. The term “engaged Buddhism” has become identified in this country with Buddhist inspired social activism. Is there a difference between an engaged Buddhist and a bodhisattva? Suiak: Yes and no. The term “engaged Buddhism” was coined by Thich Nhat Hanh, the Vietnamese Zen master. But he has recently come more and more to appreciate the Pali Canon, which is the foundation of Theravada teaching. Tricycle: Is there something unique about the Bodhisattva Vow that is absent from the Theravada tradition? Suiak: If you aspire to be the all-enlightened Buddha, then of course the next step is to be a bodhisattva. In the Theravada tradition, first you have to practice dana - the perfection of giving. Eventually you recognize that to give is more important than to receive. But the second step - sila - is

60

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

more important. The idea of sila is how to be normal. Tricycle: Isn't sila usually translated as how to be moral or ethical? Sulak: Yes, but the Sanskrit and Pali roots mean “normal.” By convention sila refers to “precepts” which goes back to the Latin word meaning “ t o give advice.” Why is it that you should not kill? Not allowing anger to rise is how to relate to society, from your family to the community, to all the animals. So to be moral and to be normal are the same. Tricycle: Are engaged Buddhist organizations vulnerable to the same problems as Christian social services, which are often empty of any spiritual inspiration? Sulak: In Theravada, all the lay practitioners start with dana and then sila, and the next step, which is crucial, is bhavana - meditation. These are all interrelated. If you want to be an engaged Buddhist, if you only practice dana, you become a goody-goody. You must go further . With sila, the emphasis is how not to exploit yourself and how not to exploit others. This is what “normality” means- acting in accord with the laws of nature, which are unexploitative and harmonious. Sila and dana work together. But where Buddhism differs is with bhavana- whatever you do, be mindful. Be engaged. Without mindfulness, you can become very angry, greedy, very deluded. You may fee), “Oh, I'm a Buddhist now, I can do all these good things.” That's very egoistic. Ultimately, a Buddhist should work toward selflessness. Our prime minister, our cabinet members, all are “Buddhists,” but they don't have bhavana. Bhavana means that you cultivate peace within. Tricycle: One aspect of engaged Buddhism is that it seems to evoke a great deal of pride in doing good deeds. If this pride the natural pitfail of social activism? Sulak: Yes, I think so. The idea that “ I am doing something good” is egoistic. If one becomes humble, the pride will disappear. That is why we must come back to bhavana. Tricycle: Do you see Western Buddhism going in this direction? Sulak: In America and Europe, everyone is very active. But if you become too active, you lose the essence of Buddhism. You only have the Buddhist labels. This is true not only in the West; it's the same in my country. Once you cultivate this attitude, it is easier to live with others. Sometimes others

Articles and Interviews

61

make you angry. Sometimes they oppress you personally. I have experienced that many times. One must cultivate peace to be compassionate. Without this, what you do, even as an “engaged Buddhist” is just a lot of activity with no good purpose. Tricycle: As American Buddhists, what we see in twentieth-century Asia amounts to a Buddhist holocaust: Tibet, Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Mongolia. As we try to integrate Buddhism and democracy in the United States, the Buddhist leadership in Asia generally offers no alternative to the political leadership in this country. In Asia we see Buddhists killing each other, oppressing each other, engaged in civil wars. We can say, well, Ne Win [thedictatorof Burma] is nota “ r e a l ” Buddhist, just like some Christians will say, “George Bush does not exemplify the true spirit of Christ.” But frankly, that's not a very satisfying way to look at it. Sulak: When you see the suffering in Asia, be skillful, be mindful, be patient, and things can change in a beautiful way because when people suffer that much, things become better. Tricycle: Are the people responsible for your exile Buddhists? Sulak: Yes, but you have to make the distinction between Buddhism with a capital “ B ” and buddhism with a small “ b ” . With Christianity, the same. Capital “ C , ” small “c.” The people responsible for my exile are Buddhists, and I try to work with them. 1 try to bring them to see the light of the small “ b ” buddhism. This will help them to be more mindful, less deluded, less greedy. If you hate them, you yourself will become greedy, angry, and deluded. That's why skillful means is very important, to put your mind right and to cultivate compassion. Tricycle: Do you feel that Buddhist societies hold out hope for a more humanitarian politics than what we have known under Christian rule? Sulak: Yes. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is a perfect example. His people have been oppressed for over forty years and he has asked his people to develop compassion for the Chinese and not to be angry. Tricycle: But while the Dalai Lama exemplifies the very best of his tradition, he cannot be said to typify his tradition. Sulak: No, but his example must be cultivated. When we look at Tibet, it is not only the Tibetans who inspire us. It is the engaged Buddhists who have helped bring Tibet to the attention of the world community.

62

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

Tricycle: We have also witnessed some confusion between working for Tibetan nationhood and cultivating buddha mind. From reading your book, 1 would guess that you do not think that these two pursuit are identical or have the same value. Sulak: No, 1 do not. Tricycle: There is a story about one of the Buddhas before Shakyamuni Buddha: he was an oarsman responsible for ferrying 500 people across the river. And he could foresee that one man had plans to sink the boat and bring about the death of the other 499 passengers. And so with bodhisattva spirit, he murdered this one man and saved the rest. Sulak: This story derives from a Mahayana text. I have respect for the Mahayana teachings, but this way of thinking is not in our tradition. And 1 certainly don't want to influence people in my tradition to imitate that story. As Buddhists, we are taught to question everything. I would have to question this text. Tricycle: Recently, an American Buddhist said to me, “ 1 believe that , as an act of bodhisattva commitment, one should, if one had such an opportunity, kill Ne Win.” Sulak: Then you're back to the Christian concept of a just war. In Buddhism, a just war is not possible. Tricycle: Have you ever considered the possibility of killing as an act of compassion, an act that would alleviate suffering for an other? Sulak: This is not possible within my upbringing and my tradition. I cannot justify any killing. Tricycle: The Dalai Lama has written that when some of his own monks took up arms against the Chinese, that he did not encourage them, but neither could he condemn them. Do you have sympathy for these monks? Sulak: I am in sympathy with the Tibetan lay people and I am in sympathy with the Singhalese, the Burmese, and the Thai lay people. But in our monastic Theravada traditions, this is not possible. You would have to disrobe first. Otherwise, what does the sangha mean? The sangha means that the whole attitude [of the ordained] is radically different from of the lay people. That is why, in our tradition, for the monks even to harm earth, is wrong. To take a human life means expulsion from the monkhood. And

Articles and Interviews

63

if you do this and remain in robes, you are a false monk. Tricycle: What is a good strategy for a situation like Tibet or Burma? In the United States, social activism has focused on AIDs, the environment, homelessness, and prisons. At this moment, the government is neither killing monks nor gunning down students in the streets. Sulak: Perhaps there is not that much difference between the governments. In this country you do not kill your own people. But Mr.Bush encourages the Chinese to kill Tibetans, and indirectly he has involved the CIA with the killing of the Chinese students, and this is something that Americans should be aware of . You do not kill directly. You kill indirectly. Or you allow your tax money to be used to kill others. The way you operate internationally and economically allows people to be killed. To me, that is just as serious. In my country, we have twice as many prostitutes as we do monks. One Burmese monk, a friend of mine, said to me, “ Ne Win may have killed thousands of people, but his regime is less wicked than the Thai regime.” The Thai regime encourages people to sell their daughters into prostitution. They have no choice... they are so poor. Their children have to become disturbed. But when you see a lot of people allowed to be killed, you do not feel so disturbed. Tricycle: So, what to do? Sulak: First of all, you must change your mind. Many of us are from middle-class backgrounds, and have become cynical about the system. In America, you think very badly of your presidents and very badly about the Senate and the Congress. This is not a healthy attitude. Tricycle: And in Asia, there are societies where the majority of people have been practicing Buddhism for centuries, yet the nature of the collective social mind has not diminished intense suffering. Sulak: This is where you have to analyze each society meaningfully. The Buddhists in China and Burma have suffered so much. The mistake they made was to compromise with the Confucians. This compromise was fatal for Buddhism in China. The Confucians say, “Why don't you live for the next world and leave this world to us?” And most of East Asian Buddhism took part in that. The Japanese Buddhist clergy make a lot of money on funerals. But until the people die, they leave their lives in the hands of the Confucians who run the country. And what “Confucian” means here is that the big boss is the emperor. Everyone follows the big boss. And when you work, you serve the big boss. You do not upset the

64

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

Tricycle: And that compromise affected all of Asia? Sulak: East Asia. In my country, we don't have much Confucianism. But South East Asia was compromised with feudalism. Now my country is the only one in the world with a Buddhist king. And we have never been colonized. Tricycle: Is the king looked upon as an incarnate deity as we have seen in some Buddhist theocracies? Sulak: No, the king is a secular man, but his institution supports the sangha and the sangha is the wheel of righteousness. The king represents the wheel of power and the two wheels support each other. We bel ieved in that - not now. We don't believe in that anymore . But of course, we are not allowed to speak openly. 1 spoke openly. That's why 1 am in exile. But suffering must teach you to be mindful. And to find the cause of suffering. Why did our people suffer? Because they thought the sangha was wonderful and the king was wonderful and all that. They didn't realize that the king is only a symbol used by the military to suppress the people. And the military doesn't only oppress the people but they work very closely with the superpowers. It used to be the British, later the Americans, and now the Chinese. And the Chinese are the worst of them all - oppressing the people, destroying the environment. This wheel of power has become dreadful and does not listen to the wheel of righteousness, which has degenerated into ceremonial use only. That's why members of the sangha are now awake. They want to challenge the wheel of power. To me, that's wonderful. And now the students are backing the sangha. Since we were not colonized, we adapted the Western administration in the colonies that surrounded us: the British system in India, the Dutch system in Indonesia, etc. This model is based on thinking, “The people are so stupid; only power and money are good. ” This was not in line with Buddhist culture. Now, there is a resurgence of Buddhist culture. Tricycle: Is there a model o f a Buddhist culture whose priority is to serve the people? Sulak: The Buddhist cultures, at least in Southeast Asia, have been a tremendous success at the village level. In my country, upuntil thirty years ago, you could not see the difference between the rich and the poor. Of course, there were rich people, but their lifestyle was similar to that of the poor. And their main motive was to improve the most beautiful place in the whole village - the temple. The temple was the center of learning, the center of intellectual pursuit, the center of spiritual pursuit, the center of

Articles and Interviews

65

all cultural activities. The environment was balance, and people knew how to behave. Tricycle: The resurgence that you speak of is at the village level and not in the institutionalized systems of Buddhism? Sulak: That's right. We imported cities from the West. Now Bangkok is the worst city. We didn't use a Buddhist approach to developingour cities. We only used the technological expertise of the West. Tricycle: And now? Sulak: These days, we must learn from various sources. But if you understand your own tradition, you can bring what is the most essential from it to the modern world. Tricycle: As American Buddhists-especially if we are of European descent-what traditions “ o f our o w n ” can we turn to? Sulak: I think that American Buddhists should learn from the original people of this country, the Indian people, who have really been destroyed. Tricycle: Is this plausible for the Euro-Buddhist community? Sulak: It's not your tradition, but it's the tradition of the land here. If you live on the land here you must learn the traditions of the land. And also, there are wonderful European traditions that have been killed in the last few hundred years such as Christian mysticism and the humility of the monks, and the love and charity of Christ. The idea in this tradition is very good: how to be humble, how to be mindful, and to face the suffering world in a meaningful way. But you from Europe must also depend on the Indian people here, some of whom are now working very closely with the Buddhists. Both believe in the trees, the land, the rivers. Tricycle: When you left Siam, there was a warrant for your arrest and, according to the newspapers, a sense that your life was in jeopardy . Do you have plans to return? Sulak: I'd like to go back, if I can. Yes. Tricycle.The Buddhist Review USA, Vol.l No.4 Summer 1992

66

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

RECONCILIATION IN BUDDHISM Reconciliation - bringing people or their viewpoints together (again), helping people to be of one mind - certainly has a place in all strands of Buddhist tradition. The Buddhist canon is full of examples which show the Buddha doing this. Whether between quarrelling monks, warring kings or fractious laypeople. The Buddhist practice of reconciliation includes mutual forgiveness and it is implicit in the ethical principles whose observance forms the basis of all spiritual progress. But in Buddhism reconciliation takes place in a mental framework so different from what Christians are used to that there is ample cope for misunderstanding and even a certain condescension towards the supposed “negativity” and “unworldliness” of Buddhism. The difference in mental background can be illustrated if we agree that reconciliation presupposes two people or groups whose interests, attitudes or opinions have become opposed. In the West, we assume that the personal relationships involved have become skewed and need to be rectified, or that there is some objective contradiction in the individuals viewpoints that needs to be discovered and resolved. In the East, however, the premise itself is not accepted: there are no two opposites if one adopts the standpoint of reality as against the illusions upon which we normally base our daily lives; reconciliation consists, not in overcoming difference, but in transcending it. The one approach is moral, the other ontological. Rather than lose ourselves in the intricacies of doctrine, let us turn to some examples of Buddhist practice to help us understand where the Buddhist equivalent ofwhat Christians meant by reconciliation lies. There are three modern Buddhists who could be said to have practised reconciliation to an outstanding degree: The Dalai Lama, who was born as Tenzin Gyatso into a peasant family in eastern Tibet in 1935, was yet to ascend the Lion Throne as spiritual and temporal ruler of his country when the Chinese invaded it in 1 950. Their cruel destruction of both the traditional culture and the natural environment led to open revolt in 1959, forcing the youthful ruler to flee the country with 100,000 refugees; he has been in exile in northwest India ever since. There are now 7.5 million Chinese in Tibet; 1.5 million Tibetans are estimated to have died under Chinese repression. In 1989 the Dalai Lama received the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his tireless and humane advocacy of his people's right to selfdetermination. He has consistently urged non-violent resistance to the intolerable provocation offered by the Chinese, invoking Gandhi 's renunciation of violence and the spirit of Buddhist compassion. No word of condemnation of the Chinese themselves has ever escaped his lips. “Tolerance can be learned only from an enemy”, he says. “Therefore,

Articles and Interviews

67

in a way, enemies are precious, in that they help us to grow.” His stance is based on the belief that “compassion and love are necessary inorder for us to obtain happiness or tranquility” “When you have fear, you can think, “Others have fear similar to this; may I take to myself all of their fears” Again and again he stresses the oneness of human nature everywhere. “When we return to this basis, all people are the same. Then we can truly say the words brother, sister; this gives us inner strength” We are challenged to develop not only “ a sense of universal responsibility”, but also “universal human and spiritual values” which can “become the fiber of the global family which is emerging”. Sulak Sivaraksa is a Thai Buddhist, born in 1933 and educated in Christian schools. After nine years in Britain he returned at twenty-eight to become one of his country's foremost intellectuals and social critics, suffering exile and the destruction of his bookselling business after the bloody military coup of 1976 and imprisoned for allegedly criticizing the king in 1984. After the most recent coup in February 1991 he again had to escape into exile for confronting both civil and military governments with their contempt for democracy and their exploitation of the people under the cloak of “development”. Far from accepting the usual cliches about the social and political nature of Buddhism, Sulak boldly asserts: “Religion is at the heart of social change, and social change is the essence of rel igion ’’.“Buddhism”, he says, “ i s primarily a method of overcoming the limits or restrictions of the individual self” based on “the Buddha's doctrine of no-self, or interdependence”. His summary of this could not be more succinct: “Religion means a deep commitment to personal transformation. To be of help we must become more and more selfless. To do this we have to take moral responsibility for our own being and our own society”. It should therefore come as no surprise that “ [traditionally Buddhism has seen personal salvation and social justice as interlocking components”. The key to reconciliation is that we “must come to see that there is no *‘other”. We are all one human family. It is greed, hatred and delusion that we need to overcome”. Thich Nhat Hanh is one of those Vietnamese monks who tried to keep open a “ third way” between communist revolution and capitalist domination during the Vietnam war. After the self-immolation of monks and nuns had drawn the world's attention to the Buddhists' peaceful protest, Thich Nhat Hanh embarked on a speaking tour through Asia, Europe and America to explain the religious basis of Buddhists' peaceful resistance. For this purpose he revived the term “engaged Buddhism” , which had been used in the 1930s. He was never allowed to return, and he has lived in exile ever since in a small community in northwest France. He sees his philosophy of reconciliation among all beings epitomized in a term from the Heart Sutra, which he translates “interbeing”

68

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

What he means by this can best be gleaned from one of his poems, entitled Please Call Me by My True Names: I am the mayfly metamorphosing on the surface of the river, and I am the bird which, when spring comes, arrives in time to eat the mayfly. 1 am the twelve-year-old-girl, refugee on a small boat, Who throws herself into the ocean after being raped by a sea pirate, and I am the pirate, my heart not yet capable of seeing and loving Please call me by my true names, so I can hear all my cries and laughs at once, so I can see that my joy and pain are one. Please call me by my true names, So I can wake up and so the door of my heart can be left open, the door of compassion. “Interbeing means that you cannot be a separate entity. You can only interbe with other people and elements”. If the flower is on its way to the garbage, the garbage is destined to nourish future flowers. “To me, this is the most important Buddhist teaching on non-duality”. Such is the practice of interbeing: accepting both the flowers and the garbage in everybody, so that compassion can eventually embrace both. Each of these contemporary Buddhists has suffered exile at the hands of particularly brutal oppressors of their people, yet each holds steadfastly to the path of non-violence. Though they are all familiar with Christianity and have participated in inter-religious dialogues, each draws both his practice and his teachi ng from the sources of Buddhist spirituality. The Dalai Lama belongs to the tradition known as the “Diamond Vehicle” (Vajrayana), which has been strongly influenced by the tantric Buddhism of India and the indigenous Bon religion of Tibet. Sulak Sivaraksa is a Theravadin or southern Buddhist who has learned much from the “Great Vehicle” (Mahayana) of northern Buddhism, the tradition of Thich Nhat Hanh. Their collaboration in exile is itself a practice of reconciliation, a precursor of Buddhist ecumenism. As is usual when Christians try to come to terms with Buddhists, the thoughts and example of these reluctant activists seem strangely familiar yet profoundly alien. Each of them insists on the interelatedness of all beings. We realise with a shock that the expression “interbeing” is meant to be taken literally, as is “universal responsibility”. Weare being presented with a spiritual ecology which acknowledges the rights of all beings, not just the human “other” to care and compassion. Yet at the

Articles and Interviews

69

same time each asserts the ultimate emptiness of all beings, for this is the deeper dimension of Buddhist “interconnectedness” (paticcasamuppada, the mutually dependent co-origination of all things, i.e. without the intervention of a creator God). Meditative insight in the illusory nature of the personal “self” is dependent to reveal the “emptiness” (shunyata) at the heart of all reality and of all attempts to speak about it. The Buddhist “absolute” (nirvana), the goal of the spiritual quest, is no exception to this. The question with which the lives and philosophies of the Dalai Lama, Sulak Sivaraksa and Thich Nhat Hanh confront the Christian is how the equanimity of Buddhist compassion results from the radical realism of Buddhist wisdom. This is all the more difficult to understand in that, although there are varieties of Buddhism such as Pure Land (Jodo Shin shu) which invoke the “other power” (tariki) of Amida Buddha, the more prevalent versions are based solely on the practitioner's own “power” (jiriki), appealing to the many sayings of the Buddha which stress the disciple's self-reliance and independence. Christians are also dismayed to find that Buddhist. “Loving-kindness” (metta), which the meditator is to radiate to all beings, is only the lowest in a series of spiritual states which rises through “compassion” (karuna) and sympathetic joy (mudita) to detachment from both joys and sorrows (upekkha, “equanimity”). This seems very different from the love (agape) and self-denial extolled in texts such as 1 Cor 13 , and it also seems far removed from those person-toperson relationships which are so central to Christian community. Further reflection, however, gives us pause. In the testimonies of all three of our Buddhist exemplars we detect as the deeper motive for their renunciation of feelings of hostility -let alone violent resistance- their conviction that anger and aggression do more harm to the aggressor than to the victim. This is the mainspring of Buddhist efforts at reconciliation. Christians practise renunciation by becoming involved in the alleviation of suffering, Buddhists by encouraging all, oppressors and oppressed, to be detached from the causes of suffering. Hard as this is for Christians to accept, it opens the way to that complete identification with the evil-doer which gives Buddhist compassion its universal scope. Not the guilt attaching to individual actions, but the fundamental “unsatisfactoriness” (dukkha) of existing at all is its object. In the light of this we can hope to understand the Great Vow of the Bodhisattva, the “ being on the way to enlightenment”, who turns back at the threshold of Buddhahood to work for the liberation of all beings from suffering. Universal reconciliation, including within its scope the natural as well as the human world, would be an acceptable way of expressing the Bodhisattva's intent. John D'Arcy May Irish School of Ecumenics Dublin

70

IWien Loyalty Demands Dissent Further Reading

The Dalai Lama, A Policy of Kindness: An Anthology of Writings By and About the Dalai Lama, ed. by Sidney Piburn (Ithaca NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1990) Ken Jones, The Social Face of Buddhism: An Approach to Social and Political Activism (London Wisdom Publications, 1989) Sulak Sivaraksa, Seeds of Peace: A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society (Berkeley: Parallax Press,1992)

Endnotes [1] The Dalai Lama, A Policy of Kindness: An Anthology of Writings By and About the Dalai Lama, ed. Sidney Piburn (Ithaca NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1990) pp, 105-6. Page numbers in the text refer to this publication. [2] Sulak Sivaraksa, Seeds of Peace: A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society (Berkeley: Parallax Press, 1992) p. 61. Page numbers in the text refer to this publication. [3] Cf. Thich Nhat Hanh, Vietnam: The Lotus in the Sea of Fire (London: SCM, 1967) p. 52. [4] Reproduced in full in Ken Jones, The Social Face of Buddhism: An Approach to Political and Social Activism (London: Wisdom Publications, 1989) pp. 104-5. [5] Thich Nhat Hanh with Anne Simpkinson, “Seeding the Unconscious: New Views on Buddhism and Psychotherapy” , Sulak Sivaraksa, ed., Radical Conservatism: Buddhism in the Contemporary World (Bangkok: Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development / International Network of Engaged Buddhists, 1990) pp. 48-57. REFLECTIONS ON MY LIFE AS A CHRISTIAN IN DIALOGUE WITH BUDDHISM There are certainly many ways in which 1 have been enriched as a Christian in my dialogue with Buddhism. And what 1 would like to do this morning is to share with you one experience in dialogue that has changed not only what I think about my Christian faith, but how I live as a Christian. Five years ago in Berkeley, at the Third International Buddhist-Christian Conference, I met Sulak for the first time. Sulak is active in interfaith and social development work in Thailand. I also met a Thai Christian, Kirti Bunchua, and a Sri Lankan Christian, Michael Rodrigo, who were also involved in that type of work in Asia. In learning more about their work, I saw how interfaith dialogue can develop mutual understanding and thereby mutual respect between Buddhists and Christians in a way that fosters a new sense of solidarity and

Articles and Interviews

71

unity between not only individuals but communities. A deeper personal report is built so that members of different communities begin to feel more united with one another and the problems of the members of one community are seen to be the problems of the others as well. Bridges of mutual care and concern are built and the personal foundation is laid for mutual co-opperation and collaboration between diverse communities for the good of everyone. Now in this dialogical activity, 1 not only saw Christians and Buddhists living and working together on the local level to address local problems of mutual concern. But from my Christian perspective, I also saw that Spirit at work who is ultimately leading us toward a more united humanity, a more peaceful and just world community, who is healing divisions and overcoming hatred and prejudice, who is calling the rich to share with the poor, who is reaching out to the lonely, the oppressed, the marginalized in order to draw us all together into a new and more united world, into what we Christians call the Reign of God. In dialogue, I saw Buddhists and Christians working together in concrete ways to further this ultimate goal of God and of humankind. Building the Reign of God is the work of God in the world and thereby is also the work of his Church. Therefore, this collaborative dialogue of Buddhists and Christians working together for the good of humankind made me rethink my role as a member of the Christian Church which was established by Jesus to realize the Reign of God. We know that we are to be a leaven for the Reign of God in the world, but I think we can sometimes imagine this Reign to be like a kingdom, the Kingdom of God, perhaps surrounded by walls, that grows by adding new territory and new members. In this vision, other religions add nothing to the Kingdom except by providing new territory to conquer and souls to convert. And in this paradigm, Jesus himself is seen as the conquering King. On the other hand, by becoming acquainted with Sulak, Kirti, Michael and many others East and West involved in this dialogue, 1 began to visualize working for the Reign of God in a different way. I began to see it as a journey of fellow pilgrims moving out of Egypt and toward the promised land. Amidst the difficult realities of today's world, it seems that we are traveling together as one pilgrim people through a wasteland. We are struggling together on a journey from slavery to fear, greed, hatred and ignorance to the freedom of love, compassion, and light; from self hatred and self centeredness to self esteem and self giving; from the poverty of the human spirit to being fully alive in the image of God. Buddhists, Christians, persons of other faiths and of no faith but with good will are all on this journey from division and oppression to unity and peace. And on this journey to the Reign of God, Christians are not called to be members of some static Kingdom built somewhere along the

72

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

way, but to be members of the Body of Christ walking with others as a light and leaven for the journey. In this vision, Jesus is not so much a King as a Servant. So we too as Christians are servants on a pilgrim's way with fellow pilgrims, with whom we can share our spiritual nourishment. And we too can be nourished by the others on our common journey, the journey of all humanity into the promised land, into the Reign of God. Also, in my discussions with Sulak , Kirti and Michael, I realized more clearly that just as the Egyptians pursued the Hebrews on their journey, there are forces of ignorance, hatred and division in our world today that attack us on our pilgrimage. All three of my new friends were in danger in their work because of persons who did not want diverse communities to be more united in their call for peace and justice. In fact, just a few moths after the Berkeley conference, 1 received a note from Paul Knitter that Michael had been shot and killed after celebrating Mass in Sri Lanka. And just a few months ago during the popular uprisings in Bangkok, Sulak had to flee from Thailand through Laos. In another part of the world, we can also see in what was once Yugoslavia what happens when the pilgrimage toward unity that respects diversity is side- tracked into the dead-end of “ethnic cleansing.” These forces of ignorance, division, hatred and violence affect all of us whether we are in Bangkok, Sarajevo, Los Angeles or here in Boston. Yet everywhere we are drawn by the Spirit of a God who is Love to reject the suggestions of these forces around us and in our hearts. We are called by this Spirit of Love to open our minds and to embrace in our hearts all of our brothers and sisters. Because as Jesus said, “Whatever you do to the least of your brothers and sisters you do to m e ” . Dialogue opens our minds to understand others, it opens our hearts to respect others, and it builds a solidarity between persons and communities of peoples that both celebrates diversity and fosters unity. So to conclude, as a Christian I have found in interfaith dialogue a way of journeying together with our brothers and our sisters of other faith communities. This way of dialogue fosters mutual understanding, mutual respect and mutual collaboration. And in this way of mutual sharing of our ideas, experiences, values, and especially of our lives, I feel that as a Christian I can be a bit more of what Jesus asks, and the Spirit impels, all of us Christians to be, namely, leaven for a new and more united and peaceful world community. Donald W.Mitchell Purdue University [Christian Homily delivered on Sunday Morning Worship at Marsh Chapel, Boston University, Buddhist-Christian Dialogue Service, 2 Augustl992.]

Articles and Interviews

73

THAIS IN US COMMEMORATE Q U E S T FOR DEMOCRACY Thai citizens living in the United States, along with sympathetic American friends, are rallying in support of their troubled brothers and sisters in Thailand. In major cities throughout the United States, expatriate Thais have responded to last month's turmoil by picketing Thai consulates and other relevant agencies, by holding conferences to disseminate information and by sponsoring fundraisers to help console their injured and bereaved fellow countrymen back home. A conference held last weekend at a Thai temple outside Chicago was origi nally expected to draw fewer than 1 00 partici pants, but attendance swelled to more than twice that number as Thais and non-Thais alike converged from around the country for three days of prayer, lectures, and workshops. “ T h e turnout exceeded o u r best expectations,” said Anan Sirisombatwattana of Chicago's Thai Resource Centre. Originally planned to commemorate the coinciding 60th anniversaries of Bhuddhadasa Bhikkhu's Suan Mokkhretreat in southern Thailand and the founding of Thailand's constitutional monarchy, a key component of the gathering was an examination of six decades of the “Quest for Thai Democracy.” Conferees from throughout the American Midwest, as well as from both east and west coasts and Canada, arrived on Friday evening to hear a speech by Dr. Sulak Sivaraksa, who has lived outside of Thailand since his verbal clash with Thai military figures last August. In keeping with the religious tone of the conference, Dr. Sulak offered as his remedy for Thailand's current political crisis a closer adherence by all Thais to the teachings of the Lord Buddha and those of Phra Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. The solution to Thailand's ills does not lie in which leader is chosen to become prime minister, Dr. Sulak suggested, and he urged his fellow Thais not to enslave themselves to temporal powers, be they persons or money. Instead, he said, “those of us who are Thais ought to regard ourselves as slaves of the Buddha.” Despite a cloud of gloom that reflected Sulak's bleak prospects of soon returning home , he ended on an optimistic note, pointing out the irresistible force of Dharma and its logical conclusion: “ I f we look to the future of Siam,” he said, “it's bound to be democratic.” Buddhist themes permeated the weekend, and each day began with religious rites. Talks presented during the weekend were filled with references to Dharma, the Sangha, and the relationship between Buddhism and democracy. American anthropologist Dr. Grant Olson, who had helped to

74

IWten Loyalty Demands

Dissent

organise the meeting, also addressed the assemblage. He pointed out that Phra Buddhadasa always believed his founding of Suan Mokkh in May 1932 (just one month before the historic transformation of Thailand's government from absolute rule to a constitutional monarchy) was no mere coincidence but rather an auspicious concurrence and a sign that democracy and Dharma were intricately related concepts. Dr. Olson went on to stress the importance of remembering original intentions, noting that Thailand seems to lose its way from time to time en route to the Buddhist and democratic ideals it once aspired to. Also present on Saturday afternoon was retired Colonel Somkid Srisangkhom, a contemporary of the visionaries who brought about the change to constitutional monarchy 60 years ago and a long-time champion of democracy in Thailand. Col. Somkid described the ‘vicious circle of elections, politics, and coups’ that has plagued his country during his lifetime. Col. Somkid complained that Thais have accepted the military as a fourth branch of government- an addition to the branches of legislature, executive, and judicary branches accepted in most other democracies. This would have to end, he insisted, if Thailand were ever to stop the vicious circle turning. He blamed the legitimation of this “fourth branch” on Thai academics and elected members of parliament, who he suggested have rushed to curry favour with military leaders after every coup. By offering to help the generals reorder the government each time, he said, they encourage the acceptance of military intervention in politics. Col. Somkid warned that the current situation could drag on for months and that more bloodshed might yet occur. He urged a reorganization of the Thai military and the removal of key officers he says are responsible for continuing tensions. “ W e are not yet at the end,” the retired soldier said. “ T h e military has learned nothing from history.” Other speakers included Dr. Thongchai Winichakul, assistant professor of history at the University of Wisconsin and a veteran of the popular demonstrations in Thailand during the 1970s. He pointed out that this was not just the 60th anniversary of Thai democracy, but the centenary of King Chulalongkorn's dramatic 1892 reforms which centralized the administration of the country. Though Dr. Thongchai credited those great changes with having laid the groundwork for modern democratic government, he also pointed out that an unfortunate and unforeseen by-product had been the quick ascendancy of the military and its influence over theThai bureaucracy . Dr. Thongchai also believes that the generals misunderstand the work's meaning and see democracy only as a set of institutions to guarantee law and order and the right of a certain class to govern.

Articles and Interviews

75

“Democracy” he said, “ i s not just institutions. It is people power.” Such power, Dr. Thongchai observed, has grown in the past 20 years, a period of great change in Thai Society. He dismissed the army leaders' characterisation of the pro-democracy demonstrators as a “resistance group.” On the contrary, he said, the 1991 coup should be seen as an act of resistance against the forces of change. Dr. Thongchai, a survivor of the October 1976 incident at Thammasat University and a prisoner for two years afterwards, said the violence of May 1992 shocked even him, but he did not expect it to deter continued opposition to military rule. A panel of six conferees conducted a forum at the end of the day to offer commentary on what had been said. Anchalee Kurutach, who teaches Thai and works as a refugee caseworker in Oakland, California, observed that Thais are not raised to question authority, something which, after coming to the United States, she discovered was an essential component of democratic society. She thanked Dr. Sulak for encouraging young Thais to be more critical, though she admitted it was still something she found hard to do. A Thai nurse on the panel echoed Anchalee's concern that Thai culture needed to change before democracy could flourish. She pointed to the health care field in Thailand as an example of the paternalism that dominates politics at home. “ I t wasn't until I started practicing in the United States,” she said, “that I even considered the patient's right to question treatments and medications.” Now she understands and believes in patients rights, and she feels the lack of them in Thailand hurts the medical professions. The conference concluded on Sunday with a series of workshops, one of which was intended to explore what Thais abroad and their nonThai friends could do to help better the situation at home. Conference organisers compiled a statement on behalf of the participants which was to be sent to key individuals and organisations in Thailand and across the United States. “ W e have resolved that both Thai authorities and the United States should understand the spiritual foundations of a large part of the social change taking part in Thailand,” the statement concluded. “ T h e interpreters of these religious traditions acknowledge that many of their most valuable teachings are in line with democratic principles, participation, and social harmony.” Though news in the US of events inside Thailand has slowed to a trickle since the violence ended, Thai communities across North America continue to seek ways of staying in touch with and lending support to the people back home. For example, a fair planned for June 28 at the Thai temple in North

76

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Hollywood, California, intends to raise money for the families of those who were injured or killed during last month's demonstrations in Bangkok. By offering live Thai music and selling food and T-shirts to those who attend, the members of Thai Taksin, a social group of southern Thais living in the Los Angeles area, hope to raise some money to send directly to Thai citizens who were affected by the violence. One of the fundraiser's organisers, a Pasadena lawyer from Trang named Sukum Sai-ngam, says the idea started out small but was growing. In a telephone interview, he referred to the tragic events of May as a “bloody down-payment” and observed that Thailand has taken a significant turn down the road to democracy. Hiscomments illustrate how very aware Thais in America are of the problems back home. “ In the past, this sort of thing would have been characterised as just another Third World upheaval and called part of a maturation process. Chamlong's fast added a whole new dimension, and the army's reaction has caused the age-old consensus to break down at last.” Though he said he feared more bloodshed would come, he hoped the people would not back down and accept another general as prime minister. “Any elected MP would be preferable. Elected leaders, no matters how corrupt, can at least be voted out of office. We Thais have got to keep this in mind. Generals cannot be voted out.” Joseph J. Wright, Jr. The Bangkok Post 6 June 1992 INTERVIEW OFTHE WEEK : RELIGION AND POLITICS : SULAK STYLE Though there may even be more coups in the short term, “The army has come to an end. If Suchinda or Kaset want to become MPs, of course they are most welcome . They may use bribery, they may use all sorts of tactics. But the point particularly after the May events is people are more and more aware of their own power,” says Sulak. “For the first time the Prime Minister comes from a real people's background,” whereas before premiers were always generals or from an elite background, he adds. But to Sulak this does not mean that the struggle is over for many old problems still persist: “Unfortunately the present government tries to forget about the May events. They came to power because of them, but they still worship the bureaucracy,[and] the multinational corporations.” What, then, according to Sulak, is the cure for Siam’s social ills? “You may call me a Buddhist maniac, ”he jokes; “for everything I go back to Buddhism.” In his recent book Seeds of Peace he writes of the ‘personal and societal transformation’ that engaged Buddhism offers: liberty not just from birth and death, but from social injustice.

Articles and Interviews

77

For Sulak, Buddhism has political and social lessons for Siam because of its critical edge. “The good thing about Buddhism is that it has no dogma,” Sulak maintains. “Criticism is the essential virtue in Buddhism,” and throughout the interview he stressed that there are positive and negative sides to every person and situation which need to be understood. With this critical attitude Sulak argues that the Buddhist monkhood -the sangha- can serve as a model for democracy in Siam. Though some are sceptical of Sulak's sometimes romantic view of the sangha, he does make some important points: “Because feudalism and consumerism have damaged the democratic element in the root of Buddhism, and for me that root is democratic. In Buddhism we are all equal....Equality means that you respect everyone.” When asked where women, who are excluded from much of Buddhism, fit into this sangha democracy, he replied, “Everyone has a right to participate -even women. They have been treated very badly by men. This is where speaking as a man Isay we should become humble. We must also work equally with women.” But Sulak still saw women's participation primarily in terms of women's ordination, and rights for nuns. Sulak argues that this critical Buddhist system worked in practice at the village level up until 30 years ago, where kamnan, village headmen and abbots, were chosen ‘democratically.’ But to Sulak these ‘elections’ were much more Siamese and Buddhist than those held in March and September of 1992. There was “nocompetition, nodebate. That'sagainst the Buddhist concept.” Local leaders were chosen by consensus, “ b y going to the most suitable persons, and asking them to serve. Most of them refused. Some senior monks even went away from the temple, because they did not want to become the abbot. They didn't want to do administrative work.” That is fine for history but how does this sometimes utopic Buddhist democracy work in the present? Sulak says he tries to challenge monks to address problems in society, to “make monks aware of the modern world, how to confront consumerism, plastic bags, foam, cigarettes. This is why the Army hates me. Tonotkill amosquito isgood. But to allow a Buddhist kingdom to spend most of their national budget on arms is basically against the Buddhist concept.” Although Sulak states that the Constitution is the Fourth Pillar of Siamese society, he insists that Buddhist Democracy differs form parliamentary democracy: ‘‘ Everything western that we have accepted we have made worse. My point is if you accept something that you don't understand you stick with forms. And the Siamese are wonderful with forms: elections, parliament, cabinets, the prime minister.” “Buddhism must understand politics,” but that is much different

78

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

form mixing religion and the party politics of western forms: “the middle way is not partisan. Christian Democrat parties [in Germany] destroy Christianity.” When asked about Buddhism and political parties in this country he replied, “That will kill Buddhism and kill politics. This is where I feel Santi Asoke went wrong, particularly with their uncompromising attitude. Buddhism is compromising.” The practical side of Sulak's work of the past few decades has involved politics at another level. Rather than dealing with the bureaucracy which is “the biggest political party” Sulak, like many other activists, seeks to democratise at the local level through non-governmental organisations (NGOs). The work of the NGOs is issue-based for grassroots democracy, and in times of trouble they can have a national influence. “The May events brought the NGOs al) together, ” Sulak states ; “without them it would not have spread to the whole country.” But the problem with the people in the NGOs, Sulak maintains, is that they do not appreciate Siamese culture and tradition enough. And this problem is not peculiar to them: “The main sin of this country is that we don't deal with our roots. We all come to Bangkok. We have lost the countryside.” Sulak tries to address this condition of modern society: “ My contribution is in linking the young leaders of the NGOs (to bridge the gap) with the monks.” So at the same time that Sulak coaxes the monks to consider modern problems like prostitution, consumerism and the environment, he pushes the people in the NGO's to consider their Siamese roots. “Now more of them understand Buddhist concepts... Young people [now] say that they have much to learn from the monks whom they previously looked down upon. But still this does not necessitate that the activists must be Buddhist, ” h e says. And the NGOs can affect public policy at the national level by serving as conduits between the democratic sangha and the government. “Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai listens to the NGOs,” report Sulak. And in this way the monks and the NGOs can help the government decentralise political and economic power so that it can benefit the people. Whether the present government will act on this advice is another matter, and it remains to be seen. “ M y mission is to confront the things that are fundamentally wrong with the country,” declares Sulak. “The present government, although democratic in form, really helps the status quo, it helps the rich to become richer, and the poor people will suffer. Those who stand for democracy and liberty will suffer.” This is a personal matter for Sulak who returned to Bangkok last month to face lese majeste and defamation charges that were filed against him by Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon after he delivered a political lecture entitled “The Tragedy and Regression of Thai Democracy” at Thammasat

Articles and Interviews

79

University in August 1991 , six months after the February 23, 1991 coup. “ M y case is very clear, ” Sulak declares. “ I am a victim of the NPKC. I have not done anything wrong, and they have used a very outmoded law to accuse me. This law of lesemajeste has been used to accuse a lot of people and a lot of people have suffered unnecessarily.” Sulak believes that his case will test the government's democratic resolve. “ If I fight the case it wil I give us a chance to see if we have become democratic in essence...! want to test whether the present regime...has moral courage enough to abolish this law. The moral courage to tell the public prosecutor to drop the charges against me. “ A t the same time, I am not selfish, I feel that our government is only democratic in form and that they are still afraid of hidden powers. If they don't do anything for me, I will understand.” Though many maintain that the lese majeste law is part of Thai tradition, Sulak argues that monarchs have been critically reviewed throughout history: T h e criticism of the monarchy has been done even with the absolute monarchy and this is where the Thai people right now have no historical perspective....! can quote you many many stories, it is in our history and literature.” Sulak insists that the charges are mislaid because he is using a Buddhist method to criticise the monarchy in order preserve it. “I’m a royalist, yes. I'm a monarchist, yes. But 1 don't blindly follow the monarchy. I'm a Buddhist, but 1 don't blindly follow the Buddha, [regard Buddhism as something very sensible. The Buddha said you must not believe everything before you accept it, and put his teaching into practice.” “Likewise, I accept the monarchy, but I don't accept the monarch as someone who is semi-divine who has supernatural powers. To some people to be loyal to the king means that you crawl and praise him in every way. I think that is very harmful to the monarchy. At the same time I feel that the kind of criticism you have in England is too much.” Any criticism must be respectful, Sulak insists. “ M y main argument is that I want the middle w a y . ” Sulak admits that this is very touchy subject, and feels that we must work step-by-step to address the situation. Citing a 22 December seminar at the Faculty of Law of Thammast University, he reports that the discussants “agree[d] that this [law] must be abolished if we want to go along democratic lines. O r the law should be amended... it should only be the Royal Household Department that can lay charges of lese majeste . Otherwise the law is liable to be used for political aims.” Even if the law was abolished, the Royal Family would be protected under the defamation law, says Sulak. He stressed: “ I don't want the Thai press to pry into the private life of the royalty.” Still “ t h e

80

VVTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

monarchy as an institution should be criticized.” Sulak will celebrate his fifth cycle this year and says that “ i n my old age 1 must try to think deeper and offer something more positivefly], at the same time realistically, not entirely nostalgicfally].” Sulak took philosophical attitude both toward his own his situation and Siam's in general: “Truth will win out in the e n d , ” he said, “compassion will overcome violence.” The Nation Weekly Briefing 23 January 1993 B A C K G R O U N D PAPER ON T H E NOMINATION O F S U L A K SIVARAKSA FOR T H E 1994 NOBEL PEACE PRIZE For more than 30 years Sulak Sivaraksa has been working nonviolently for peace, social justice and a form of development which truly expresses theculture and answers the needs of ordinary people, particularly in Asia. This is a struggle which has frequently brought him into conflict with the authorities. Indeed, he is currently involved in a court process which might lead to a term of imprisonment for having criticized the Thai generals who were responsible for the suppression of the 1991-92 democracy movement and allegedly defaming the king. The heart of Sulak's work is his attempt to support the essential elements of Asian (and particularly Thai) culture , in the face of the increasingly intrusive pressure of Western cultural values. The export of values and life-styles from the North to the underprivileged South is one of the deepest and most unacknowledged forms of violence in our age, and is the cause of the destruction o r erosion of the cultural integrity of many peoples. Sulak seeks to uncover in Thai Buddhism, and by extension, all threatened cultures, a development model which is faithful to tradition, while answering the human needs which Western development models claim they alone can provide. Sulak's Thai Work Defence and Renewal of Thai Religion and Culture In his work for the integrity of Thai culture, Sulak asks people to look critically at their cultural roots and to apply indigenous wisdom in searching for appropriate development models. He teaches them to question the mainstream western model of development, which was strongly imposed by the Thai military regime. One of Sulak's outstanding contributions to Thai culture and development has been to understand and mobilize the Thai Buddhist Order (Sangha). He saw its tremendous spiritual and cultural power, but also the identity crisis it entered in its search for a role in modern society. In 1966, Sulak collaborated with Thailand's two Buddhist universities to create a programme for training monks in community development. The pro-

Articles and Interviews

81

gramme developed awareness of modern social problems and knowledge of such basic tools for community work as skills in health care and community organizing. Based on this work, Sulak created the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development (TICD), which generated programmes for reaching out to other religious groups to work in community development. TICD has also specialized in identifying monks with special aptitudes for community development, indigenous health care techniques, and environmental preservation. Developing these specific relationships more deeply has enabled TICD to expand the work to new monks and communities while building an interconnected and versatile network of unique individuals and programmes. When TICD began 15 years ago, it was a small group of 15 monks working with a unique community development vision. Today, the work has spread to include over 200 monks with such well known success stories as the environmental work of Phra Prachak in Buriram province, the Buddhist cooperative programs of Luang Po Nan in Surin province, and the herbal treatment centers of Phra Somnuk in Nakhon Pathom province. As the network grew larger, Sulak encouraged these monks to form their own network, Sekhiya Dhamma (Dhamma for self-cultivation) which seeks to redefine and apply Buddhist teaching to changing modern conditions. In order to engage in such progressive development work, Sulak and the monks saw the need to bring the Sangha discipline up to date; for instance, by setting a Buddhist standard for dealing with modern materials like plastics and hazardous chemicals which are not spoken of by the Buddha. Through a bimonthly magazine, preaching, and workshops, the network has sought to create a grassroots consumer protection agency. Ultimately, these programmes have educated and conscientized both the monks and the local communities on the dangers of global consumerism, and on the alternatives. One dream of Sulak's that has been recently realized is to create a place for socially concerned activists, writers and artists to renew their intellectual and spiritual energy. An Ashram for Life, Society and Nature was set up about 50 km. northeast of Bangkok so that people can come and live a simple life while using their talent creatively to serve society. They are invited to stay for short retreats to rejuvenate themselves before returning to their work. It also serves as a place for meetings, seminars and training courses. In the recent past the Ashram has hosted trainings for local Thais, Cambodians, Burmese and Sri Lankans on nonviolent confl ict resolution, alternative development and meditation for social action. Much of Sulak's work has involved publications - he has founded and edited at least seven magazines in Thai and English, and published more than one hundred books on culture, development, Buddhism, non-

82

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

violence and humanitarian principles. Sulak began his career as an editor in 1963, when he founded the Social Science Review. This heralded the beginning of a new intellectual renaissance after a period of fear and despair among Thai intellectuals following the arrest, killing and exile of progressive writers, academics, politicians, artists, and social activists when Field Marshal Sarit seized power in 1957. Sulak' s role within the country has been to remind the Thai people to be aware of the value of theirown cultural roots so they will not blindly follow the western model of development which encourages violence, materialism, power and centralization. He wants Thais to have selfrespect, respect their own ancestors and indigenous wisdom without turning the clock back to the ‘‘golden past”, but able to apply those values skillfully so that they can live simply, happily and in harmony with nature. At the same time Thais must develop a new attitude towards their neighbors and learn to respect their cultures and religions, which may be different from their own. Popular Participation and The Criticism of Authority Over the past three decades Sulak has urged young people and grassroots leaders to participate actively in the decision-making processes of society. To mobilize these groups he has written and published books and articles, served as the editor of several magazines promoting alternative solutions to society's ills, and spoken at thousands of public meetings. He has also encouraged young people to set up alternative non-governmental organizations to organize seminars and cultural activities, run training courses, promote grassroots leadership and implement model projects to demonstrate the viability of appropriate alternatives for the future. One characteristic of his work and life is that Sulak always tries to honor ordinary people who have made great contributions to Thai society, contrary to the tradition of exclusively honoring the monarchy and the military. He is also extremely courageous in criticizing authority, and has made a major contribution to freedom of expression in the rather closed society of Thailand. In 1967, Sulak narrowly avoided a charge of lese majeste for an article criticizing the king's behavior. In 1976, when the student movement was completely crushed by the ultra-rightist movement, thousands of his books were removed from the warehouse and burnt. As a result one of his book-shops went bankrupt. He was forced to live in exile for two years, teaching at various universities in Canada and the United States of America. Seven years later, in a similar situation to the events of last year, he was charged with lese majeste, and subsequently arrested. On August 22, 1991 , Sulak made a speech at Thammasat Univer-

Articles and Interviews

83

sity called “Regression of Democracy After the February Coup”, on the basis of which General Suchinda Kraprayoon, then Army Commander-inChief, charged Sulak with lese majeste and personal defamation. The charges stemmed from various comments about the misuse to the monarchy for political advantages, and accusations that the leaders of the coup of 22 February 1991 had secretly visited Burma to acquire logging concessions. At the time of writing (March 1993) , Sulak is involved in court proceedings on these charges which could lead to a 7-15 years sentence.

Non-Violence, Peace and Justice Following the uprising of 1973, the students' movement became very powerful, and large sections began to consider the use of violence as a means ofchanging social structures. Sulak remained firm in hiscommitment to nonviolence, despite the fact that his position soon became unpopular amongst certain circles of the student movement. In 1976, together with progressive Muslim, Christian and Buddhist friends, Sulak helped to form the Coordinating Group for Religion in Society (CGRS) to create a nonviolent alternative to the increasingly violent and polarized extremes of the left and right. In addition, a small group of young people inspired by Sulak, independently formed a group called Ahimsa to study and promote nonviolent action and literature. This group and the CGRS played a crucial role after the bloody coup of 1976, giving support to the thousands of political prisoners, and running national and international campaigns for their release. The Social Science Review was the first to publicize and provide information about the US bases in Thailand and their involvement in the Vietnam war. The magazine helped to form a bridge between Thai activists and the anti-war movement in the West; and after the Vietnam war, Sulak and his colleagues were the first group of Thai people to visit Indochina. On his return, in opposition to the prevailing propaganda of the Thai military, Sulak argued that Thailand should not see these socialist countries as enemies. When these countries recently opened up, Sulak was again at the forefront in criticizing the Thai business and military sectors for exploiting their neighbors. After the coup of 1976 , Pajarayasara, one of the magazines Sulak had founded, became a forum for people who were interested in nonviolent social change. Since the eighties, it has been theonly journal initiating and promoting discussion of alternative ideas among the Thais. In 1988 Sulak founded and served as director of the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute (Peace-democracy-righteousness) to promote the pursuit of Santiprachadhamma in Thai society. The two main objectives of the Institute are to deepen knowledge and thought on peace, nonviolence,

84

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

democracy and righteousness, as well as their application to current situations in Thai society, and to search for and develop the human resources conducive to the realization of these principles. Its activities include participatory research and publication, training and teaching (such as a programme for new and prospective workers of non-governmental organizations), exhibits, seminars and community activities.

Sulak's International Work The Message to the North Sulak has often been invited to address universities, meeting and conferences in Europe and North America, where his main message for people in the “first world” is that there is a viable alternative to “Western-style” development, based on spirituality and , particularly from his point of view, Buddhism. He also emphasizes the interdependence between those in the “first” and “third” worlds, noting that we are all inextricably linked. He states that the structural exploitation between the two must be ended, and that ordinary people have the power to achieve this by changing their lifestyles and exercising their rights and responsibilities justly and compassionately. Sulak encourages westerners to pay more attention to inner cultivation, to develop inner peace for personal transformation, which will lead to social transformation. Members of the Green Movement and the Peace Movement should have more peace within themselves, otherwise they will hate themselves and their own families, which is antithetical to working for peace in society. For western Buddhists, Sulak's message is that meditation alone is not enough. They must face the suffering society and develop insight into unjust social structures. Otherwise their Buddhist practice is just another kind of escapism, relevant only for rural society. For Buddhism to be meaningful in the present time, it must be applicable to industrial and postindustrial society, and able to respond to global issues, and it is no surprise to learn that Sulak has been consistent in his support of oppressed groups in many countries, including Burmese, Tibetans, tribal Buddhists in Bangladesh, Nepal and Ladakh, and the untouchables in India, not to mention the tribal minorities in his own country, Thailand. The International Network of Engaged Buddhists In 1989, Sulak co-founded the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB) . It was the first international Buddhist network to link socially active Buddhist individuals and groups worldwide to support one another. INEB's areas of concern centre around alternative education and spiritual training, women's issues, human rights, the environment, alternative development and the integration of spirituality and activism. It also

Articles and Interviews

85

serves as a clearing house for information and creative solutions to local, national and international problems. INEB further encourages the sharing of diverse traditions by publishing and sponsoring the translation of various books and pamphlets, as well as by sponsoring, organizing and conducting training workshops locally and internationally. INEB's greatest concern is empowering Buddhists and people of all denominations in areas under great duress, such as Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia and Sri Lanka. Recently, INEB has conducted trainings on socially-engaged Buddhism for Sri Lankan monks, Cambodians, Burmese and Nepalese. By helping to create leaders at the local level skilled in nonviolent social and political interaction, alternative economics, ecology and spiritual development, INEB desires to empower local communities to solve their own problems and create strong, wholesome societies. By the pivotal nature of his work, which bridges the artificial divides of North and South, Buddhist and non-Buddhist, self and other, bringing a healthy mix of universalism, and concern for local culture, and by the exemplary courage he has manifested in “speaking truth to power”, Sulak Sivaraksa has made, and continues to make, a major contribution to peace and justice in his native Thailand, as well as in the world as a whole. Mairead Maguire an abridged version of this article appeared in The Bangkok Post 19 March 1993 GREEDY FOR THE GOOD LIFE Social critic and nobel peace prize nominee Sulak Sivaraksa, who faces lese majeste and defamation charges, talks with Pravit Rojanaphruk about flaws in Thai society. When 29-year-old Sulak Sivaraksa returned home from England in 1962 after completing his education in Philosophy and Law, he was like almost any other Thai with a foreign diploma. “ I was a full-fledged elitist,” recalled Sulak, who turns 60 next Saturday. Sitting in his office at his Kled Thai publishing house, across the street form the Ministry of Interior, Sulak - with his mottled-grey hair and serious square face - poured Chinese tea from a white China pot into matching cups as he talked. Born in 1933 an affluent Thai-Chinese family, son of a chief accountant for the Thai Tobacco Monopoly, Sulak describes himself as a “call-a-spade-a-spade person”. His critics, however, call him a “professional gadfly” who pesters Thai governments. One of Thailand's foremost social critics and activists, Sulak

86

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

founded and edited at least seven magazines in Thai and English, and has published more than 1 00 books on culture, development, Buddhism, nonviolence and humanitarian principles. This month saw Sulak nominated for the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize by Mairead Maguire, an Irish woman who won the 1976 Nobel Peace Prize, who said of him: “ I am extremely impressed by his life-long dedication to non-violence and truth.” But come April 8, Sulak will face prosecution on charges of lese majeste and defamation filed by former junta leader, NPKC vice-chairman and Prime Minister Suchinda Kraprayoon. He faces a sentence of up to 15 years in prison if found guilty. Soon after his return from England, in 1963, Sulak began hiscareer as an editor when he founded Sangkomsart Parithat (The Social Science Review), a quality social science magazine that became popular among Thai intellectuals. While editing the magazine he decided that, unless one cares about the problems facing ordinary people, the majority of whom live in rural areas, exercising intellect is simply ‘‘intellectual masturbation”. Estimates the fiery Sulak, 99 per cent of foreign-graduated Thais work for their own self-interest. “They are unaware that they cause problems to their society, as many serve dictators or employers without proper consciousness,” he said. “Studying abroad is like a double-edged sword. If you study abroad without knowing the country that you stay in, and the oppressed of that particular society, then you get an education fit to serve only your own social mobility and dictators. And if we cannot grasp this, we become like animals.” In Thailand, intellectuals who have multi-disciplinary knowledge hardly exits, Sulak said. “Most Thais are productsofcompartmentalization. History teaches us about the truth of the past, Literature teaches us about dreams, Philosophy teaches us about contemplation and Law teaches us about the search for justice - all of these are related.” While most Thais worship Western culture and technology, they understand Western culture only as far back as the renaissance period, Sulak lamented. Very few Thais, he said, know about Greek philosophy or Latin language or about Christianity, which is the root of Western culture. Sulak claims that importing Western ideas haphazardly without properly understanding one's native culture and the foreign culture from which the ideas come leads to a struggle between two forces- wattana tham baan (rural culture) and wattanatham muang (urban culture). “ I n a rural culture, everyone is equal. Buddhism is at the centre of everyone's heart, people respect and care for each other. But over the past

Articles and Interviews

87

30 years, this very culture has been destroyed and mutilated because of an imported urban culture.” Further, Sulak contends, people have been brainwashed by the education system to think that working in the government bureaucracy is superior to other occupations, and those working for the government start to think of ordinary folks as ignorant. He feels this is the root cause for a society in which ordinary villagers sell their daughters as prostitutes, migrate to the city's slums or struggle to go to foreign lands to work. Sulak has tried to convince the public that a rural and traditional culture is essential, and that life lived for oneself is meaningless. Much of his life seems to support the notion. In the 1960s, he participated in a number of rural development projects with activists and students. In the 1970s he became the central figure of many organizations: The Komol Keemthong Foundation (named for a young teacher killed by communists in 1971), the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development, the Coordinating Group for Religion and Society, the Slum Childcare Foundation and the Pridi Banomyong Institute. Later, he and other activists co-founded the Asian Cultural Forum On Development and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Sulak and his colleagues attempted to develop models for contemporary life which avoided consumerism and materialism. "‘Consumerism exploits the minds and bodies of the young and is entirely dysfunctional,” he wrote in 1992's Seeds of Peace. Today, he has not changed his mind. “ I f Thais cannot grasp the essence of Thai culture and know themselves, they can easily fall into a culture that is only after money. But those who understand Thai culture use the weaknesses of the culture to exploit their own countrymen. Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai elevated himself from being the son of an ordinary person-he may not think of exploiting his countrymen but the system forced him, unknowingly, to do so. Prime Minister Chuan has to pay lipservice to the mass media and to the military. ‘‘ Banharn Silapacha, secretary of the Chart Thai party, also understands Thai culture. He provides people of Suphan Buri province with benefits and interest under one condition - he must be the number one man in that province. Rich tycoons from the CP group, the Siam group and the Chirathivat group also used the institutions as their means to gain interest. “These weaknesses of Thai culture have been utilized to benefit a few. England, too, used to claim that whatever the government did was for ‘God, King and Country’. In fact, it benefitted a few capitalists, high ranking officials and elitists. And Thailand isn't much different,” Sulak continued. Sulak's love for tradition and Buddhism started when he was 1 2, he

88

VVTien Loyalty Demands

Dissent

said. During the Second World War, he was ordained as a novice at Wat Thong Noppakhun , where he remained for 18 months, a time Sulak recalls as a good break from his Catholic education at Assumption College. It was then that the kernel of Thai culture and Buddhism germinated in Sulak. ‘‘The temple was the place where I learned to contact both rich and poor, where my seed of Thai culture was planted. But only the poor join the monkhood, and this is one of my concerns, ” Sulak said. Though he never seems at a loss for identifying problems plaguing society, Sulak remains hopeful. “ I n Bangkok we see traffic jams, pollution, but we cannot see human values. Some say it's too late, but I say we ought not to debate and to start working now. We must fight with love. To fight against greed by giving isn't easy , but it can be done, ’’Sulak averred. Besides the time he has devoted to various organizations, Sulak's struggle for an alternative society is reflected in his way of dressing — a symbolic fight for the return of wattanatham baan. He often wears col larless cotton shirts, loose cotton trousers with a pha khamah (loin cloth) as a belt, and slippers, while holding a walking stick in one hand on a fine day, he may wear traditional phamuang, lustrouspurple wrap-around trouser. His style of dressing sometimes embroils him in bitter situations which, he dismisses, reflect the mentality of present society. “Often times when I go to different district offices, the officers shout at me saying I am a Chinaman, a bugsiew (lousy fellow) and all that. What kind of honour do officials want to get? Aren't government offices places to serve citizens? 1 was once chased out of The Oriental Hotel for dressing like this. It's clear that Thai society works for 10 percent and not for 90 per cent of the population. “ H o w much do you think foreign-made suits which atypical M.P. wears cost? It's these very people who claim that they represent poor rural villagers. Yes, it's their money. But if they didn't spend that much, they could help other people with the excess money from their clothes.” Thais now are as reluctant to wear traditional Thai clothing as they are to accept the truth as it is, Sulak said. “ I am a person who says what I see - (I call) ‘a spade a spade’,” he said, smiling. Of course, it's his passion for pursuing truth that has gotten him into so much trouble since his youth. In 1976, after Thailand experienced a bloody coup and hundreds of students were killed, thousands of Sulak's books were burned and he was on the “arrest list” . Out of the country at the time , he went into exile for two years, teaching in the United States and Canada. In 1 984 , he was arrested in Bangkok on charges of lese majeste, but he was pardoned after a wave of international protest. And, in September 1991 , another warrant for his arrest was issued for the charges

Articles and Interviews

89

he faces now. The reason for the current charges: a speech he gave at Thammasat University about democracy and the coup d'etat on August 22, 1991 . He was charged with lese majeste, or criticizing the King, and also for allegedly defaming then Army Commander-in-Chief Suchinda. Following the warrant's issue, he went into refuge in Europe, America and Japan and just returned Dec. 14. “ I f you have gone to any mom and pop store, you can see H.M. the King's portrait high upon the wall, ” he said, “but on the same wall, you'll see bags of instant noodle for sale. They should be arrested. But Thailand is a country where criminals are given pardons while those who speak the truth are not.” Though he is an outspoken critic of so-called elitists, Sulak has been described much the same by some of his own disciples. Sulak contends he respects ordinary people, though he admits that his understanding of Thai and Western cultures makes him feel arrogant at times. “ If I am aware of it, then I am humble. Though I don't have much money, I have something that is considered ‘better’. I have no false modesty like the Japanese who intentionally humble themselves so as to get admiration. I also have no modesty,” he said. Sulak acknowledges his shortcomings over the years. “In a way, I am elitist, and in another, I’m a simple and ordinary person. We humans are composed of many elements, both good and evil. A man who has no conflicts would be a bodhisattva (Buddhist deity), ” he said. Though he said he's satisfied with his personal life, he insists that his professional life is a failure. “If my life wasn't a failure, there wouldn't be so many prostitutes, so many polluted canals. I do only things that I am capable of doing. But I have always failed at things I thought I was capable of . These failures are due to the unreadiness of the public. People respect money before everything else,” he said. Sulak, who has one son and two daughters, said his family is a happy one. “ M y wife is very understanding , though my kids may think what I do is crazy. I do not expect much from my children. It is enough that my children do not get addicted to heroin or contract Aids. Other parents, however, want their children to be angels.” With his life entering its fifth-cycle year, Sulak said he hopes to spend less time working and more time thi nking , and hopes to write a book about an alternative society. “ I am now a senior citizen. 1 sell my ideas - if they buy them, they do the work ...” “You think that 1 have no greed?” Sulak asked. “Some people wanted me to be an angel, but I have greed. My greed isn't to get a Nobel Peace Prize. My greed is to see society the way I wish it to be.” The Nation SUNDAY FOCUS, 21 March 1993

90

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

SULAK : CHUAN MUST DEFY BUREAUCRACY As he turned 60 on Friday , social critic and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Sulak Sivaraksa launched a broadside against Prime Minister Chuan Leekphai - accusing him of ignoring the people and bowing t? the bureaucracy. “Khun Chuan and I have been friends for more than 20 years. But I have to challenge him as this is my democratic right, ” Sulak told The Nation in an interview at Santi Pracha-Dharma Institute of which he is founder and director. He said whoever becomes prime minister normally views himself as the ‘big boss’ of the bureaucracy, the institution he charged that looks down upon the people. “If the prime minister regards himself as representing the people, he should be courageous enough to defy the bureaucracy,” he said. But the premier did not understand this point, Sulak said, referring to Chuan's refusal to intervene in the legal process before Sulak was charged with lese majeste and defaming an ex-army chief on March 8. Even though Chuan has the authority to order the prosecutors to withdraw the charges, he did not do so and bowed to the bureaucracy, he said. Chuan has said Sulak asked him to order prosecutors to drop the charges, but he refused, saying he could not intervene in the legal process. Sulak was charged with insulting H.M. the King and defaming former army chief Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon. If found guilty, he could be jailed for 15 years. The prominent social critic had gone into exile in Europe when Suchinda first brought charges against him. He returned home late last year, anticipating a fairer hearing under Chuan's elected government. Sulak is fighting charges stemming from an August 1 991 speech at Thammasat University when he criticised the dissolved National Peace Keeping Council and suggested that the lese majeste law be abolished. He is a leading Buddhist scholar who describes himself as a staunch royalist. Early this month , he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Mairead Maguire, herself a winner of the prize from Northern Ireland. Sulak told The Nation that the longer his defamation and lese majeste lawsuits dragon, the more damaging it would be for the prime minister and the country. He said his speech was made to challenge the dictatorial rule of the NPKC, but the government did not recognize his struggle against dictatorship at all. “Instead, the government regards the law which takes advantage of the people as being more significant than the struggle against dictatorship,” he said, referring to Chuan's repeated remarks that the country

Articles and Interviews

91

would be administered according to law. “Any way, it's still better to have Chuan as prime minister than others,” he said. “To have at least a form of democracy is better than nothing.” Sulak predicted that if Chuan did not listen to the people, his government would collapse because the people's political awareness now is quite high. In the longrun, Thailandhastochange because current development concentrates on luxury, sex, taking advantage of others, power and a culture of consumerism. “Arms should be reduced and the military has to change its role. Soldiers should serve as ‘national fences’ (to defend the country) rather than intervene in politics,” he said. Asked to comment on the future of Thai society, Sulak said there is likely to be violence like the May tragedy last year, if the people do not stop competing with each other for money. He said the public would not continue to be passive any more. But if politicians take sides with them, there could be a peaceful solutions to problems. He expressed doubts over the government's handing of the May incident. “I'd like to ask if the Prime Minister would hold a religious ceremony for the May victims Actually, he has to , because he would not have risen to the top post if it was not for the May victims. The government is unwilling to build even a memorial for them.” Sulak said Thais have easily forgotten major incidents like the May tragedy; the Oct. 14, 1973 student uprising and the military suppression of students on Oct. 6, 1976. He said Thais often forget such events because the people had lost out in the incidents. “Thais love winners even though most of the winners were evil” he said. He questioned the Chuan government's sincerity in wanting to help the poor when they invited senior bankers to become deputy prime ministers. “The government is not courageous enough to make decisions because it wants the country to be rich. At the same time, it says it wants to help the poor. This is impossible.” He pointed out that if the government wants to help the poor, it has to delay or reject its aim to become rich for a certain period of time. He said democracy should not be identified with any specific political party or politicians because these are like actors on stage. The substance of democracy is equality, fraternity and liberty .

92

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

In a democratic system, the commoners are significant. In the last 40 years, they have been brainwashed into thinking that they are insignificant, stupid and poor, he said. At present, they have gradually started to realize they are not stupid. They rely more on themselves than on the government for help. They grow rice following the traditional method and enhance their ancestors' wisdom, according to Sulak. “This is a significant turning point in Thai society which should influence our neighboring countries like Burma,” he said. Asked about the qualifications of an idealistic politician, he said they do not exist. The Palang Dharma Party and its founder Chamlong Srimuang made a mistake in trying to establish an idealistic politician's image. “Let's look for one who is least evil,” hesaid, adding that it is ‘ all right ’ having politicians like Chuan or Deputy Prime Minister Banyat Bantadtan. Democracy is not idealistic. The idealistic rule is dictatorship, he said, referring to Plato's idea in The Republic that the ideal ruler is the philosopher king. Such an idea, Sulak said , cannot be applied to democracy which upholds the principle of accepting the clash of different opinions and decentralization. Krissana Chairat The Nation 21 March 1993 PROFILE : SULAK SIVARAKSA Anglo- Americans' Jacobin in Thailand Virtually every individual connected to Thailand's synthetic “democracy movement” directs inquiring reporters to “the man behind it all”: Sulak Sivaraksa. The movement, created by Anglo-American intelligence for the purpose of weakening or destroying the military, religious, and political institutions of that nation, is composed of hundreds of NGOs (non-governmental organizations), but is run by only a handful of individuals who overlap at these various NGOs. What they all have in common is their funding and direction from the U.S. government and intelligence institutions, and their connection to Sulak. Sulak is now in exile, living mainly in the United States and Canada, with occasional trips to Europe. He is in a familiar environment, since he spent much of his adult life in the West, and, despite his firmly professed Buddhist faith, confirms that “most of my friends are Anglicans.” His international organization, the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, was spawned from the American countercultural

Articles and Interviews

93

swamp left over from the 1960s and '70s in Berkeley, California. He espouses the most wretched forms of the British colonial ideology of the “noble savage,” demanding that the Thai people be denied access to even the most primitive kinds of technology, in favor of the “joy” of backwardness andpoverty. Hishatredofscienceandtechnology parallels thatof Cambodia's Pol Pot and the MaoistsofChina'sCultural Revolution. Like the British-controlled Jacobin terrorists Marat and Danton, who directed the 18th-century French Revolution into mob assaults against science, against progress, so Sulak and his friends have been deployed to wreck the sovereign independence of the Southeast Asian nations, one of the last remaining areas of economic growth on this planet. British education Sulak was born to a wealthy Sino-Thai business family. He was educated in the best foreign schools in Bangkok before going to England for college. He spent nine years there, first at St.David's University in Wales, then at Middle Temple in London, where he qualified for the bar in 1960. Asked about his relationship with the British and the Anglican Church, Sulak replied: “This is my identity.” After a year in training as a broadcaster at the BBC, he returned to Thailand. He was set up as editor of the Social Science Association Press of Thailand, and its journal, the Social Science Review. The Ford Foundation was actively supporting and expanding the work of the Social Science Foundation throughout the 1960s and 1970s, setting up Social Science Institutes at the universities. Under Sulak's direction, the journal and a bookstore he opened became the focus of radical opposition to the Thai government. As he explained: “1 went home in 1961 from Wales with all my Anglicanism. 1 was supposed to be upperclass, but (my magazine) became a torch in the dark world. All the students looked up to our magazine and they all came to see me and 1 became a small hero among a small group of people. . . and the demonstrations in 1973 started from my bookshop.” The “joy” of primitivism The message Sulak delivers to the Thai youth is that of rabid antidevelopment and iconoclastic attacks on the institutions of state. On the potential for Thailand to emerge as one of the “Little Dragons” (economically powerful states in Asia), Sulak opined: “ I, of course, was a very outspoken critic of this. 1 said that development means human development.” This is the typical vocabulary of the International Monetary Fund and the U.N. ecological fascists, who justify the economic backwardness imposed by the IMF under the guise of ecological and “human development” frauds. The peasantry should be “self-reliant,” without the benefit of fertilizers or ‘ ‘ mechanical stuff,” Sulak told an interviewer from

94

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

his home in Toronto. “Let's go back to our buffaloes, go back to growing with joy.” Sulak irrationally equates the Thai military with the most hideous forms of fascist and communist dictatorships. Thailand, despite severe problems of corruption, is generally considered to suffer, not from authoritarianism and lawlessness. Still, Sulak says that the Thai military accommodation to the Japanese in World War 11(when the British offered no assistance whatsoever to Thai land's defense) shows their inherent fascism, and that the Thai military imitated the Nazis by accusing the Chinese minority in Thailand of being an inferior race, an enemy of the Thai people. “ All this is never acknowledged,” he says, and traces the military leaders of the postwar period to these imaginary roots. The Thai military, he insists, is on a par with the ex-Soviet and Chinese communist tyrannies. Sulak's training in the modern form of CIA intelligence operations through NGOs was carried out during the mid- 1970s in the United States. He was in the United States to lecture at the Smithsonian Institution, when he learned that he had been arrested in absentia in Thailand. He spent the next few years lecturing at the University of California at Berkeley. At Berkeley, he met up with the myriad institutions that emerged out of the countercultural hey-day in Berkeley. The “New Religion Project” at the Berkeley Divinity School was actively profiling and shaping a wide variety of sects and cults for various purposes, while U.S. intelligence operations for Asia were using Berkeley as a major base for its operation. One of the groups that emerged was the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, founded in the late 1 970s, composed primarily of aging hippies who were “experimenting” with Buddhism. Later, in the 1980s, this group sought out Sulak to head a new international organization, providing him with backing and direction. This organization, the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (1NEB) , according to one of its spokesmen, was based on the principle that “the Buddhist practice of wall-gazing was a selfish pursuit, and that Buddhists should become ‘engaged’. “Their first ‘engagements’ were efforts to stop nuclear power in Asia, save the whales, and other operations linked to such radical environmentalist groups as Greenpeace. “Buddhist Socialism” Sulak had been influenced by a Thai Buddhist sect headed by a monk named Buddhadasa, who was an advocate of ‘‘ Buddhist socialism” was justified-in fact, necessary-provided only that the dictator was righteous. While this is a point of debate among Sulak's followers, it does not prevent him from denouncing the leaders ofthe current government as vile dictators, and even declaring that General Suchinda is not a Buddhist-

Articles and Interviews

95

despite the fact that the ruling council of the Thai Buddhist Sangha visited Suchinda with a pledge of support as the legitimate head of state. Sulak boasts that the rural monks he has helped organize “take no notice of the hierarchy.” Sulak also attacked the king, specifically his involvement in the economic development of the country, claiming that this had “spoiled the monarchy.’’ T h i s earned Sulak the charge of lese majeste, which is one of the reasons he is now in exile. As for the NGOs in Thailand which ran the recent violent revolt, Sulak claims to have instructed virtually all of their leaders, especially those behind the scenes. Fully aware of the source of their funding in the Anglo-American intelligence community (in fact, he is responsible for much of the fund-raising), he brags that they “have now become very much respected... So the people are captured by them ... These NGOs have now become the democracy movement. Nobody trusts the government; they trust the NGOs.”Sulak boasts, “ I have become a hero again” The following are excerpts from two interviews with Sulak Sivaraksa that were made available to EIR: O n his British identity: I was brought up in an Anglican college, in Wales. In fact, I am to have dinner with the Prime Minister of Canada tonight. This is my identity. In 1961, having returned from Wales with my Anglican background, 1 started an intellectual magazine. Before I returned, there was nobody [doing] intellectual publications whatsoever. Anybody who criticized the military government was considered a communist. I did not knowthat . I went home in 1961 from Wales with all my Anglicanism 1 was supposed to be upper class. But 1 became a torch in the dark world. Then of course, all the students looked up to our magazine and they all came to see me and I became a small hero among a small group of people. So I started a coffee club, and that was the place where all the student leaders came, for 1 0 years, from '63 to '73. 1 started a bookshop, and the demonstrations in 1973 started from my bookshop. It started with 11 people, and it ended up just like this time(1992). But this time, it was half a million people. 1 am supposed to be, you see, the originator of all this. Founding the N G O s : From 1978 onward, for the last 14,15,16 years, I have been very active in founding various non-governmental organizations. Non-governmental organizations have now become very much respected, because they are honest, composed of young people. They hardly get paid properly, and they work for an alternative. So the people are captured by them. 1 founded the first one 25 years ago. I usually was not the founder; I usually got more respectable persons to be the founders. People know I am behind the scenes.

96

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

We sent all this information to the Asia Watch, to the Asia Resources Center, so they came. The Children’s Foundation-I am not really in the forefront, but the managing director was my secretary. All three of our organizations-they were all raided. All these organizations, in their opinion, are clandestine and anti-government. But we are working for the people, for justice, truth, and nonviolence. We have them all over the country now. In the north, there is a kind of networking-in the northeast, in the south. That is why this time, unlike October 1976, the demonstrations took place all over the country, not just in Bangkok, because the NGOs are involved everywhere. The NGOs have been respected very much. In '73, '76 they were labelled communists. But now, in the last elections, The government asked the NGOs to supervise the elections. These NGOs have become the pro-democracy movement. Nobody trusts thegovernment; they trust the NGOs, partly because they have no power, and partly because they are known for honesty, and that is why the NGOs now command respect. In fact, you see, before Suchinda resigned , the NGOs came out together and set up a committee of seven to oversee all the demonstrations. All seven were ordered to be arrested. And later on there was a declaration of 17 more dangerous persons, and they are not allowed to leave the country, and they are all my friends, you see. These seventeen people are very well-known, but those who are really working-my young people keep on moving form one office to another. They raided our office, but by that time, we has moved to another. At least our people are very well informed. We can get a great deal more information than the foreign journalists. And we do thorough research. These are the young people we know. Some may say 1 trained them, but 1 didn't train them. We work with them. It is good that 1 have been away for seven months-they don't need a guru or anybody. Rejection of economic development: According to the WallStreet Journal, we are a dragon-Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, and we are the fifth. 1, of course, was a very outspoken critic of this. I said that development means human development, means spiritual, cultural development. Then economic or technology goes, but we must limit our greed. We are very greedy; we have destroyed all our forests and now we have to go into Burma to destroy the environment in Cambodia and Laos. We fish from the Gulf of Siam and we pollute our Gulf of Siam. We fish in the Gulf of Burma and Vietnam. The World Bank was meeting in Bangkok in October. Everywhere the people demonstrated against the building of the dam to show the bank thatwedon't wantthatdam. Only therich people wantthedam. And again, the monks have come out for the people. We stopped many dams. We

Articles and Interviews

97

stopped cable cars. We stopped high - rise buildings. So that is a good sign. The noble savage: The poor must feel that they are important, whereas the present norm makes them feel hopeless, makes them feel stupid, foolish. So the Buddhists are now working with the poor to make them feel that they are important, and they can be self-reliant. They can grow for their own consumption, whereas the government tells them to grow for sale. The more they grow for sale, the more they are indebted, the more they have to import chemical fertilizers, they have to use mechanical stuff. Now the monks say: Let's go back to our buffaloes, go back to our growing with joy, the whole community. In reality, the farmers have been brainwashed to believe the government, and they have seen that in the last 30 years, the more they follow the government line, the more they are in debt, the more their land has been destroyed by chemical stuff, and the more their environment has been destroyed. The only thing they have to do is to limit their greed. That means they shouldn't watch television, or if they watch television, they have to be mindful not to want what they don't really need. So I think this is working. We are still blessed in our country with rainfall, with easy growing, and if we grow just for our own food and our own stuff, I think we can survive very nicely. Economic growth is a great danger to our people. Against the king: The people are not happy with the king. My proposal was that the monarchy must curb its greed. The monarchy must not get involved with economic development. I feel that all the top institutions must limit their greed. The monarchy is now having one bank, the Siam Commercial Bank which has now gone into Cambodia. We have the Siam Cement company, a crown property. This has spoiled the monarchy in the long run. I said “ In the long run, this is not good and the King was not happy with my remarks. 1 think we must preserve the monarchy, but it is better for the king to be poor ” Against Plato: My lectures in Chicago and at Harvard made very clear that there are two lines of thought, fundamentally. One is the worship of power; it goes right back to Confucianism, that the emperor has the mandate of Heaven; and right back to Platonic thought, of the philosopher king, in the West; it goes back to Hobbes and so on, that power is justified; and back to the Hindu concept, of the deva raja, the divine ruler. Whatever they have the “right’ ’ to do , they do it. That is not only Tiananmen Square, but also Ne Win, and of course the Thai also follow that 1ine. The Thai have been influenced more by the Hindu concept, and, of course, later on, by the western colonial concept. The Thai elites never understood the West properly. They only brought the prevailing norm, which is the worship of power, which is strongly advocated by Plato; the worship of money and greed, strongly

98

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

advocated by Adam Smith; or the alternative, a few who joined the Marxists, which is another kind of power, full of hatred, destruction. But the beauty of the West you have the real primitive Christianity, going right back to Christ, to Francis of Asissi, to the Mennonites, the Quakers-you even have this in the Roman Church, like Thomas Merton. Against the Buddhist Sangha: The whole Buddhist concept has been, unfortunately, a compromise all along. The Thai hierarchy has been compromising with feudalism. The Sangha right now is quite feudalistic. But that is alienated from the teaching of the Buddha. We are the only country in the world left with a monarchy. The Sangha has been clinging to feudalism, and now they have come into confrontation with consumerism and capitalism, and they have joined it! But luckily, in my country, the Sangha at the grass roots is implementing the fundamental teaching inspired by Buddhadasa. So in these recent years, people at the grass roots take no notice of the hierarchy. 1 can't give the numbers, but in almost every province we have these groups. They are active in alternative development, in looking after the environment. The norm of development is to get the rich richer, and the poor poorer, with the destruction of the environment. But the monks want human development first. Destroy the Army: Looking at it positively, if the Thai democracy movement is clever, they will start working on the Armed Forces, divide the sheep from the goats, start working with some elements of the Army, and in the long run destroy the Army—if they are clever. But I am afraid that they are not clever. There are some people in the Army who are open to this. Where does the Air Force stand ? The Air Force is now playing a crucial role, but, unfortunately, the people also lump the Army and the Air Force all together. They don't divide the goats from the sheep, and the people have to pay the price for this. This is what 1 try to tell the people at home. The Thai military is fascist: In 1939 (when the Japanese occupied Thailand), the military backed the wrong horse. Thailand imitated Hitler and Deutschland. The Deutsch were the Aryans, the superior race. And like the Deutsch, they said that the Chinese were the enemy of the Thais. We must hate the Chinese even though they were our fathers, and grandfathers. You see, as 1said, they were with Hitler and Japan, and they were defeated in the Second World War. But all this is never acknowledged. O n Suchinda: The pact in 1957 was that the Army and the civilians would share the spoils, but that the Army would remain behind the scenes. But in the last three or four years, the politicians got out of control. The politicians felt that the time of the coup d'etat was over, so they became

Articles and Interviews

99

more corrupted and did not share with the Army people. So they became very angry. They kicked the politicians out in 1991, and claimed that they wanted to put the house right, that they wanted a clean, honest government-this was Suchinda. So people did not mind that the coup came. But I gave a press interview at home and said that yes, people would not mind to begin with, but after three months, people would start minding. And it was true enough. So after three months 1 gave a speech at Thammasat University denouncing Suchinda-that the coup was wrong, that he did it for selfish reasons, that our country would suffer. He said that he wanted to save the monarchy. It is not true. He is not a monarchist; he is a Suchindaist. He says he wants to serve Buddhism. 1 said, this is not true. He is not a Buddhist. Buddhism believes in nonviolence. It preaches against greed; this man is greedy. It preaches against hate; this man is very hateful. Buddhism says to be careful about illusion; this man is an illusionist, because he is very selfish and egocentric. Of course, he was very angry. If he had ignored my speech, no one would have taken me seriously. But he put out an arrest warrant against me, and that's why I had to leave the country. So my speech became like a bible again, you see. 1 have become a hero again. The only mistake that Suchinda made is that he wanted to come out into the forefront. The Army is very good at remaining behind the scenes and getting all the benefits. When you go to prostitutes, of all the dollars you pay there, some of it goes to the military man. The same with drug traffic or child labor. That's why these problems are not solved, because the Army is a major beneficiary of the problem O n Chamlong: There is one guy that 1 am at a bit of a loss to account for: what he is trying to do, the way he looks at things. And that is this fellow Chamlong. He seems to be well motivated. He is a contradiction in himself. He tries to be very honest, but he still has a dictatorial approach. He has been educated by the military, so that they think the civilians are too liberal, they talk too much. At first he was very popular, but many were alienated by him. At this point, we must regard him as a fellow traveller, until he changes. Sulak's U.S. support apparatus

From the United States, the entire array of non-governmental organizations founded by Sulak Sivaraksa and his followers receive logistical and conceptual support from a handful of “human rights” organizations. Among those organizations directly aiding Sulak's ventures are: ♦Freedom House, New York City. Chairman of the executive committee is Leo Cherne, a member of President Reagan's Foreign

100

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Intelligence Advisory Board and an advisory board member of the Center for Strategic and International Studies at Georgetown University. Another key individual in Freedom House was Carl Gershman, now executive director of the National Endowment for Democracy. Freedom House overlaps with the Jay Lovestoneite International Department of the AFL-CIO. Sulak was a featured speaker a Freedom House in May to a room full of reporters and representatives of foundations. ♦Democracy in Asia, Washington, D.C. Its head, Michele Bohana (see interview below), has been squiring Sulak around most recently; Sulak is reportedly on the organization's board. Also on the board is Elsie Walker Bush, who maintains regular political contact with her cousin, President George Bush, according to Bohana. ♦Amnesty International. The U.S. branch of the organization is running support operations for Sulak and company, and claims opposition leader Gen. Chamlong Srimuang as “definitely democracy movement. ” Amnesty was founded in 1961 and was exposed by its nominal founder as an offspring of British intelligence. ♦Asia Watch. One of a number of “Watches,” it maintains close links with Freedom House. One of its operatives in Southeast Asia, Therese Caouette, is in constant touch with Sulak (see interview). Among other actions, Asia Watch is demanding that the United States “actively lobby loans to Thailand.” according to a May 21 release. ♦Asia Resources Center. Working with a left cover, the center has close links with the National Council of Churches, and organized a proSulak demonstration at the Thai embassy May 23. ♦Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. Funded by many of the country's most prestigious law firms, the committee is currently working on a project to prove that the amnesty granted by King Bhumibol of Thailand to former Prime Minister Suchinda is against international law. Thecommittee works closely with the Union of Civil Liberties in Bangkok, one of the key NGOs in organizing the “democracy movement.” The Union of Civil Liberties also gets direct funding from the Ford Foundation. From outside Thailand, these organizations direct the NGOs. As one source explained, “ I n the last months, the NGOs have been particularly crucial in ensuring protection for the students, and providing support and that kind of thing against reprisals. In making declarations, in formulating principles, etc., so that this didn't just become another discontented student uprising kindof thing. NGOs played the roleof ensuring in the public's mind what the struggle was about.” Among the NGOs in Thailand receiving direct support from these organizations are : Asian Cultural Forum on Development, Union of Civil Liberties, Coalition for Peace and Development, Project for Ecological

Articles and Interviews

101

Recovery, People's Plan for the 21st Century, Democratic Doctors, Democracy Heroes' Fund, the Coordinating Group for Religion and Society, the National Institute of Development Administration, the Campaign for Popular Democracy, the Foundation for Children, the Duang Pratheep Foundation, and the Law Society. Documentation The following are excerpts from interviews made available to E1R. Michele Bohana, director, Democracy in Asia I think half the battle is won, but the other half is trying to firmly root democracy in the political process, when so much of the military is part of the picture, when Suchinda is head of the military.... He's not the entire military. The infrastructure of the military in Thailand is allpervasive. ...They have got to disengage the military from the political process, if this is going to last more than a month. Otherwise we're going to be right back to square one. That's my feeling. ...So the students are saying two things: Don't give amnesty to Suchinda and the military thugs, and two, get the military out of our process, and those are two very just things that they are asking for. I'm all for holding these murderers accountable according to somebody's international standards. It's like Idi Amin leaving Uganda and going to Saudi Arabia, living in glory. 1 don't buy that; you don't necessarily hang them, but if we took the Nuremberg Tribunal as one step, that might be a good idea, everyone seems to agree with that. Hold them accountable. What other deterrent is there? Therese Caouette, Asia Watch I just talked to Geneva right now : We arc now trying to push for the International Committee of the Red Cross to have access to the jails and to the people who are still being detained there and to be able to investigate more specifically what the conditions of their release are, if the charges are still there. What we are tying to push for in Thailand is that there be allowed to be set up some sort of accountability for those who are missing or lost. In the paper today, in the faxes I received from Thailand today , they said there are several groups that are setting up such an office. Now we just have to watch and see that they are not threatened or harassed, because when they did that two days ago, they were forced to close by the military. (I was there) 10 years. And actually 1 just returned on Saturday (May 16). I was there all during the prelude to this. 1saw it building up. We all knew it was coming. There were supposed to be demonstrations and they were called off a week ago, because Chamlong ended his fast, hoping

102

When Loyalty

Demands

Dissent

they could negotiate So we knew that on Sunday there would be demonstrations. When 1 left on Saturday, by Friday, they had 8,000 military troops already brought into the city. So it was already quite tense. People were quite clear about what would happen next. I think the point is that we encouraged the negotiations, but to say that the question is not quite so simple as just changing the Constitution, we have to take it a bit further Our Washington , D.C. office has been doing some research into the arms trade with the U.S. and Thailand. Officially they are not to be trading at all since the military coup. However, there is a loophole where they have been able to it without government assistance... You really need to look at the corruption of the military and how that is tied into the political system. Mostly because 1 worked with refugees along the borders, you can see both in heroin trading and also in logging taken wood from the borders, the military is in very, very tight control of the economy and sort of the black market trade. It really needs to be exposed and to encourage a government that's a bit more accountable to the people. I just signed a contract with those who are organizing the demonstration, actually, that they would come here and help work on it back and forth, and we would try to do one this summer, because there has been a lot of very subtle intimidation and people missing in Thailand since the coup and others who have been forced to leave the country. There is one Professor Sulak, have you ever heard of him? He was exiled for speaking out against the military and especially for their deals with the Burmese military. And he has been in exile since October. He's a very , very wise and respected Thai... 1 have run into him everywhere.... The royal family is really very, very weak. They're just a showpiece, really. They are very weak. 1 often wonder , like at this time, what they really haveoverthem. What keeps them so unable to act? Idon't really know about this, but they are really concerned. They very rarely do anything. The are very slow to act. Clarence Dias, International Center for Law in Development , U.N. Chamlong is not the leader of this movement; or at least he wasn't until three to four weeks ago, because of the fast. See, several people went on fast; some broke the fast. Chamlong was the one person who went through almost to death's door. It was at this point that the movement coopted him as their leader; it was not the other way around It is all interrelated in a uniquely holistic kind of way. The democracy movement is the name being given now, because that is a priority, but it is linked with maintaining the cultural life-styles; namely a society not completely overrun by the mad rush to industrialize; to urbanize; a very strong environmental movement. There isn't a very strong

Articles and Interviews

103

anti-povery movement , because there isn't the kind of poverty you find in other Asian countries. It is a movement to prevent poverty form coming as a result of this rapid industrialization. These things are interrelated. And interestingly enough in the male-dominated society , there is also a strong women's movement. In Thailand, this is not separate. The people in the human rights movement are the people in the democracy movement, the environmental movement, the women's movement -they are the same people. And often the same organizations. You have a meeting on prostitution in Thailand, and you have some of the leading environmental groups at the forefront of that meeting. There has been a whole kind of social revolution that has been democratic , participatory, human rights sensitive, gender-sensitive, going on. The democracy movement is getting more visibility right now , because that's the immediate struggle. The environmental movement showed its strength by having won so many battles. They won the imposition of the logging ban all over Thailand; of course the people making money off it then went and began logging in Burma and other places, but still they won that. They won against the construction of a very environmentally damaging dam. The Pak Moon dam project was blocked. They won in the World Bank governors' meeting the blocking of another environmentally damaging dam... But still you seethe environmental movement had made significant gains. The women's movement has made a lot of gains in terms of working mothers' rights, and the whole AIDS issue. from E1R Executive Intelligence Review June 12,1992, Vol. 19 No.24 LESE MAJESTE SULAK AND THE THAI GENERALS In Thailand a year ago this month the NPKC (National Peace Keeping Council, the military junta which took power in the coup of 23 February 1991), was busy trying to suppress the Democracy Movement. This ultimately led to the restoration of civilian rule, by way of an intervention by the King, a royal amnesty for the generals and a climbdown by Prime Minister General Suchinda Kraprayoon. The military was clearly unhappy with this outcome, but is no doubt gratified that it still has sufficient power to preserve one of its initiatives while in office, the prosecution of its long-standing critic, Nobel Peace Prize nominee Sulak Sivaraksa, whose trial opens on 2 June. Widely praised or vilified as a major influence behind the 1992 Democracy Movement, Sulak had delivered a stinging attack on the

104

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

NPKC at Thammasat University, Bangkok, on August 22, 1991 . He had also accused students and others of uncritical and servile attitudes towards authority, including the monarchy. This allowed the generals to charge Sulak with the serious crime of lese majeste, or defaming the King, a crime which lies somewhere between treason and blasphemy, and carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. To those with little insight into Thai culture and history, the use of lese majeste may seem rather eccentric, especially in a 20th Century constitutional monarchy where the king is considered a Dhammaraj, ruling in accordance with Buddhist principles and insight. We might expect a Brahmanical Devaraj, representing a theocratic hierarchy, to be vulnerable to attack, and need some form of judicial defence, but hardly a Dhammaraj, who takes his stand on the Ultimate Reality of Emptiness. So what is the real reason for employing such anachronistic legislation? One answer is that generals who have taken power by dubious means yearn for some kind of legitimation beyond that of the bullet. A ceremonial identification with the unitary state, as represented in the person of the monarch, appears to provide this, and thecharge of lese majeste offers a judicial means of defending “national security” (i.e. the general's interests) by “defending” the King. This explanation makes a lot of sense in Sulak's case, especially since he is actually facing two charges: one of defaming the King, and the second of defaming General Suchinda Kraprayoon and others. In the charge relating to the king, Sulak is accused, not of criticising the King Himself, but of attacking certain actions and attitudes by other people towards His Majesty;- for instance the undignified way in which Chulalongkorn University students “pay homage” to the royal car tyres when the King comes into the campus for the graduation ceremony, or the military's tendency to “bully” the King. The logic of the charge is that such statements might “ destroy the dignity and reputation of His Majesty the 9th King, and bring insultsand hatred upon him” In other words, the issue is what people might think of the King as a result of hearing Sulak's speech. The truth or falsehood of the offending statements is irrelevant. In substance, the charge appears trifling and speculative (at least to nonThais), but carries much heavier penalties and is much harder to fight than the Suchinda charge, which is of simple defamation. The real reasons for bringing and maintaining the charges are presumably personal animosity by the generals, plus the fact that Sulak's speech constituted, and still does, a real threat to the Thai military. It is a rousing call, 9 months before the May '92 events, for the revitalisation of the students' and people's movement for democracy, and an analysis of the psycho-historical reasons for the suppression of that movement. He develops this into a sustained, forceful, humorous and carefully-crafted

Articles and Interviews

105

critique of hierarchical power as such, the military in general and the NPKC in particular. Sulak hits the NPKC and the military where it hurts most “ i n their legitimacy ” by discussing the four historical sourcesof the legitimization of power in Thailand: Nation, Religion, Monarchy and Constitution. He goes carefully and systematically into these areas, arguingthat the military is (1 ) destructive and dismissive of nine-tenths of the people who comprise the nation; (2) insincere and uncomprehending towards religion; (3) disloyal to the King and (4) anti-Constitutional. He is saying that in fact and in law, the military has no political legitimacy whatsoever, and the sooner it returns to the barracks, the better. This , and the example he might give to others to resist authority, is his crime. But these issues cannot be raised in a public hearing without the risk of a reaction by the people, and Sulak is popular with the people, especially the activist monks and students. Thus the need for a device to keep him and others quiet without raising the real issues. Lese Majeste fits the bill perfectly: substantive issues are not discussed; the case can be tried in camera', the penalties are (perhaps) harsh enough to make Sulak keep his head down over the years it could take years decide the case, and pour encourager les autres. Sulak's deeper structural criticisms are hardly mentioned in the charge-sheet, which concentrates largely on such dire threats to the King's reputation as the cult of tyre-worship, and the personal defamation suffered by Suchinda and his fellow generals. “Just before the coup both Big Suu (General Suchinda) and Big Jod (General Sunthorn) flew to Burma. What interest did they receive from Burma? Or did they go to Burma to learn from Saw Maung how to carry out the coup? The NPKC has always been involved in bribes. They even fix their own salaries. How many thousands did they earn a month. What did they do to deserve it? It is true, beyond their personaly content, these comments attack the military at another point of their claimed legitimacy -stamping out corruption- and the charges go on to mention Sulak's accusation that the military and committed Lese Majeste in carrying out the coup, but his general critique of hierarchy and the military is left out. It is likely that if the case had been brought simply on the Suchinda charge, as a simple case of defamation, it might have been politically counter-productive (coup leaders are rarely enthusiastic about a cause celebre which might rally the public and rock the boat), and anyway the penalties are relatively light (two years maximum in prison) It was necessary, therefore, to bolster in with Lese Majeste accusation in order to increase the penalties, dilute the political factor and make an acquittal less likely. But if anything could bring the King and the Thai monarchy into disrepute -the substance of Lese Majeste- it would be this

106

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

cynical use of the Lese Majeste legislation to silence criticism against the military. The generals who took power in a military coup and then went on to organise the bloody suppression of the Democracy Movement received an immediate royal amnesty. It would be ironic if Sulak, a Buddhist scholar committed to non-violence, and nominee for the highest peace award in the world, and a radical supporter of the monarchy , had to spend the next years in prison or under the threat of prison. It might also indicate where the real power still lies in Thailand. Written by David Arnott in May 1993. The German version was first published by the Centre for SEA Studies at Bokum and the Thai version was published in NWrn} on 1 June 1993 Seeds of Peace Vol.9 No.3 September 1993

Ill . Press Cuttings from Abroad

The Emperor... as the titular head of state, is the connecting link between traditional and modern Japan.

It is necessary to remember that the Emperor is not a n actual leader but a symbolic leader. He stands for the idea of national unity a n d the continuity of Japanese traditional civilization. The Emperor is a power d u a l symbol to an army conscripted largely from the peasantry. He makes anemotional bond between Japan's primitive agriculture and her mechanized army by performing the rituals of traditional Shinto on the one hand and of Pure Shinto on the other. Because of his importance, the current tendency in America to link the Emperor with Hitler as one of a partnership of 'aggressive political leaders is extremely unfortunate. The often urged proposal that, once the Japanese military have been defeated, troops of the U ni ted Na tions must march to the imperia 1palace a n d arrest the Emperor is dangerous. The way to discredit the military in [the Japanese people's] eyes is not to depose of the Emperor but to use him. The Japanese Monarchy Nakamura Masanori; 1989

TROUBLE IN THAILAND IFOR members were deeply disturbed in September to learn that Professor Sulak Sivaraksa, the respected Buddhist social critic and founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB), was facing charges of insulting the Thai monarchy and of defaming the Commanderin-Chief of the Thai Army, General Suchinda. The charges arose from a speech Prof. Sulak gave in August at Thammasat University in Bangkok. Prof. Sulak had previously been arrested in 1984 and held for 12 days in a top security prison on charges of offending the Thai monarchy. International support, including that of IFOR and Amnesty International, helped secure his release. Because requests for bail were denied by General Suchinda, and because he was to be imprisoned in a normal jail where he was sure to face physical assault, Prof. Sulak sought sanctuary in the German embassy in Bangkok. After weeks of failed negotiations, Prof. Sulak fled the country. Supporters are concerned that his case, and the case of the Venerable Phra Prachak indicate a crack down against dissidents on the part of the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC), which gained power in Thailand last February during a military coup. The NPKC is headed by Genera] Suchinda. Phra Prachak is a Buddhist monk who had led villagers in his district in a struggle to preserve forest land. In late September the Venerable Prachak left his hiding place in Bangkok and, surrounded by a group of reporters, students and environmentalists, returned to his monastery in northeastern Thailand. One of the monk's supporters, the popular singer Yuenyong Opakul, reported that he has received threats against his safety from government officials. The NPKC has stated that they intend to relocate Prachak' s monastery, in order to make way for a eucalyptus plantation. The monk and villagers believe the plantation will be converted into a golf course and the rest of the forest logged. In the wake of Prof. Sulak's comments about NPKC involvement in logging concessions in Burma and the persecution of Burmese refugees, co-worker Sam Kalayanee of the Burma Project in Bangkok has gone into hiding. Kalayanee is believed to have proof that Prof. Sulak’s charges were correct. Supporters of democracy in Thailand are afraid of further government repression, particularly after grassroots groups organized demonstrations during the World Bank meeting in Bangkok in October. The INEB office has been watched and searched by police and forced to submit a report on its activities. The fourth annual INEB conference is still scheduled for February 20 to 22 , in Chiang Mai, Thailand. There will be three exposure trips planned for the week immediately after the conference: to the Burmese

110

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

border, to northern Thailand to visit the hill tribes, and to Cambodian refugee camps. Reconciliation International The Netherlands Winter 1991/1992 BUDDHIST WAY O F PEACE MAY BRING HARSH OPPOSITION Sulak is in exile because of a warrant issued for his arrest Sept. 13 after he spoke at Thammasat University Aug. 22. In his speech, he criticized the military junta for interfering in drafting a new constitution. He said Thai royal family members are ordinary humans who, to be effective, should be open to criticism. Ironically, he is close to the royals who agree with him, but who are in a delicate position as the junta does not. He also is charged with defaming Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon of the National Peace Keeping Council that took power Feb. 23. British Prime Minister John Major, Amnesty International and others objected. Meanwhile, because people arrested in Thai land today get tortured, Sulak is in political exile . He had been arrested twice before. Seventeen years ago during another exile after a bloody coup there have been 17 in the last 60 years - that junta made sure television covered the destruction of his publishing firm and its Buddhist books. It now exists again. Sulak believes Thailand, as a Buddhist country, is supposed to be a free-speech democracy. He said even the Buddha welcomed critical examination. “How can I remain silent while Burmese students are being killed; refugees from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam are being oppressed and exploited”. What about increasing child labor and prostitution among our own people? (There are 300,000 monks and 1 million prostitutes.) The status of the clergy is deteriorating, not to mention the decline of education and development. “As a Buddhist, 1 have to raise the consciousness of those who care,” Sulak said. “ I must have responsibility for other human beings, for trees and rivers, the sea. They are ourstrength . Everything is interrelated.” Sulak said he speaks violently, but he himself is not. He expresses deep compassion for those he sees harming his country and people and who wish to harm him. Eventually, it will all come back on them, he said. Murry Engle Star-Bulletin, Honolulu 11 January 1992

Press Cuttings from Abroad

111

RIGHTS TOP ASIA ISSUE, THAI SAYS With President Bush just back from Asia, people should be aware of the human rights violations in many of the countries in that region, said a leading Thai dissident who fled his country under threat from his country's ruling junta. “Trade, of course, is important, but first of all I think should come concerns about human dignity, human rights, democracy,” said Sulak Sivaraksa, 58. “The whole of Southeast Asia is dictatorial in some from or the other,” he said. “ M y country is usually not in'the news (and) people think it's a wonderful country-fast-growing economically,” Sulaksaid. “They don't even know we have a junta. What the junta declares is law- they can do anything behind the scenes.” Thailand's elected government was ousted Feb. 23 by military leaders. The coup leader dissolved the old assembly and approved the appointment of every member of the current body. Sulak fled Thailand in September after the military National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) accused him of defaming the royal family in a speech and issued warrants for his arrest. “They twisted it around,” Sulak said. “1 was criticizing (coup leader) Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon, saying the coup was unnecessary. They claim they did it to uphold Buddhism, but they have destroyed i t . ” ” Sulak's speech, delivered at Thailand's Thammasat University in August, called on the students to oppose the new regime so that it would fail like the three-day coup in the Soviet Union that month. When he found out the military was after him, Sulak hid in the German Embassy while he attempted to negotiate his safety with his own government. “ I thought even if they arrested me, I would be able to bail himself out, but they threatened me and said they would torture me,” Sulak said. Adding to his fears, Sulak said, was the June disappearance of union leader Thanong Pho-arn, president of the Thai Labor Congress, who had criticized the junta for its ban on unions. Other dissidents say Thanong is dead or being held by the junta. “When the negotiations failed, 1 escaped to Laos, then got a plane to Sweden because you don't need a visa there,” Sulak said. Until he resurfaced Oct. 1 at a Buddhist discussion at Uppsala University in Sweden, Amnesty International, the London-based human rights group, expressed concern over Sulak's safety. Since then, the Buddhist scholar and social activist has lectured in Germany, England, Ireland, France, Norway and Honolulu. Sulak arrived at the East-West Center last month at the invitation

112

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

of the Center and the University of Hawaii. His next public engagement -on Buddhism and politics in Southeast Asia -is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. Friday at Kuykendall Auditorium on the university's Manoa Campus. Sulak said he has been spreading the word about human rights, violations in Asia across the world and will soon leave for the Mainland for more lectures. He is critical of the logging industry in Asia, which he says is destroying the environment. “ I n my country we have plenty of prostitutes, plenty of chi Id labor, plenty of malnutrition, yet we are supposed to be one of the richest countries,” he said with a slow shake of his head. ‘ ‘ I want people to be aware we need change and the military cannot change it. It has to be changed through democratic processes and by upholding human rights.” He said he speaks not only about Thailand, but “for the Burmese people, for Laotians, Khmer, Vietnamese: We all need basic human rights, human dignity.” Jon Yoshishige The Advertiser, Honolulu 1 2 January 1992 BUDDHIST AUTHOR, ACTIVIST TO SPEAK AT UW

Sivaraksa's ‘radical conservatism’ calls for generosity, awareness “ I f you have a tree in your garden, you must preserve it. Not because it is the most beautiful tree in the world . Not because it is sacred. Just because it grows in your garden. The small man, simply dressed in a rough blue cotton tunic and black trousers, smiles warmly. Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa, prominent Thai author, Buddhist thinker and political activist, has arrived at the UW for 1 0 days of lectures on topics ranging from politics to religion. Controversy follows him like a shadow. Ajarn Sulak (Ajarn is a title much like professor in English) is a man with a foot in each of two worlds, spiritual and political. He calls his approach “radical conservatism.” He deplores the notion that Buddhism deals only with individual suffering and not with that of society, as he invokes the fundamental practice of dana or generosity. “ M a n y in the West want to skip dana. Very selfish - want to be enlightened.” That smile again. “To give is good.” There is a charm that extends beyond the graceful and ubiquitous smile of this man, beyond his delightfully archaic and slightly fractured use of the English language, not unlike a character in a Peter Sellers movie. Social action is one of the primary focuses of his work and he is

Press Cuttings from Abroad

113

founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, as well as numerous other social and humanitarian organizations. By the practice of generosity, explains Ajarn Sulak, one learns compassion for all sentient beings and avoids exploitation of oneself and others. “ O f course, as an ordinary human being you cannot help but exploit yourself and others. The point is to exploit less,” he reassures his 'audience. The practice of the Five Precepts (sila) gives guidelines for nonexploitative behavior, but Ajarn Sulak emphasizes that these are only guidelines. “Recommended. Up to you,” he said. His ready sense of humor frequently surfaces when the context seems grave. ‘‘We all kill, perhaps indirectly . Even if you are a vegetarian, don’t be proud. At least the buffalo and the cow have a chance to run away from you . The poor vegetables cannot even run away!” He matter-of-factly points out the logic of vegetarianism. “Cows cry louder than cabbages.” “Believe in whatever is helpful to you to become less greedy , less selfish, less hateful. To see things as they really are.” This philosophy has extended to the realm of politics as well, in a region where the ramifications of American foreign policy are far more extensive than many realize. “We must adapt Western ideas critically. This is my main idea. The people at the top have power, but they have no brain,” says Ajarn Sulak. “Not, too strong. In Indonesia, for instance, top politicians have been brainwashed by their Berkeley advisers. They stimulate greed and call it development.” Ajarn Sulak’s outspokenness has earned him the disapproval of a succession of military regimes in Thailand. William Galloway The Daily of The University of Washington 3 February 1992 VISITING WRITER STRESSES CONCEPTS OF BUDDHISM He said people should try to become more aware of the suffering experienced by fellow human beings and be willing to share their wealth with others. “People who are better off don’t understand the suffering of others,” Sivaraksa said. “ A person should develop himself in relation to other human beings. We’re all living in a global village,” Sivaraksa said, “For us,

114

WTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

Buddhism teaches us to have enough. Then when you have enough , you can share with others.” Relating to other human beings begins with the creation of peace within yourself, Sivaraksa said. Although he believes in human rights of people, Sivaraksa said he is a monarchist at heart. He wants to preserve the monarchy in Thailand, but wishes it were less divine and absolute. He said the March 22 elections in Thailand are a move toward democracy, but there is still room for improvement. Susan Kreimer The Daily Iowan 11 March 1992 THAILAND’S EFFORTS TO WESTERNIZEHARM ENVIRONMENT, DISSIDENT SAYS A Thai author and social activist said Tuesday that the westernization of his country was contrary to its Buddhist beliefs and was causing suffering and environmental destruction. “Development is driven by greed” Sulak Sivaraksa, 58, said. “For me, development must first of all start with human development.” Such criticisms have effectively banned Sivaraksa from Thailand. A warrant for his arrest was issued following a speech about the government and the military given Aug. 22 at Thammasat University. Now he ison an American speaking tour “of sorts.” He spoke Tuesday to the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council. Instead, Thailand should remember the Buddhist philosophy of contentment - the drive to be selfless, not selfish. Rather than struggling for more wealth and power, the Thai people should be working to secure the basic human rights of shelter, food, clothing and medicine for others. Some are waking up to what's been forced upon them, Sivaraksa said. Students and monks are beginning to take action. The government should be open to their criticisms, he said. “This is my voice at home and abroad, ” he said. “ But at home they don't like it, unfortunately.” Valoree Armstrong The Iowa City Press-Citizen 11 March 1992 THAI EXILE STRESS BUDDHIST TRADITIONS Sulak Sivaraksa, exiled magazine editor, Buddhist and anti-government activist, likes to compare his native Thailand with the former Soviet Union. Why, he asks, did the coup last August by Soviet military leaders last just three days, when the military coup of February 1991 in Thailand has still not ended?

Press Cuttings from Abroad

115

Sulak, who visited Lehigh earlier this month to talk with students and professors was forced to leave Thailand in August when a warrant was issued for his arrest. He had denounced the coup leaders and was accused of defaming Thailand's king. Although he espouses Western style democracy, Sulak, founder of the magazine Social Science Review, decries the legacy of Western-style capitalism on Thailand and the other countries of Asia. Economic growth, he writes in his book Seeds of Peace, has caused the Thai people to abandon religious and social values that go back thousands of years, and to hunger for material goods imported from the West. It has widened the gap between rich and poor and wrecked the environment. Asian countries cannot live apart from the rest of the world, he says, but they can build their own model of development based on traditional values of family, spiritualism, sharing and respect for all forms of life. “With his many projects for social development, particularly among his own Thai people and the founding of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, Sulak Sivaraksa has set an admirable example of the relevance of Buddhism in the contemporary world,” writes the Dalai Lama in an introduction to Sulak's book. Sulak's visit to Lehigh was sponsored by the department of religion studies. Kurt Pfitzer Lehigh Week April 1992 BUDDHISM AND ECOLOGY IN THAILAND Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa, probably Thailand's best-known academic abroad, gave a presentation on January 24, 1992 in the Asian Centre at UBC His topic was Buddhism and Ecology in Thailand. Mr. Sulak was born in 1 933, the son of the chief clerk of an importexport firm. He went to England when he was 19 and studied philosophy, history, literature and law there for years. After his return to Thailand he became a student of the eminent scholar Phya Anuman Rajadhon. He enjoyed the patronage of Prince Dhaninivat and Prince Wan, support which was to be important later when he was imprisoned for the “crime” of lese majeste after criticising the Thai royal family. He quickly became his country's leading intellectual and social critic, founding the periodical Social Science Review. H e was involved in the Asian Cultural Forum On Development (ACFOD) and is active in the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB). He is a political thinker and activist, not in the sense of subscribing to an ideology, but because he is trying to rethink traditional Buddhism so as to meet the challenge of Western influence and development.

116

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Mr. Sulak is unable to return to Thailand at present because he has publicly criticised the military group which came to power as the result of a coup in February 1991. He is currently a visiting scholar at the University of Hawaii, and he was in Vancouver at the invitation of the North West Regional Consortium for South East Asian Studies. He has been to Vancouver in the past, the last visit being eight years ago as a speaker in an ecumenical conference sponsored by the World Council of Churches. Mr. Sulak, a most learned person in Buddhist concepts as they pertain to the socialization process and contemporary society, related in his talk how the Five Precepts of Buddhism are connected with ecology in Thailand (as well as in the rest of the world). Buddhism is said to promote respect for all things, living or not living. Everything is kept in harmony and the Middle Way is to be followed . With this in mind, Mr. Sulak went on to emphasize that the ecological balance of the environment must be maintained, not only in Thailand's villages and countryside, but it must also extend into the urban centers where the fast-growing industries are located. To do this, Mr. Sulak believes that the teaching of strong Buddhist values would make Thais more aware of how people and their environment are so inter-related, and how one relies on the others to keep everything in perfect balance. He also stressed that all our thoughts and ideas start from within and that we shouldn't blame other people like US President George Bush or Iraq's President Saddam Hussein for the destruction of the environment. He said that everyone should be responsible for one's own actions, and everything else will take care of itself. To illustrate this interdependence of all things, Mr. Sulak told the story of the Elephant, Monkey, and Bird under the Tree, and how they helped each other out when they could not do something for themselves. At the end of the presentation, there were several questions from the audience, and these extended into longer discussions as people came to follow up particular points and to look over the books and manuscripts Mr. Sulak had brought along. Terry Wong Pacific Rim Program Langara, VCC Friend of Thailand News, May 1992 ACTIVIST SAYS PROTESTS ARE WORK O F PEACEFUL COALITION Cambridge - A leading Thai social activist said yesterday that massive street demonstrations now occurring in Bangkok are the work of a non-violent pro-democracy movement destined to topple Thailand's

Press Cuttings from Abroad

117

military government. Sulak Sivaraksa, who has been touring Europe and North America organizing overseas Thais and publicizing the democracy movement in Thailand, fled his country last autumn to avoid arrest on charges that he defamed the Thai monarchy. It is his third exile in connection with prodemocracy activities. Crowds demanding the resignation of Gen.Suchinda Kraprayoon as Prime Minister are growing daily in Bangkok and numbered tens of thousands yesterday. Sulak said the demonstrations are being mounted by a coalition of nongovernmental organizations that have grown strong in Thailand during the past 20 years, when governments run by military and civilian officials alike lost the confidence of the populace as a result of widespread corruption. He said the coalition won support by avoiding corruption and offering a spiritually- based approach to developing Thailand that put human needs ahead of economic development. He said such coalitions are forming in many nations in Southeast Asia as part of a struggle against the economic alliance of Japanese big business with national elites-a role the Japanese have taken over from American companies. “ I t is a new force, linking the Buddhist monkhood with students, professionals and many civil servants,” Sulak said. The coalition is solidly behind Chamlong Srimuang , the popular politician whose vow to starve himself to death unless Suchinda steps down is at the center of the current protest. Chamlong began fasting early last week. “ H e will either die or he will be Prime Minister if events continue on their current course”, Sulak said yesterday. However, the activist said the citizens' coalition is petitioning King Bhumibol Adulyadej to dissolve Parliament, a move that would require new elections and provide a possibility for removing Suchinda from power “ i n a way that would save face for everyone. That would be the Siamese way,” Sulak said. But he stressed that the goal of the movement in Thailand and in neighboring countries was not just to establish democracy but to provide an alternative to Western capitalist models of development. “ I f we are serious about the environment, it is not possible to solve the problems in the old capitalist way,” he said, because the alliance of foreign corporations and national elites is based on greed and attaches no value to the environment or people's welfare. “This big meeting in Brazil,’’ he said, referring to the environmental summit in June, “will end up with nothing. It is all politics.” Sulak, whose efforts are supported by the Dalai Lama, is founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists and is currently

118

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

attempting to encourage activism among Buddhists in Asia and in the West who he believes have become too detached from worldly affairs. “Buddhists in America have just withdrawn,” he said. ‘ ‘This is not right. First you must find your sense of peace, it is true, but then you must expose yourself to society and confront its suffering.” Sulak said many other activists went along with the military coup in February 1991 because the elected government had grown corrupt. Suchinda, the coup leader, pledged not to make himself prime minister, he said, and mass protests broke out because that promise was broken. Charles A.Radin Globe, Boston 9 May 1992 THAI DISSIDENT SPREADS MESSAGE O F NON-VIOLENT PROTEST He has been branded a CIA agent and a communist, has been jailed and has twice been forced to flee his native Thailand. For a man who preaches compassion and non-violence, Sulak Sivaraksa has made a lot of powerful enemies, including General Suchinda Kraprayoon, the Thai mil itary leader who was recently forced to step down as prime minister following massive demonstrations. A leading Thai dissident and Buddhist intellectual, Mr. Sulak, 59, was in Hamilton yesterday at the invitation of McMaster University's Centre for Peace Studies. Short, broad shouldered and dressed in a collarless gray jacket, Mr.Sulak seems unruffled by his latest exile. Charged with having defamed the king, Mr. Sulak fled Thailand after a warrant was issued for his arrest in September. The charge carries a minimum seven-year sentence, and has frequently been used to silence dissent. “ I had to go into exile, otherwise they would have tortured me. I am a brave man but I didn't want to be tortured,” he said. Criticism

Previous governments had branded Mr. Sulak a communist. Students angered by his criticism of communist countries at one time accused him of being a CIA agent. His only real crime has been to speak his mind , said Mr. Sulak, who is a professor, lawyer and author. During an informal talk at Divinity College yesterday, Mr. Sulak spoke candidly about Thailand's military, corruption, the monarchy and the protests that ousted Gen. Suchinda. The military enjoy “ a tremendous amount of wealth and power and they love it.” he said. After a brief spell of civilian rule, the military seized power again in February 1991 because they felt their privileged

Press Cuttings from Abroad

119

position was threatened. Concerned only with business most Western countries, including Canada, failed to speak out forcefully against the military takeover. “Most countries nowadays behave like prostitutes,” Mr. Sulak said. Mr. Sulak helped organize non-violent opposition to the military's rule before being forced to flee. Since December, Buddhist monks have played an important role in the demonstrations and in ensuring they remained peaceful, he said. The young Thais who led the uprising should follow Buddhist teachings, he said. They must show compassion instead of seeking retribution, and must be careful not to become overconfident. It is important the military “feel you don't win entirely and they don't lose entirely.” Mr. Sulak said he believes the Thai monarchy should be preserved and can play an important role in times of crisis. But, he added, the king should not be worshipped like a god. Since he left Thailand, Mr. Sulak has been “ a gypsy Buddhist,” moving from city to city and country to country. He has spent the past three weeks in Toronto, where he was a visiting professor at the University of Toronto in the late 1970s. Mr. Sulak has been spreading his message of non-violence and Buddhist renewal throughout Europe and North America. He particularly wants to reach young Thais who are studying overseas and who will be that country's future elite. Mr.Sulak's visit was co-sponsored by Peace Brigades International in Hamilton. Rian Maelzer The Spectator Hamilton, Canada 27 May 1992 EXILED THAI WRITER SOWS SEEDS OF PEACE On tour to promote his latest book, Seeds of Peace: A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society, Sulak Sivaraksa will describe his life as a dissident at a forum in Toronto tonight. Sulak Sivaraksa, one of Thailand's leading writers - and a man whom The Far Eastern Economic Review call its most outspoken social critic - sits smiling and apparently serene amid the lilies and columbines of John Ralston Saul's midtown Toronto garden. Saul and Sulak have been friends for more than a decade; in fact, Saul dedicated his last novel, The Paradise Eater, to Sulak and based one of the characters, a committed and pragmatic slum doctor, in large part on his Thai friend. A book tour promoting his seventh and latest book to be published in English, Seeds of Peace: A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society , would

120

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

seem reason enough for Sulak's Toronto visit, “ l a m considered a master of Thai prose,” the 59-year-old writer states matter-of- factly. “ I n English, all I try to do is tell the truth.” The book is a Buddhist critique of what Sulak calls The “Think Big strategies” of economic development; it's also a gentle reproach to Japan for its exploitative investments in Thailand and its sister countries; and it's a call for more humanist development goals. But in fact Sulak is in exile, and not for the first time. A speech he gave six months ago, included as an appendix in Seeds of Peace, helped trigger the riots that rocked Bangkok last month Ironically, Suchinda Kraprayoon , the man who lead the coup and bears responsibility for the massacre of demonstrators, has already been pardoned (a condition of his resignation). But the dissident author still faces charges. Sulak's words are quiet, sensible sermons. “ 1 call a spade a spade, which is why my writing so often brings me difficulty, ” he smile. He landed in jail back in 1984 ; he'll recount that experience tonight at a free public forum at the George Ignatieff Theater, sponsored by the Canadian Centre of PEN International, the writers and human rights group (other speakers include Saul, Michael Ondaastje, Constance Beresford-Howe and Alison Gordon). Then he's off to Finland to speak on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the Finnish Peace Movement. As founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, Sulak has global connections. The preface to Seeds of Peace was written by the Dalai Lama. Among those who protested during his last imprisonment was the Archbishop of Canterbury. Son of a Bangkok accountant, he started building his vast network of overseas friends in his student days. Thailand, never a colony of the big powers, adroitly preserved its independence by playing off the English, Dutch and French. Even so, Sulak recalls that when he was a young man, “ I f you were called to the bar in England, you were really somebody at home. I wanted to be somebody - 1 wanted to be prime minister! So I was called to the bar in England.” But studying at an Anglican college in Wales, he changed direction “ 1 could see that much of politics was hallucination , ” he says, “and my Anglican friends had a good influence on me. They wanted to look after the poor. This strengthened my Buddhist faith.” While Thai intellectuals back home were learning to curb their tongues and live with censorship, in England Sulak was turning himself into a journalist, contributing to magazines and the British Broadcasting Corp. He returned to Bangkok in 1961 when the Americans just getting entangled in the region's politics, decide to finance a new university press. No one would take the job. So Sulak became publisher. He also launched

Press Cuttings from Abroad

121

a bookstore, a “coffee club” or student discussion group and a small magazine-77ie Social Science Review. “ M y models were The Atlantic Monthly and Encounter,” he recalls with a smile . “ I was very surprised when I found out Encounter was funded by the CIA.” As U.S. involvement in Vietnam increased the pressures on Thai society, Sulak's enterprises became major outlets for dissents. Early in 1973 , 1 1 of his students and friends were arrested for distributing leaflets on democratic reform. There was a crackdown; within a week, 500,000 people were demonstrating in the streets. As they would do in 1992, King Bhumibol Adulyadej intervened to loosen the military's grip. In 1976 while Sulak was abroad there was another crackdown. His bookshop was invaded and he was arrested in absentia on trumped-upcharges of being boss ofthe Thai Communist Party. He spent the next two years in North America, teaching at Berkeley, Cornell and the University of Toronto. One day after his return, he met a minor member of the royal family, a radical prince, who told him, “ I f you don't know about the farmers, what you're doing is just intellectual masturbation . ” Sulak smiles again. “ H e was right.” So Sulak trudged off to live among the rural poor and began writing about their rights. He adopted peasants' clothes and began to be seen around Bangkok on foot - a radical statement in a city hell-bent on westernization. As Saul puts it, “Sulak lives a non-air-conditioned life” Six months ago, Sulak made a speech urging his compatriots to “cultivate political awareness and understanding based on our indigenous culture and fight for social justice and ecological balance in a nonviolent way.” Another warrant went out for his arrest. The German ambassador helped him flee. So now a person reputed to be one of Thailand 's most subversive men sits in a quiet Toronto garden talking gently about the Buddhist path. It leads away from greed and Western style consumerism, he says, and back to simpler models of justice and community . But until he 's pardoned it cannot lead Sulak home. Vai Ross The Globe and Mail Toronto Sunday 7 June 1992 BUDDHIST TARGETED FOR CRITICIZING THAI COUP : PROFESSOR HOPES TO BE ABLE TO RETURN TO FAMILY IF REGIME IS OUSTED When you meet Sulak Sivaraksa for the first time, you sense by the welcoming look in his chocolate-colored eyes and softness of his handshake that he is a kind and gentle man. But 11 months ago, the59-year-old university professor and father of three fled his native Thailand under threat of arrest and most likely torture. The charge: defaming the king.

When

122

Loyalty Demands

Dissent

In August, Sulak, as he is known, gave a speech at Thammasat University in Bangkok in which he criticized Thailand’s authorities. Sulak founded the International Network of Engaged Buddhists and is the author of Seeds of Peace. “That lecture caused the commander of the army to be angry,” he said . “ I said there was no cause for the coup. H e said we neea the coup, we need to go back one step to go forward 1 0 steps.” But Sulak's argument was that the coup set his country, which is predominantly Buddhist, back “ m a n y steps.” ‘ ‘ He said the government was corrupt. You don't change corruption by a coup.” A short time after his speech, officials showed up at Sulak's door and presented his wife the warrant for her husband's arrest. “ I didn't think that sounded too good, so I left, ” Sulak said. He fled the country, leaving his family behind. Six months after that speech, the army commander who issued his arrest warrant became Prime Minister. In May, he was stripped of his power. Because of his belief in Buddhism, Sulak does not harbor anger and he has learned to overcome fear. During the past 1 6 years, he has fled his country twice-each time because he publicly criticized the monarchy-and been arrested once. “Every seven years. It is like a seven-year itch,” he said. “ I s p o k e the truth, but by Thai law, I am a criminal. In Buddhism, you are taught not to be angry. It doesn't help. You meditate about those people who cause you difficulty. “The Dalai Lama teaches Tibetans to love the Chinese, even though the Chinese have been burning their temples and killing people. The people who do that don't really know what they're doing . You should help them, not condemn them.” Since his escape, Sulak has lectured in North America and Europe. His message to Buddhists is the same to Christians and Moslems. “ W e should try to talk to people, to be concerned with others,” he said. Sulak said he tries “to teach people how to confront each other peacefully, how not to be slaves of T V . ” He hopes he can go home if a new regime is elected in Thailand Sept. 13. “Hopefully, they will understand people like me are needed at home.” Sulak will Boulder.

speak Monday a l 8 p.m. at Karma (Dorje) Dzong, 1345 Spruce St.,

There w i l l be a meditation at 7 p.m. Cost is $4.

Julie Stafford Daily Camera Boulder, Colorado 25 July 1992

Press Cuttings from Abroad

123

WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE: DEMOCRACY'S FUTURE IN THAILAND

Exiled Buddhist Activist makes Rare UW Appearance Sulak Sivaraksa, prominent Thai author, Buddhist thinker and social activist, spoke before a crowed of about 100 people at the University of Washington Friday, August 14. Clad in the simple garb of a farmer, he articulated a vision of the Thai polity that was far from homespun. The audience was dotted with the graceful saffron robes of Buddhist monks. In the wake of tragic social unrest, Sulak sought to place the conflict between authoritarian rule and the demand for democratic reform into an historical context, dating from the origins of the Siamese state. “ I neveruse the name Thailand, ”he said. “ I t is a mongrel word imposed upon us by a dictator in 1939 and obviously chauvinistic. The country does not belong only to the Thai. There are the Mon, the Karen, the Laos, others.” In pre-modern Southeast Asia, Sulak contended, people conceived of their place in the social order relative to the hierarchy of baan, “household, family, village,” and muang,“ town, city, country”. The concept of the nation was unknown, and kingdoms were called by the names of their principal cities, names which still evoke the splendors of antique seats of power such as Sukhothai, Angkhor, and Ayutthaya. Each baan, each muang, was culturally distinct and politically autonomous, while sharing the traditions of Buddhism. “But the weakness of Buddhism is compromise,” said Sulak. In Southeast Asia, the compromise was with Brahmanism, a Hindu cult which viewed the ruler as devaraja, or godking, and which was promoted by the ruling elite as a means to legitimatize their power and the use of force in defense of it. ''ulak perceives this tradition of “atrocity” in the authoritarian politics of contemporary Southeast Asia, in contrast to the democratic traditions of village life. His candor has earned him the wrath of a succession of military regimes. He has been accused of complicity in fomenting massive student demonstrations in 1973 and again in 1976 , when the movement was crushed by enraged royalist forces. His books were burned, but his voice has not been silenced. “ T h e last 1 4 years of my life, my work has concentrated on social injustice, ecological crisis and human rights,” he said. Sulak is founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, as well as numerous other humanitarian and ecumenical organizations.

124

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

The irreverent wit for which he is known was somewhat tempered on Friday, perhaps due to the violence in May, when the streets of Bangkok erupted in a barrage of automatic weapons fire. Scores of unarmed demonstrator were killed and wounded, and hundreds more remain unaccounted for. “ W e had a bloody thing at home,” he observed gravely, while noting that those who unleashed the violence have been deposed, contrary to the experience of several of Thailand's neighbors, most pointedly that of the Burmese. But even as the power of the m i1itary appears to decl i ne, Su lak sees a new threat to his vision of dhammic socialism, a model for political reform that is both culturally conservative and socially progressive. “ N o w the rich and the army have the same idea. They worship money.” Social inequities have been exacerbated in the headlong rush toward industrialization. “The rich get richer, and the poor become so poor they must sell their daughters to be prostitutes and their sons for child labor,” he lamented. “ W e must go back to tfie way of the Buddha: fight greed with generosity, violence with love, lies with truth, We don't need to build big temples, big halls, big Buddha images. We need to build people.” The warmth of this man's gentle smile does not belie the power of his convictions nor the pressing urgency of his quest to promote alternative models of development for a society in the midst of redefining itself. ‘ ‘The country is a house, and the military are the termites who feed on it and finally destroy it. When will the military cease being termites and become ordinary insects?” asked Sulak on Aug. 22,1991 at Thammasat University in Bangkok. Three weeks later a warrant was issued for Sulak's arrest. He has been in exile for the past 1 1 months, and has spent that time speaking to audiences throughout North America and Europe, as an Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. In anticipation of election scheduled for Sept. 1 3 in Thailand, h e will travel to Japan to be closer to his native country. “ A s a Buddhist, I fell that wherever I am I should be as effective as possible. As a human, I yearn to be back h o m e . ” William Galloway Northwest Asian Weekly Published by Seattle Chinese Post, Inc. V o l . l l No.34 22 August 1992 SEEDS O F PEACE - T H E FUTURE O F THAI DEMOCRACY Sulak Sivaraksa, author of more than 60 books and founder of the

Press Cuttings from Abroad

125

International Network of Engaged Buddhists, has been called one of Asia's leading social thinkers. His warmth and ready wit have inspired a generation of Thai students, but those who hold the reins of power have rarely been amused. “ I use strong words,” he says. “ 1 think you need strong words to make people agree or disagree.” “ I stir things u p , ” says Sulak simply. Thailand , with a population of 56 million people , is undergoing fundamental social change, set in motion by the need to modernize rapidly in order to avoid subjugation by encroaching colonial powers in the late 1 9th Century. Due to the adroit statesmanship and visionary insight of two Thai monarchs, the Siamese court conceded territory, but avoided colonialization. While it is commonly held that Thailand retained its independence during this period, the threat of colonialization led to political reforms which in fact created rather than preserved the modern Thai nation-state, a process Sulak calls “intellectual colonization.” Since the drafting of a constitution in 1932, Thailand has pursued a turbulent course toward western-style democracy. Sulak, however, believes the model for Thai democracy should be derived from indigenous values. *‘ Democracy means not exploiting oneself or others. Buddhism is the most democratic of institutions,” he says. Exposure to 19th century European thought prompted religious introspection as well as political reform under King Mongkut. Under royal patronage, the emphasis of belief shifted from ritual to a more critical selfawareness. “Buddhism, with a big B ” , as Sulak calls the now dominant from of the religion, is taught in the schools and has been politicized as one of the three pillars on which the modern Thai nation is founded; King , Country, Faith. But Sulak responds, “Buddhism isn't learned in books. It is learned by confronting suffering.” Contemporary religious thought, of which Sulak is a proponent, has continued to revise the relationship between the individual and the environment. The analytical interpretation of Buddhist practice has been expanded to include not only the self, but also the society in which one lives. “Buddhism with a small b , ” has spawned a wave of social activism, particularly since the turmoil of the mid-1970's. This interpretation has become increasingly popular with well-educated middle and upper class Thais in search of spiritual beliefs relevant to the secular concerns of a changing world.

126

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Many see environmental abuse and societal decomposition as evil stepchildren of rapid industrialization. “Pattana [the vogue term for westernstyle development ] is for me a dirty word,” says Sulak But it is here that the military and the economic elites share a common concern, for both require domestic stability to profit from an ignited economy. Thus, the appearance of political tumult since 1932 reflects a complex balance of power, in which the economic elite has come to demand an increasingly important share. Economic development, while polarizing the extremes of rich and poor, has given rise to a well-educated and increasingly politicized middle class, mostly in Bangkok. Sulak cautions however, “ I f you think there's a big movement, 1 give you a false picture.” His voice is one in a loosely-organized chorus of humanitarian and ecumenical groups which seek to join political concerns with progressive social action. But popular sympathy for such causes is on the rise. Democratic forces no longer consist of a narrow circle of academics, such as when Sulak founded the Southeast Asian Social Science Review in 1963. Last April, when General Suchinda Kraprayoon was appointed Prime Minister, popular discontent was expressed in massive demonstrations which broke all social boundaries. Suchinda was deposed, but not before bloodshed. “ I feel very proud of my people,” says Sulak. “The poor, the rich, the yuppies, even my children, my wife - they all went to join the demonstrations. I think this is great.” Ndrthwest Asian Weekly Vol.11 No.36 5 September 1992 JUSTICE FOR THAI EXILE 1 found your article Order in the Ranks, [13 Aug.] particularly interesting and hopeful for the course of democracy in Thailand. But I'd like to remind your readers about the situation of Sulak Sivaraksa, whose exile continues while the generals, however chastised, go free. One year ago, lecturing at Thammasat University, Sulak first warned the Thai public about the dangers of military rule and about Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon in particular. Suchinda then raised charges against Sulak for defaming both the king and the commander-in-chief of the army. Sulak's warnings proved painfully accurate. In the aftermath of May's violence , even the Prime Minister admits that the bodies haven't all been counted. Suchinda may be gone from power, but the charge of lese majeste still stands against Sulak. There is a terrible irony to these events. Suchinda was free to

Press Cuttings from Abroad

127

celebrate with agrand affair in Bangkok (8 Aug.). Only lastweek, he went to pay his respects to the queen on her 60th birthday. Meanwhile, in North America, Europe and Japan , Sulak Sivaraksa remains far from his nation and family, arguing ceaselessly for Thai democracy, justice and monarchy true to its Buddhist roots. If Prime Minister Anand is truly “acting in the context of political and moral responsibility,” he can complete this responsibility by directing the Public Prosecutor to drop all charges against Sulak and inviting him to return to Thailand, where his honesty and straight talk are much needed. As the September elections approach, principled action on behalf of Sulak might counterbalance the shameful amnesty of bloody-minded generals. As a political legacy, Anand could set a tone for justice that will help Thailand find its peaceful way. Alan Senauke Berkeley, California The Far Eastern Economic Review 3 September 1992 September 2 9 , 1992 Dear Editor I have found your editorial, The Postmodern Monarchy, timely, except you did not mention that the present Thai Kingdom has the longest reign in the world and the day you published your editorial (September 13) happened to co-incide with the General Elections in Thailand. Unless the Thai Government follows, at least, the Western European model of constitutional monarchy, Thai democracy is only a facade for feudalism and military dictatorship, allowing the rich and the powerful to exploit the poor and the powerless and let them become the victims of the environment. Unless the king is openly criticized constructively, the ultra-conservatives will make use of the monarchy to witch-hunt their opponents and anyone who speaks freely for basic human rights and social justice. Eight years ago 1 witnessed a lese majeste case against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa, a well known Thai social critic, at the military tribunal in Bangkok. Luckily the case was withdrawn by the king himself. We all admired his gracious act. A year ago Mr. Sulak gave a lecture at Thammasat University against General Suchinda Kraprayoon and the 1991 coup leaders. Unfortunately what he said turned out to be true, especially the fact that Suchinda could really kill the Thai people for his ambitions and to maintain power. Mr. Suchinda, the killer, received a royal amnesty, while Mr. Sulak, who spoke the truth, is now an exile in Japan. Amnesty International refers to Mr. Sulak as a prisoner of conscience. After the General Election a new government has been formed

128

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

already which will adhere to democracy in form. But the essence of democratic government is the protection of basic human rights and freedom of expression. Unless Mr. Sulak can return home as a free citizen, there is no real democracy and a constitutional monarchy in Thailand— let alone a postmodern one. Kenichiro Mochizuki The Japan Times 1 1 October 1992 SULAK READY FOR TRIAL Despite appeals from many countries, the trial of Sulak Sivaraksa in Thailand will soon begin. On March 6, the prime Minister stated he had no authority to interfere with the legal process. In court in Bangkok March 8, Sulak was formally charged with defaming the king and General Suchinda. Many supporters, including monks, students, representatives of nongovernmental organizations, professors and relatives of people killed in protest against military rule, were present. The trial is scheduled to begin on April 8 and may last for months. For a speech condemning the junta that he made at Thammasat University six months after the military took power in February 1991, Sulak faces up to seven years in prison. Although Sulak was granted bail and is able to move freely, restrictions have been placed on what he can say and do, as the court can say at any time that his words are interfering with the process of justice. In Belfast, Northern Ireland, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, 1976 Nobel Peace Laureate, announced she had nominated Sulak for the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize. The Thai Prime Minister's secretary responded by telling the press that “the Nobel Prize was one thing, criminal charges another, and the two should not be mixed.” “Many people here now realize that Sulak's speech helped to raise the public's awareness and consciousness of the dictatorial nature of the coup leaders,” comments Pracha Hutanuwatr at the Secretariat of International Network of Engaged Buddhists in Bangkok." Without the public's peaceful agitation and nonviolent demonstrations, the present civilian Prime Minister would not have come to power. But since coming to power the Prime Minister has done nothing for the underprivileged or for the protection of the environment. In fact he has only worked to maintain the status quo.” Peace Media Service, Holland April 1993 SULAK SIVARAKSA ON TRIAL Despite many attempts to have the charges against him dropped, Sulak Sivaraksa, founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, has been brought to trial by the Criminal Court in Bangkok,

Press Cuttings from Abroad

129

Thailand. After Sulak formally submitted a plea of innocence to the charges of lese majeste (defamation of the monarchy) and defaming General Suchinda Kraprayoon, the court began hearing the State's evidence. For the remainder of 1993, Sulak will be a research fellow at Ryokoku University in Japan, but he will be returning to Thai land for three more trial dates in August, when it is expected that General Suchinda will testify against him as the prosecution's chief witness. Suchinda was the most prominent member of the military junta responsible for the bloody suppression of the nonviolent pro-democracy demonstrations in May 1992. The charges against Sulak stem from a speech he gave in August of 1991, when Suchinda was Commander-in-Chief of the Thai army. In his statement to the court, Sulak asserted that General Suchinda and his “military clique” were in fact themselves guilty of lese majeste during the period of their rule, posing as they did a danger to the country, its institutions and its international reputation. The charges against him, Sulak said, were nothing more than an attempt to destroy him since he had become a threat to General Suchinda's power by speaking the truth. Turning Wheel, Journal of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship USA, Summer 1993 THAI NOBEL NOMINEE WARNS OF WESTS WAYS Nobel Peace Prize Nominee Sulak Sivaraksa of Thailand has worked for Human Rights in Asia for 30 Years. He says that when countries blindly follow the Western model of development, their cultures suffer and dissipate. His antidote is application of basic nonviolent Buddhist philosophy-not to lie, kill, steal or harm anyone or anything. He has asked Thailand's government how it can truthfully claim to be Buddhist country, when it: Arrests, tortures and kills people who criticize it. Arrests monks for protesting wholesale cutting of forests, stealing away their spiritual home and a world environmental asset, and selling it to other countries. Disallows ordination of nuns, but condones widespread prostitution. Sulak spoke at aconference at the Social Science Research Council of New York on “ Human Rights of Indigenous People.” Sulak said Western development tends to make the poor poorer, take land from citizens and make the lot of women, which is terrible, in Asia much worse. Sulak said Bangkok's traffic problems have prompted Japan to call it “the world's biggest parking lot.”

130

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

He is not against all Western ways. “Western style justice has concern for basic human rights, concern for free expressions, constructive criticism,” Sulak said. “ W e have been denied this in Thailand.” “But imitation without awareness is dangerous’.’ Sulak's opposition to Thai government, which has undergone more than 16 coups during his activism, has kept him in trouble. He will be tried June 2 on combined charges of libel against the military and lese majeste (criticism of the king), comparable to a treason charge here. He faces a maximum 15 year prison sentence. He is free on bail equivalent to U.S. $25,000 The attorney, publisher, social critic, intellectual and author of more than 100 books had been in self-exile since 1991 because he feared for his life. After the last government change-over, Sulak returned to Thailand in December, and was met by his wife, three children, his attorney and police, who arrested him. His supporters hope the combination of a new Thai government; the first Western style justice system now in place there; and, Sulak’s recent Nobel nomination, will combine to get charges dropped, the case dismissed or result in an acquittal. “ I have a 50/50 chance,” Sulak said. “Before, it was 1 0 percent.” Murry Engle Star-Bulletin Honolulu 4 May 1993

IV. Petitions

In view of the history of its genesis, the Emperor should always exist for purposes of festivals and ceremonies.. .[historically,) the reason why the Japanese have maintained the emperor's position is not because he is an absolute being. Rather they have thought that by embracing the emperor they could maintain their national unity and avoid the confusion which arises in the common feeling and interests of the race in different periods when the emperor, an historical entity, is abolished. From this sort of perspective, 1 belive 1 can conclude that the emperor symbolizes national harmony and that maintenance of his position as the head of state, who represents national ceremonies and honor, while leaving him politically powerless, is neither unnatural nor irrational. The Japanese Monarchy by Nakamura Masanori Translated by Harbert P.Bix Jonathan Baker-Bates and Derek Bowen

TO THE KING

■

From Lord Avebury Chairman Parliamentary Human Rights Group London October 28, 1991

Your Majesty, I have read the speech by Dr. Sulak Sivaraksa which was delivered at the Art and Culture Hall, Thammasat University on August 22, and had an opportunity of discussing the speech with Dr. Sulak this evening. As Your Majesty is no doubt aware, the institution of monarchy is held in the highest respect by the British people, and there is no organised body of opinion which advocates republican constitution. However , this does not mean that members of the Royal Family, and even Her Majesty the Queen herself, may not be criticised or lampooned. The Queen is caricatured in a popular TV show, “Spitting Image”, and the mass circulation newspapers print a great deal of scurrilous gossip about individual members of the Royal Family ; the Queen and the Royal Family. However, I think the British people see Her Majesty as a unifying force in our country, just as Dr. Sulak says that in Thailand, the monarchy is necessary as the centre of unity in the country. I think Dr. Sulak's argument about the Russian and German monarchies cannot be denied . They perished partly because in those countries, no criticism of the monarchy was tolerated. On the other hand, the Dutch, Belgian, Swedish, Norwegian, British and Spanish monarchies continue because in those countries there is a considerable freedom of expression, including the freedom to say or write anything about the royals. May I respectfully submit to Your Majesty that the cause of monarchy in Thailand would be upheld best if Your Majesty were to let it be known that Your Majesty does not approve the charge of lese majeste which has been brought against Dr. Sulak, and that Your Majesty would like this charge to be dropped.

134

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent Dublin

18th December,1991. RE: Professor Suiak Sivaraksa Your Majesty, It is now some years since 1 had the opportunity of meeting you in the Grand Palace during the course of an EC/ASEAN meeting in Bangkok. 1 very much hope that you have been healthy and happy in the meantime. 1 was recently approached on behalf of your above named subject who has again I understand been accused of lese majeste. 1 understand that a similar charge against him in 1984 was withdrawn by the Royal Thai Government after you graciously intervened on his behalf. Your action was applauded throughout the world who knew Professor Sivaraksa as a patriotic Thai who defended his King, Country and Religion with conviction. I have read the translation of his speech delivered on the 22nd of August which apparently has caused the Commander in Chief of the Thai Army to again raise a case of lese majeste against him. It is very difficult to see any justification for any such charge because the speech itself appears to be a forceful plea to uphold the monarchy and a constructive way of saying how the monarchy should be the soul of the nation in the coming decades. 1 do not wish to interfere in any way in the internal matters of Thailand but I write as somebody who has visited on a number of occasions, has particularly liked the people and the country and as one who understands how important the monarchy is for Thailand. In that situation, I do believe that your intervention to have what appears to bean unjust case withdrawn against Professor Sivaraksa will be very much in the interest of your country and of course in addition, enhance your own prestige internationally. Every good wish for Christmas and the New Year. Yours sincerely, Jim O’ Keeffe T.D. Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs

Petitions

135

Congress of the United Stated Committee on Foreign Affairs House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515

April 13, 1992 Your Majesty: 1 write concerning charges brought against Mr.Sulak Sivaraksa in connection with a speech he made at Thammasat University last August. There is a warrant for his arrest for lese majesty and “defamation” for remarks he made about the monarchy and the military. It is my hope that the charge of lese majesty will be dropped against Mr.Sivaraksa, who is characterized as pro-monarchy. 1 understand that his remarks were not meant to be critical of the royal family and that a similar charge was made against him in 1984 but was withdrawn by the government after your intervention. I would like to urge you to please use your good offices once again to intervene of Mr.Sivaraksa's behalf. Thank you for taking my concerns into consideration. With kind regards, Sincerely, Gus Yatron Chairman Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations

136

VVTten Loyalty Demands Dissent Lehigh University, Department of Religion Studies, August 25, 1992.

Dear Your Majesty, Amidst the troubling news from Southeast Asia, it was wonderful to learn that you have awarded, through Thammasat University, an honorary degree to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. As you know, she is a hero and a symbol to supporters of democracy everywhere, and your noble act adds further legitimacy to her cause. Thank you for helping to focus the world's attention on the repressive regime in Burma, and for giving new hope to the Burmese people who must suffer in silence. Please allow me to introduce myself briefly. I am a professor of Asian religions, specializing in Buddhism. I have also been a Buddhist practitioner for over twenty years. Although my initial research dealt primarily with medieval Japan, in recent years I have become concerned about the present-day condition of Buddhism throughout Asia. In 1990 I spent some time in Thailand, and I was deeply moved by your country's exceptional beauty and rich Buddhist heritage. I hope that 1 will have a chance to return to Thailand soon. During that 1990 visit 1 had the privilege of meeting Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa. I had been aware of his work for a number of years: his essays are well known among Buddhist scholars and practitioners, and his role as the founder/leader of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists is widely respected. Even before meeting Sulak, I knew that he and his teacher Acharn Buddhadasa were the Thai Buddhists who had made the most significant contributions to Buddhist circles worldwide. Since you know Sulak, you will not be surprised when I report that meeting him deepened my admiration considerably. He is one of the few people I’ve encountered who embodies the true principles of Buddhism even in action. So many other Buddhists are unable to remain centered when they leave the protective shelter of a monastery or a community of faith. Yet Sulak sees with clear vision and speaks with a clear voice even in the midst of the most turbulent political crises. How lucky Thailand is to have such a resource! I realize that the situation there is still unstable, and that you must take many factors into consideration as you exercise your authority and influence. But as Sulak's involuntary exile drags on month after month, it is a personal hardship for him, a blow to the pro-democracy forces in Thailand, and a real loss for the Thai people as a whole. Is there anything you can do to enable Sulak to return home? Might you be able to act in your own name to have the charges against him

Petitions

137

dropped, or persuade the government to grant him amnesty? Even though I cannot possibly know the political pressures you face, it seems from this distance that a merciful gesture on your part would have many positive consequences and few negative ones. I apologize for the presumption of a mere outsider writing to a King, and I hope that you will forgive me. Sulak 's situation has left his many friends around the world feeling confused and desperate; we don't know what to do or where to turn. So we appeal to you as a friend of democracy and as one who understands the importance of Sulak's international reputation. Thank you very much forgiving this letter your kind consideration. With hands palm-to-palm, Sincerely, Kenneth Kraft Associate Professor

Irish School of Ecumenics 14 March 1993 Your Royal Majesty, On behalf of the staff and students of the Irish School of Ecumenics I am writing in support of Professor Sulak Sivaraksa as he attempts to secure his freedom in Thailand. Professor Sivaraksa was our guest in November 1991, shortly after he was forced to leave Thailand, and his message was one of justice and peace for his country without any trace of bitterness or recrimination. We feel very strongly that the charges brought against him in September 1991 should be dropped because of the importance of his life-long work in support of democracy and social justice in Thailand. We are aware of Sulak's involvement in organisations such as the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development, the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Work of this kind is entirely in accord with the ecumenical aims of our own Institute, and we have learned much from Sulak and his writings about alternative ways of bringing about integral human development based on Buddhist values. The painful events of May 1 992 have proved to the world the depth of the Thai people's longing for democracy. The charges against Sulak seem to us to contradict the people's commitment to democracy. The dropping of all charges against Sulak would give a sign to the international community that Thailand is indeed committed to the prosper-

138

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

ity and well-being of all its citizens. We support your Majesty's efforts to encourage renewed peace and reconciliation among the Thai people. We would like Sulak to have the chance to make his unique contribution to this process. We wish you strength in the days ahead and we assure you of our support as you guide Thailand towards a more democratic future. Yours sincerely, John May Encl. We staff and students of the Irish School of Ecumenics in Dublin, express our support for Sulak Sivaraksa in his campaign for human rights and democracy in Thailand and we urge that the charges brought against him in September 1991 should be dropped.

Signed: with 33 names and addresses March 30, 2535 B.E. Your Majesty: We are the people who engage in a discussion through a computer bulletin-board network called USENET in the newsgroup ‘soc.culture. thai ’ . This is a world-wide network which consists of people from many professions and nationalities, most of them are university educated. We are writing to Your Majesty to ask that Your Majesty pardon Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa on the charge of lese majeste. We understand that this was not the charge that Your Majesty pressed against Prof. Sulak but rather was pressed by the NPKC. Nonetheless, we feel that Your Majesty's explicit pardon to Prof. Sulak will eventually force the NPKC to drop the charge. From the many of Prof. Sulak's essays that we read in the network, he seems to be an honorable man who upholds Nation, Religions, Monarchy and Constitution to the highest respect. His devotion to and understanding of Buddhism is very thorough. He seems to be one of the few who seriously considers applying Buddhism to solve social problems despite his education in the West. We feel so amazed that a precious person like Prof. Sulak is not wanted in his own native country. We feel that Prof. Sulak's devotion to the monarchy is real rather than superficial, as those is expressed by certain groups of people. As he quite rightly pointed our, many interest groups are bringing the excellency of Your Majesty down to the mundane level of politics or even commercialism. The only purpose of Prof. Sulak's speeches at Thammasat University and elsewhere was precisely to protect his beloved monarchy by being critical of those interest groups who have all along been

Petitions

139

exploiting the monarchy to further their personal ends. O n e particular interest group, that of the NPKC, could not tolerate this blatant fact and pressed charges against Prof. Sulak. This proved once again that the junta only used the monarchy to further their political ends. All of their coup d'etats in the past were ultimate insults to the monarchy since they abolished the Constitutions which had been signed and approved personally by your majesty. As Prof. Sulak pointed out, the monarchy in Thailand will continue to exist meaningfully if and only if there are certain changes in the law to permit the populace to criticize the monarchy. There are at least two reasons for this: 1 . Criticism from the populace is the best mirror for the monarchy to reflect upon so that adjustments can be contemplated according to the prevailing sentiment of the populace. 2. Various interest groups can no longer degrade the excellency of the monarchy by exploiting the law as a tool to suppress their opponents, thus furthering their (the interest groups) personal interest. The second reason is indeed very dangerous. The groups that are hurt by the exploitation will surely develop animosities toward the monarchy. One of the Ten Precepts for aDhammaraja is to not resist the will of the populace. How, your majesty, could this most magnificent ideal be realized if no one criticizes the monarchy? Without Your Majesty's suggestion, this law can never be changed. If the law was amended by Your Majesty 's suggestion, however, the excellency and the righteousness of Your Majesty in particular and the monarchy institution in general would be greatly praised both domestically and internationally. The authors of this letter, who are both Thais and foreigners, deeply respect the Thai monarchy. We would like to see Thailand's monarchy exist meaningfully as a symbol of unity and prosperity, hence our appeal regarding the pardon of Prof. Sulak and the amendment of certain laws. May the omnipotence of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha bless Your Majesty with good health both physically and mentally so that the Thai populace can admire the excellency of Your Majesty for a long long time to come. Most respectfully yours, List of Signers: Note: The list of signers was based on the order of electronic mails received by Dr. Tawit Chitsomboon, who is the primary drafter of the letter. He can be contacted at the following address: Institute for Computational Mechanics in Propulsion NANA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH 44135, USA. Phone: (216) 433-5904

140

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Mommsenstrasse 125 5 Cologne 41 Germany

12>August 1992 Your Majesty, Let me take the opportunity on your wife's, Queen Sirikit, 60th birthday to extend my best wishes to the health and well-being of both of you. Please do not understand this letter as a means of an outsider to interfere in Thai internal affairs on my friend's Sulak Sivaraksa behalf. But by granting amnesty for persons like Suchinda and at the same time ignoring my friend whose only crime was to reveal Suchinda's wickedness, makes the Thai Crown and the Thai government look peculiar abroad. 1 am afraid the longer my friend can't go home, the less he will defend the Thai monarchy and the more people will start to ask for the relevance of the monarchy for contemporary Thai politics. The more people listen to him, the more may agree with him and could not understand why such a man cannot be a free citizen in his country. Listeners also learn that wherever he goes, he praises Your Majesty's father and asks for donations to build a Buddhist library as his monument of goodness and knowledge to the holy Buddhist land of India. They will be more confused that such a man does not even deserve royal notice or royal pardon. From theoutsideonegets the impression, that the law on lese majeste has often been used against persons for political reasons. 1 remember well Your Majesty's graciousness in 1967, when Kukrit wanted to accuse Sulak of lese majeste. And in 1 984 Your Majesty graciously ordered the case against Sulak withdrawn. Isn't it known to Your Majesty that last year Suchinda started the case against Sulak as in 1984 Athit had done so against him? In 1984 the royal pardon was widely acclaimed abroad for royal magnanimity and made it clear to the outside world, that politicians had no chance to abuse the law for political purposes, whereas the May 1992 amnesty was not beyond criticism. But if Your Majesty granted pardon to Sulak and other victims oftheNPKC like Phra Prachak, Your action would certainly be acclaimed abroad at least all over the democratic world. It would argue well for the future of Thai democracy. Please accept these considerations as drafted by a friend of the Thai people. Yours respectfully Michael Baumann

Petitions

141

University of Cambridge Clare Hall, Cambridge CB3 9AL January 8, 1993 Your Majesty, I understand that charges against Sulak Sivaraksa are to be brought on January 21st. I am writing to you to request that these be dropped. 1 have known Sulak Sivaraksa personally for more than ten years on account of his academic work, and at no time have I heard him speak disrespectfully about you or about the Royal Family. His concern has always been for the welfare of the Thai nation, especially the poorest member, and for world peace. May I say how much we in Great Britain admired your own work for peace last May during the difficult and painful events which aroused international publicity. It was clear to everybody how much you care about peace and how deeply you love the Thai nation and national unity. I do not believe that your admirable goals of peace and national unity will be furthered by prosecuting Sulak, and I therefore sincerely hope, together with many others in Britain, that the charges against him will be dropped. With kind regards, David L. Gosling Department of Religion University of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A. 96822 January 10, 1993 I was very disturbed to learn that the legal charges brought by former Prime Minister Suchinda have not been dropped against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa, and that he was arrested by the regime of Prime M i nister Chuan Leekphai when be returned to Thailand last month. There is no question that Mr. Sulak is a loyal Thai citizen who has dedicated his life to improving Thai society at home and promoting Thai culture abroad. Although his actions sometimes are ambitious and outspoken, at least they are not evil, nor are they for personal gain or profit. Rather, his actions are intended to enhance life in Thailand in terms of the Buddhist Dhamma. Is he charged with not telling the truth? Is he charged with bringing

142

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

darkness rather than light, or corruption rather than truth? No. Instead, he is charged with threatening the powerful with his words. Our new world community is based not only on the daylight of television coverage, but also on the 19th article of the Declaration of Human Rights that guarantees free speech. Words are to be countered with other and better words, not by the barbarism of prison and persecution. Your Majesty has exercised wisdom and strength in the past by intervening to free Mr. Sulak, and so we in the international community once again appeal to you to remove the charges against Mr. Sulak, ancj protect his family and property, and thereby to restore the reputation of your nation as a place of humaneness, graciousness, and truth. Yours in the Dhamma, David W. Chappell Professor

708 Meadow Lakes Highstown, New Jersey 08520 August 15, 1992 Your Majesty: 1 was the senior associate of the late John D. Rockefeller 3rd, working especially on his interests in Asia. In that connection, as well as by personal inclination, I became a devoted friend of your country and a frequent visitor to Bangkok. It was there that I met Sulak Sivaraksa and observed his effort to help young people in their intellectual development. I believe it would be greatly in the interest of your country if Your Majesty would grant - as a Royal Favor - permission for him to return home. He is a patriot and eager to serve his country. If Your Majesty would graciously permit that, I believe it would serve the interest of your country. With my deep respect, Datus C. Smith Jr.

Petitions

143

Buddhist Peace Fellowship New York Chapter August 1992 Your Majesty, We greatly appreciate your gracious act of stopping the killing in May. There are those who may criticize Your Majesty for granting amnesty to General Suchinda and the others who were responsible for the killings. However, we think this was a generous act. Without Your Majesty's backing it would not have been possible for the peaceful removal of the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and of the Air Force, and of the others who held key positions, to occur. We have been informed that Your Majesty, through Thammasat University, has awarded an honorary doctorate to Aung San Suu Kyi. Although this is the act of the University, symbolically Aung San Suu Kyi has received this degree from the hand of Your Majesty. We feel that this means a great deal not only to Aung San Suu Kyi, but to all those who aspire to democracy and freedom. As Buddhists and members of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship we ask that Your Majesty intercede with the government to have the case against Mr. SulakSivaraksa withdrawn . Mr. SulakSivaraksa isamember of our Advisory Board. We are convinced that he is a practicing Buddhist, a loyal citizen of Thailand and a monarchist. We believe that he was the first to expose to the public the wrongdoing of General Suchinda. General Suchinda has now been removed from all offices. Yet Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa is not able to return home due to the accusations of lese majeste. We understand that the present Prime Minister has attempted to have the case withdrawn but he is not able to because he is an interim Prime Minister. It is our hope that Your Majesty will be so gracious as to ask for the government and/or the Public Prosecutor to withdraw the case against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa. This would be a great act of merit and would be praised by all Buddhists and all those who aspire for human rights and democracy. Yours Respectfully University of Washington Seattle Your Majesty, As a scholar on Thai studies, I have been following the political events in Thailand with great interest. I feel that Your Majesty's role in resolving the recent conflicts has been exemplary. Some have suggested that Your Majesty intervened too little and too late for your people. Those

144

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

of us who understand the delicacy of the monarchy, however, realize that Your Majesty succeeded in restoring calm and order in manner which could not have been accomplished by any other Head of State in Asia o r anywhere else. Again, some may not be happy that General Suchinda Kraprayoon and those of his colleagues who ordered the killing of the people last May received a royal decree of amnesty. Those of us who study Buddhism understand, however, that compassion and forgiveness are very strong elements in the teaching of the Buddha, and that it is better to let the law of karma punish the evildoers rather than try to use the western system of justice to punish the killers of the people. Notwithstanding Your Majesty's wise handling of the May events, it does not seem just that General Suchinda and his associates should have received royal amnesty while Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa, who was the first to expose the General's bad intentions towards the nation, the Buddhist religion and the monarchy, should still be in exile. It creates an unfortunate impression both towards Your Majesty personally and towards the monarchy in general. As all those who know him are aware, Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa is a devout monarchist. Everywhere he goes he defends the royal family, acquainting people overseas with the celebration of the centenary of your late august father, H.R.H. Prince Mahidol of Songkhla. What Mr. Sulak argues is that if even constructive criticism of the monarchy is regarded as an act of lese majeste this could, in the long run, prove detrimental to the monarchy, even turning the ruler into a deva raja rather than enabling him to remain a dhamma raja. I have heard that Your Majesty is of the opinion that since Mr. Sulak has not yet been convicted of a crime, it is not therefore possible for Your Majesty to forgive him o r pardon him. But the mere fact that the Prime Minister, Mr. Anand Panyarchun, could not even order the Public Prosecutor to withdraw the lese majeste charge against Mr. Sulak, shows both the seriousness of the situation and the fact that civil servants do not take orders from an interim government. Eight years ago Your Majesty magnanimously asked the Prime Minister and the Public Prosecutor to withdraw a lese majeste case against Mr. Sulak. This gracious act was widely acclaimed all over the world. At the present time Thailand needs national reconciliation and world support for her democratic movement. Your Majesty could help toward this direction most effectively, as Your Majesty's support behind the scenes clearly shows that Mr. Anand has been granted the authority to remove even top military personnel from important positions and to distance them from economic enterprises. Mr. Sulak's case may not be a major issue, but the longer it remains unresolved amicably the longer it places strain on Thailand 's efforts at national reconciliation while at the same time it also creates an unfortunate

Petitions

145

and erroneous impression about the monarchy. Believe me, Your Majesty, I have no wish to interfere in Thai politics, and indeed hope you will not regard it as presumptuous on the part of a farang to even address you on this issue, but as one who loves your country and wishes to see it develop peacefully and democratically, I believe Your Majesty alone can act constitutionally, through your Prime Minister and the Public Prosecutor, to obtain the withdrawal of the lese majeste charge against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa. It is true that he is an outspoken critic and at times his language is not as temperate as it might be, but he truly loves his country, Buddhism and his king. Only through Your Majesty's grace can such a man be allowed to enjoy his liberty at home and permitted to contribute to the democratic development of your great kingdom. Yours respectfully, Charles F. Keyes Professor 18 August 1992

May It Please Your Majesty 1 have the honour to refer to my good friend Nai Sulak Sivaraksa, indicted for alleged lese majeste and beg to plead on his behalf for the grace of rescinding the warrant of arrest issued against him by the Thai authorities. Most humbly 1 beseech Your Gracious Majesty to allow Nai Sulak to return to his beloved Muang Thai as a free man to live with his family a life of devotion to the Dhamma. 1 spent about ten years in Thailand on the diplomatic staff of the German Embassy and have known Sulak Sivaraksa for a long time as a devout Buddhist, Royalist and law abiding citizen. When I was assigned as an escort of honour to H.H. Prince Dhani and his sister Sibpan Sonakul on their tourof Germany in September 1 967, Prince Dhani commented very favourably on Sulak, especially his civic spirit and endeavors to preserve Buddhism and traditional values in Thailand. Prince Dhani believed that Sulak was an asset and a promising figure for the future of Thai cultural life and traditions. Nai Sulak Sivaraksa is an honourable man and in my opinion one of Your Majesty's most loyal subjects. I can testify to this and vouch for him.

146

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

1 beg Your Majesty to be pleased to accept the assurance of my deep respect. Erich W. Reinhold Diplomatic Service Officer (Retd.) Officer of the Most Noble Order of the Crown of Thailand Bonn, 14 August 1992 7 Sep. 1992 Your Majesty, We are writing to you today concerning the fate of our colleague and friend, Ajahn Sulak Sivaraksa, who this month is marking a full year in exile from his homeland. We are a group of Japanese priests who with Prof. Sivaraksa formed the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. At this time, we not only represent the members of this network in Japan and worldwide, but also the various traditions of Japanese Buddhism which share the same heritage as our Thai Sangha brothers and sisters. In the past 4 years, we have worked extensively with Prof. Sivaraksa through the INEB interreligious dialogue. We know him as a committed campaigner for the rights of the marginalized peoples of the world and for the development of a healthier, more just and more peaceful world. More specifically, we know Prof. Sivaraksa as a devout Thai Buddhist; a man who cares deeply about his country, his people, and his religion. In the past 18 months, the Thai nation has endured tremendous upheaval and suffering. As the moral leader of the nation, you know all too well the difficulties of this period. Prof. Sivaraksa has endured great travail during this period as well. Not only has he had to endure the anguish of his homeland from afar, but he has had to endure further personal sufferingin theseparation from his family and hiscolleagues and financial and emotional difficulties of exile. As you may reflect on the hardships of the past 18 moths and the tremendous personal strength it took for you to work through them, please also reflect on the personal, professional, and patriotic hardships that Prof. Sivaraksa has also had to work through during this period. Concerning the remaining charge of lese majeste against Prof. Sivaraksa, it is ironic that he has always struck us as the most patriotic of men. Coming from a well-to-do family, he has embraced Thai traditions as witnessed in his daily clothes which still maintain the traditional custom. His education and upbringing have also enabled him to see through the devices of others who try to use Thai patriotism and nationality for their own personal ends. It is Prof. Sivaraksa, most clearly, who wants

Petitions

147

to see the true nature of Your Majesty as a Dhammaraja shines through the manipulations of Your reign by those who seek political power. Prof. Sivaraksa's life work has embodied a commitment to the preservation and strengthening of Thai national identity. He has campaigned for a distinctive Thai democracy with the King playing an integral role as moral exemplar of the people. We remain truly perplexed that such a patriot has been charged with the crime of lese majeste. In May, you admirably set the Thai house in order by calling on the morality of the people and the battling leaders to end the bloodshed. You acted courageously. You also acted very compassionately by granting full amnesty to all those parties involved in the conflict. The May conflict, however, was the last act in a grotesque play enacted by a few hungry and selfish souls. In the 15 months before this final act, these souls perpetuated many other crimes against the people. Pro. Sivaraksa is one of these victims w ho is wondering why these hungry souls have received amnesty for their crimes while many of their victims remain under persecution. Surely, Prof. Sivaraksa's supposed speech crimes are less weighty than the blood crimes of those responsible for May's violence. Why do they receive amnesty while Prof. Sivaraksa lingers in exile to be prosecuted if he returns home to his people and family? Prof. Sivaraksa is a peaceful man who lives and advocates the Buddha's doctrine of nonviolence. He remains in exile while the generals who practiced their doctrine of violence on the people continue to be free men. Certainly, there seems to be some injustice of the punishment not fitting the crime. As Prof. Sivaraksa marks a year apart from his country, family, and colleagues, we again ask you to use your strength and to extend your compassion to pardon the final Thai of any supposed wrongdoing in the past 18 months. As a common follower in the Lord Buddha's path , please reflect on the Buddha’s teachings and grant Prof. Sivaraksa amnesty to return to his homeland, his family, and his sangha. Go forth on your journey, for the benefit of the many, for the joy of the many, out of compassion for the welfare, for the benefit and joy of all beings. — The Buddha Vinaya 1,21. Sincerely Yours, Ryowa Suzuki Secretary General International Network of Engaged Buddhists— Japan

148

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

Swiss- Burmese Association Geneva International Centre For Human Rights and Democratic Development Canada February 23,1993 Yours Majesty, We would very much like to thank you for the royal audience and the hospitality extended to us by your Majesty, your government and your people. Thailand provides a wonderful opportunity to be a zone of peace. Your Majesty played a crucial role in reestablishing democracy in Thailand in 1992, and the permission granted to H.H. the Dalai Lama to join us in your country added much prestige to the Thai Monarchy and the Thai government. The record for human rights and freedom of expression in Thailand, however, are not yet entirely satisfactory. We write to your Majesty on that sad day of the second anniversary of the 23 February 1991 coup which brought an end to democracy in Thailand. Although Thailand again has a constitution, parliament and democratic government, yet those prosecuted by the coup leader of 1991 still suffer under unjust laws. We refer particularly to the Venerable Phra Prachak whose only crime was to protect the forest, and to Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa who spoke against the coup leaders. If Your Majesty could use the royal prerogative to advise the government to grant amnesty to these two gentlemen and other cases suffered as a result of the 1 991 coup, Your Majesty would enhance Thailand's international status. Without basic human rights and freedom of expression, despite democratic form, it lacks the essence. By the end of March there will be a regional UN meeting of NGOs on human rights in Bangkok. If Thai land could be not only a host country but also an example on the issues of human rights and people's rights, its international prestige would be improved. To gain such recognition the Thai government and officials need to be more kind and generous to the suffering Burmese refuges as your Majesty's subjects have been very kind for them already. As a practicising Buddhist and patron of all religions, Your Majesty’s words and deeds will indeed help lessen the suffering of your people as well as those seeking refugees in your country. We pray for your good health and a long and peaceful reign. Your respectfully. Mrs. Mairead MAGUIRE (Irland), Nobel Prize 1976

Mrs. Betty WILLIAMS (Ireland), Nobel Prize 1976

Petitions

149

Mrs. Rigoberta MENCHU ESQUIVEL (Guatemala), Nobel Prize 1992

Mr. Adolfo PEREZ (Argentina), Nobel Prize 1976

Prof. Elie WIESEL SANCHEZ (USA), Nobel Prize 1976

Dr. Oscar ARIAS (Costa Rica), Nobel Prize 1987

Suan Mokkhabalarama Ampoe Chaiya Surat Than i 84110 Thursday 14 January 1993 Your Majesty, Although I have had the great fortune to live in your country for twelve years, both as a rural school teacher and as a bhikkhu, I have never written to you before this. I have never thought that I had anything worthy of your attention, but recently some lay supporters have suggested that the following thoughts might be of value for you. The reason for writing concerns Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa and the charges of lese majeste which have been filed against him. However , I do not know all the details of the case, nor am 1 familiar with the Thai legal system, therefore 1 will limit myself to areas in which a foreign bhikkhu has some knowledge. My concern is for the reputation of my adopted country, its government, its culture, and its “Father”. 1 am worried that should the charges against Mr. Sivaraksa be carried through it will only do harm to the prestige of Thailand and its central institutions, especially that of the monarchy. Although I am a foreigner, I feel obligated to express this fear due to the countless kindnesses showered upon me by the Thai people, culture, and religion. As you undoubtedly know, the international press and human rights organizations do not have a deep understanding of Thai culture and customs. Especially in the West, such as my own country, the United States of America, the reverence the Thai people feel for Your Majesties the King and Queen cannot be understood due to the cultural gap. Charges of lese majeste are likely to be criticized in ways that reflect negatively on the institution of the monarchy. This would be most unfortunate and of benefit to nobody. Thailand has given me a New Life. First, through the kindness of her people and the wisdom of her culture, I learned to have a cool heart and enjoy the simple things of life amongst rural farmers, students, and

150

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

teachers. Second, Thailand has maintained a living tradition of Buddhist wisdom and practice which she graciously shares with foreigners like myself. Third, Thai Buddhists generously support me in my study and practice of Buddha-Dhamma. For these gifts I must be eternally grateful and try to repay these debts in the little ways that I am able. Please take this letter to be an expression of my profound gratitude and indebtedness. It is my profound hope that the Buddhist culture of Thailand can set an example of the Middle Way between the crass and competitive materialism of Western societies and the poverty of most former colonies. The Venerable Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, whom I have the wonderful privilege of studying under, has spoken of your interest in Dhamma. I hope that your guidance will benefit Thailand and Buddhism for many years. Lastly, I hope that Your Majesties continue in good health and that yourexamplesoftheTen Royal Dhammasblesses Thailand with Peace for many years. Respectfully yours in the Dhamma, Santikaro Bhikkhu

O King I Just as consider what to do to help So should you love what to do to help

you love

to

yourself, to consider others I Nagarajuna

TO GENERAL SUCHINDA KRAPRAYOON International Fellowship of Reconciliation(IFOR) The Netherlands 19 September 1991 Dear General Suchinda, We are particularly concerned about Professor Sulak Sivaraksa, an internationally-respected authority on Buddhism and social commentator, with whom IFOR has worked on a number of occasions. Prof. Sulak is currently facing charges, instigated by yourself, of insulting the Thai monarchy and yourself during a speech he gave in August at Thammasat University. We have read a translation of Prof. Sulak's remarks and do not find them deserving of such a harsh reaction. The entire speech is obviously that of a man who cares deeply about both his country and the rights of ordinary citizens. His remarks are well within any normal standards protected by free speech. Prof. Sulak has the right-some would even argue the obligation in a democracy-to voice his opinions. It is extremely disturbing to witness the harassment which has resulted from this exercise of his right to free speech. It is also extremely disturbing to learn of government plans to relocate millions of villagers and monks in northern Thailand. The recent arrest of the Venerable Phra Prachak andother community leaders, and the reports of violence against unarmed villagers make the international community wonder if this relocation is really voluntary or not. Similarly, the forced repatriation of Burmese refugees within your country is also a severe human rights violation. We are very worried that Thailand is moving away from democracy. These reports damage Thailand's reputation in the world and indicate that Thailand is no longer a safe place for its own citizens or for foreign visitors. We respectfully urge you to put an end to the harassment of people exercising their right to free speech.

Diana Francis President

Respectfully yours, David C. Atwood General Secretary

152

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Traprock Peace Center Woolman Hill, Keets Road, Deerfield, Massachusetts September 19, 1991

Dear General Suchinda Kraprayoon It is our view that Prof. Sivaraksa is one of the most honorable of scholars, a great spokesman for democracy and Buddhism in Southeast Asia. We are aware that such an outspoken and courageous man can be an irritation to government, but insist that such a man is a great blessing to society in the long run. Decent government must be prepared to bear criticism, both just and unjust. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely James Perkins Executive Director Asia Watch 485 Fifth Avenue, Newyork, NY 10017-6104 19 September 1991 Dear General Suchinda, We are writing to express deep concern over the indictment of Sulak Sivaraksa on charges of lese majeste for remarks he made at Thammasat University on 22 August. Those remarks were highly critical of the military leadership and of the tendency to place the royal family above criticism. To indict Mr. Sulak for his remarks is to demonstrate a disturbing intolerance of dissent. Mr. Sulak was exercising his internationally recognized right to freedom of expression and should never have been arrested of charged. We urge you to drop those charges as an indication of Thailand's commitment to uphold human rights. Sincerely yours, Sidney Jones Executive Director

Petitions

153

September 19,1991 RE: Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa and Ven. Phra Prachak General Kraprayoon: We request that all charges against Professor Sulak Sivaraksa and Ven. Phra Prachak be withdrawn immediately, and that they be released from custody. If the charges are not dropped, we will work with local organizations to have the World Bank postpone or cancel its October meeting in Bangkok, and will aid the efforts of Amnesty International and other international human-rights organizations to protest the Thai government's treatment of Sulak Sivaraksa and Phra Prachak. Staff of Parallax Press Berkeley, California Friends House, Euston Road London, NW1 19 September 1991 Dear General Suchinda Kraprayoon, We have had many contacts with Sulak and, like many others throughout the world, have developed a profound respect for the integrity of his work for peace and in the practical application of Buddhism. We are sure that any comments he may have made were intended patriotically and constructively. We would urge you to reconsider, in the light of his work as a whole, the decision to place charges against him. We are sure that an act of magnanimity on your part would be welcomed in the many international circles where his efforts for peace, justice and nonviolence are widely valued, and where there isconsiderable concern about his present situation. Yours sincerely, Adam Curie On behalf of Quaker Peace and Service

154

VWien Loyalty Demands Dissent September 20, 1991

To: Gen. Suchinda Kraprayoon Subject: Japanese Buddhists Growing Concern about Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa and Phra Prachak's Basic Human Rights We have no intention to interfere with the politics of Thailand. As Buddhists, however, we cannot help expressing our grave concern about your government's treatment of two respectable Thai Buddhists. Thailand has been known for many years as a country where basic human rights, including freedom of speech, are well respected. If Mr. Sulak and Phra Prachak are treated unjustly, however, we have to reconsider our relations with Thailand. Thailand and Japan have been developing a friendly relation for centuries. We also sincerely hope that the relations between the two governments violates the basic human rights of respectable Buddhists arresting Mr. Sulak and Phra Prachak . We are ready to ask our government to seriously re-consider our relations with Thailand. Respectfully yours, Kazuhiro Honda Chairman, Japan Buddhist Council for Human Rights Issues Congress of the United States Washington DC 20515 April 30,1992 Dear Mr. Prime Minister: We are impressed with Prof. Sulak's commitment to the promotion of human rightsand democracy. Prof. Sulak was exercising the internationally recognized right offreedomofspeech and expression asproclaimed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We are surprised to hear that, to date, the aforementioned charges against him have not been dismissed, and we urge your government to reconsider them. Prof. Sulak has long been known as a supporter of the monarchy and as an important spokesperson for human rights and democratic principles. Widely regarded as a prominent intellectual and Buddhist scholar, his absence from Thailand can only be a detriment to the unique Thai cultural heritage, which is much admired by the American people. It is our hope that Prof. Sulak and other prominent, nonviolent advocates of democracy in Thailand will be allowed to speak freely, and that this case

Petitions

155

will not stand in the way of our long history of friendly relations. In the spirit of friendship, we ask that you move with dispatch on this important issue and further ask that you take every appropriate measure to ensure the freedom, safety and well-being of this outstanding international scholar, Prof. Sulak. We will continue to monitor the welfare and status of Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa's call and look forward to hearing from him and from you, of the fine progress in your country.

Dante B. Pascall Chairman Committee on Foreign Affairs

Very cordially, William S. Broomfield Ranking Republican Member Committee on Foreign Affairs

Stephen J. Solarz Chairman Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs

Benjamin A. Gilman Ranking Republican Member Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East

Sam Gejderson

Jim Leach

Doug Bereuter

Henry J. Hyde

Neil Abercrombie

Robert J. Lagonarasino

Edward R. Keighan

Tom Lantos

John Edward Porter

Charlie Rose

Mervyn M. Dymally

156

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent United States Senate Washington D.C. 20610-30L

May 1,1992 Your Excellency, Our staff recently had the privilege of meeting with Professor Sulak Sivaraksa to discuss democracy and human rights in Thailand, and the lese majeste charges still pending against him. We are convinced that he had no intention of giving offense to His Majesty the King or the royal family when he delivered his address at Thammasat University. We strongly believe that Professor Sulak was exercising his right to free speech under Article 37 of the Thai Constitution, which is also his right under internationally recognized norms of free speech. We respectfully submit that we find nothing in Professor Sulak's address that violates the provision of Article 37 prohibiting the use of free speech to impugn the honor or reputation of any other person. We respectfully urge you to take steps to see that the charges against Professor Sulak are dismissed. We look forward to you reply on this important matter at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Paul Simon US Senator

Jesse Helms US Senator

Daniel Patrick Moynihan US Senator

Claiborne Pell US Senator

Edward M. Kennedy US Senator

Harris Wofferd US Senator

Alan Cranston US Senator

TO PRIME MINISTER ANAND PANYARACHUN Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universitat Frankfurt am Main Your Excellency, The ending of the bloodshed in Bangkok and the ending of the maliciousand bloody government of General Suchinda Kraprayoonby the mediation of his Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej makes me feel a great relief and many people in Germany too. Your ambassador in Bonn wrote me that all protesters who had been arrested during the incidents were released. I think that it is a beginning of a satisfaction taking place in your country by the FactFinding-Committee towards a reconciliation in Thailand. But therefore it is unintelligible to give royal amnesty to General Suchinda and his colleagues who ordered the killing of many many Thai people. Why Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa did not receive royal amnesty, who only spoke the truth against Genera] Suchinda and who gave an example for a free and righteous Thailand. If your country is going to be a real democracy there must be basic human rights and freedom of expression. The longer Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa is not allowed to return home as a free citizen it is a very bad image for your government in the world. Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa was a participant at our symposium in Frankfurt. He made very important and innovative contributions to it. 1 think his presence is asked in yourcountryjust nowby all means. You need him to help developing democratic and participative structures in your society. Urging you to call him back to Thailand and to give him royal amnesty I think is a good advice conveying right and democracy in Thailand. Please let me know what you are willing to do and send me as fast as possible a copy of the royal amnesty for Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa. With good wishes for you and your country Yours sincerely Prof. Johannes Hoffman Theologie Interkulturell 5 July 1992

158

IVTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

Borgargaton Swedish PEN Centre Sweden

S - l 1 7 Stockholm

23 September , 1991 Your Excellency, The arrest of Sulak for his remarks about the monarchy in his speech would be a violation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression as set down in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We strongly urge you to ensure that Sulak not be arrested for lese majeste, and that if he is to be charged with defamation for his remarks about the military he receive a fair trial at which he may be found innocent if his remarks are judged to be true o r constitute fair comment. We further urge that if he is detained his physical security be properly protected. Yours sincerely and respectfully, Maria Ekman International Secretary Buddhist Peace Fellowship Berkeley, California Dear Prime Minister: I am writing to you of a matter of grave concern to us at the Buddhist Peace Fellowship in the United States. We understand that your government has brought charges of lese majeste against Sulak Sivaraksa and Venerable Phra Prachak. Professor Sivaraksa is an internationally respected writer and activist for social justice issues; he has many supporters among international peace groups, including the 2000 members of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship. Phra Prachak is likewise equally well known for his courageous and honorable actions on behalf of the dwindling forests in your country. Many many people in our country are deeply concerned about the fate of the world's forests; Thailand is a country under observation by many environmental activist groups. 1 am concerned that your arrest of Professor Sulak and Ven. Prachak is a violation of basic human rights. Both of these men have been speaking to what they see are the current issues for your government to deal with. This includes your promise for democratic elections, which you seem to have delayed. I want you to know that we stand prepared to ask our membership

Petitions

159

to respond to your actions with urgent letters to the World Bank. We are asking you to drop the charges you have brought against both men and release them from threat of imprisonment. If you do not see fit to drop these charges, we will ask our members to pressure the World Bank to postpone or cancel their scheduled meeting in Bangkok this October. We do not feel it is appropriate that such an esteemed world organization should hold its meeting in a supposedly modernized country where such human rights violations are practiced. The Buddhist Peace Fellowship regards itself as a sister organization to the International Network of Engaged Buddhists; we will do all we can to support freedom of speech and the protection of intellectual and spiritual leaders in you country. PLEASE DROP THESE CHARGES NOW. Sincerely yours, Stephanie Kaza, Chair Board of Directors

IVS International Voluntary Services, Inc. Washington D.C. 19 September 1991 It is with great consternation that we have learned of the arrest of Professor Sulak Sivaraksa and Ven. Phra Prachak. In the name of peace and democracy, we ask that you drop the charges against them. Don Luce President

Linda Worthington Executive Director

160

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) Box 271, Nyack, New York 10960 September 19,1991

Dear Prime Minister Panyarchun: We have just become aware of the arrest and trial of Sulak Sivaraksa and the Ven. Phra Prachak, two internationally known and respected Buddhist leaders from Thailand. As an internationally involved organization with branches in forty countries, we have come to know and respect the integrity, compassion, courage and wisdom of both of these men. We have witnessed in the last few years the rapid spread of democracy throughout the world and the growing determination of the world's peoples for governments which rule with fairness, justice and integrity Although we have known and appreciated Thailand's great history and traditions, we are stunned that you have chosen to arrest and bring such serious charges against an eminent rel igious leader in Thailand. If these charges are not dropped against Sulak Sivaraksa and the Ven. Phra Prachak, then we have no alternative but to publicize this throughout the world. Sincerely, C. Doug Hostetter Executive Secretary

(Rev.) Richard L.Deats Director, Interfaith Activities

Nonviolence International Washington D.C. 19 September 1991 Please withdraw the charges against Sulak Sivaraksa and Phra Prachak. If you do not see fit to drop the charges against these two, we will work to have the World Bank postpone or cancel its meeting in Bangkok scheduled for next month. With utmost earnestness, Mubarak Awad

Philip Bogdonoff

Laura Barnitz

Petitions

161

Congress of the United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 February 19,1992 Dear Prime Minister: 1 am writing to you on behalf of Professor Sulak Sivaraksa of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. I have met today with Professor Sulak, and I am positively impressed with his nonviolent, Buddhist approach toward the encouragement of human rights and democracy in Thailand. This is the method by which the Dalai Lama has brought increasing worldwide support for his efforts to bring human rights and democracy to Tibet. f have invited Professor Sulak to continue to inform me and the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, on a regular basis, concerning developments in Thailand. He has spoken of his hopes that the current government can be persuaded to cease threats to arrest him and other prominent, nonviolent advocates of democracy in Thailand, and to move quickly toward improved human rights protections and free and fair elections, conducted according to accepted international standards. I add my hopes that your government will be able to move with dispatch on these important issues, and 1 ask that you take every care to ensure the freedom, safety, well-being and freedom to travel of this outstanding international scholar and authority on democracy, Ajahn Sulak. 1 shall continue to monitor, with the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, the welfare of Professor Sulak Sivaraksa and the progress of human rights and democracy in Thailand. I look forward to hearing from Professor Sulak, and from you, of fine progress in your country. Very cordially, Tom Lantos, Co-Chairman Congressional Human Rights Caucus

TO PRIME MINISTER CHUAN LEEKPHA1 Department of Religion Swarthmore College Swarthmore, PA 19081 November 17, 1992 Dear Sir I am writing to request that the government's charges against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa be dropped. I have known and admired S. Sivaraksa since 1968 as a person dedicated to Thailand (chat), Thai religion (sasana), and to the King(p/ira mahakasat). S. Sivaraksa's strong stands on civic and human rights have been motivated by his deep convictions as a Buddhist and by his profound respect for Thai culture and for the King. S. Sivaraksa is loved and admired throughout the world as a dedicated, tireless interpreter of Theravada Buddhism in the modern world. We have been privileged to have S. Sivaraksa as a guest lecturer at Swarthmore College on several occasions. His knowledge and enthusiasm have helped our students appreciate Buddhism as a living, vital religious tradition in today's world. As one of the co-founders of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists and a participant in several international Buddhist organizations, S. Sivaraksa has become one of the world's foremost proponents of an engaged Buddhism. At this particular time in the development of Thai democratic institutions, S. Sivaraksa's message of the relevance of Thailand's cultural, religious, and royal traditions to the country's political, economic , and social development needs to be heard. With the most heartfelt concern for Thailand, a country for which I have the deepest affection, I urge that the government's charges against Sulak Sivaraksa be lifted. With my profound respect to you and to the Thai government. Sincerely yours, Donald K. Swearer

Petitions

163

11 December 1992 From Hon. Justice Michael Kirby AC CMG Sydney, Australia Your Excellency, 1 write in my capacity of Chairman of the Executive Committee of the International Commission of Jurists and a lawyer concerned with human right in all countries, including Thailand. Your election and work for the rule of law and human rights commands admiration. When 1 was in Bangkok recently I called on the Speaker, Mr. Marut Bunnag, and expressed support for the initiatives for human rights being taken in Thailand. 1attended a conference in Thai land on 29 October 1 992. Following that conference 1 participated in a Session of the Permanent Tribunal of Peoples concerned with a complaint by the peoples of Tibet. One of the appointed members of the Tribunal was Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa, a distinguished author now teaching at the Nanzan University in Nagoya, Japan. Mr. Sulak informed me of the charge of lesemajeste which has been preferred against him and which occasions his self-imposed exile from Thailand. As a judge of a foreign country I do not, of course, wish to interfere in the legal processes of Thailand. I also appreciate that laws will differ from one country to another in accordance with culture and tradition. However, it would give great joy to Sulak's many admirers in numerous countries of the world if the charge against him could be dropped and he could be permitted to return to Thailand, his family and his professional obligations. He is a courageous and modern defender of democracy and a most impressive scholar and human being. I am proud to count him as a friend. I hope that the new government of Thailand , committed to the rule of law and human rights ( which include freedom of expression) will see their way clear to terminating the legal process against this fine man.

C/C The Hon. Marut Bunnag Speaker of Parliament Parliament, U-Thong Nai Road Bangkok

164

UTien Loyalty Demands

Dissent Religious Society of Friends London

15 December 1992 Dear Prime Minister We are writing to you today in support of Professor Sulak Sivaraksa and his attempts to return in freedom to Thailand. We urge you to allow him to return in safety to his country, in order to continue is life-long work in support of democracy in Thailand. Sulak's commitment to the welfare of Thai land is exemplified in his founding such organizations as the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. His work with groups such as the Siam Society and the Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation reflect his deep commitment and concern for the preservation of Thai society. Sulak is a respected international authority on engaged Buddhism and a dedicated voice for democracy. The painful events of May 1991 have proven to the world the Thai people's longing, and your own present government 's continuing struggle, for democracy in Thailand. Since this struggle includes a reform of the lese majeste laws and anti-coup legislation, we hope that your government will drop all charges against Sulak Sivaraksa and allow him freely and safely to return to Thailand. May we also express our support for His Majesty the King's efforts to encourage renewed peace and reconciliation among the Thai people. We understand that this reconciliation includes a peaceful and amicable solution to Sulak's care for all concerned parties. May we respectfully wish you strength in the days ahead, and together with the international community support your efforts for increased democracy in Thailand. Yours sincerely, Andrew C. Clark General Secretary Tegucigalpa, Honduras December the 18th 1992 Your Excellence Chuan Leekphai, We the “Compartir con los Ninos deyen laCalledaTegucigalpa” staff in Honduras, are very sorry to know that our non-violent dear friend Sulak Sivaraksa has been arrested in Bangkok. We deeply wish he will get his freedom back on December the 24th,

Petitions

165

for Christmas. We hope that you will listen to our request and that we will soon receive the good news. Sincerely yours, Proyecto Comparti With 50 signatures Dharmavedi Institute for Mass Communication and Social Development Colombo , Sri Lanka 1st December, 1992 Hon’ble Prime Minister, Professor Sulak Sivaraksa, leader of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists in Thailand is the chief advisor to our Sri Lankan Organization aimed at the revival of Buddhism on the island. We in Sri Lanka have been influenced by his valuable ideas and advices, and got the strength and courage to revive the Buddhism in the country. While attending to the religious, social and cultural well-being of the people, our organization is interested in maintaining peace and harmony in the country which is already shattered by the ethnic wars existing for the past few years. Our organization is taking every possible action within our area of authority to bring peace and order creating friendly atmosphere. We have already collected valuable articles written by Prof. Sivaraksa in the book Seeds of Peace reprinted and distributed them in Sri Lanka towards this end. In a Buddhist country like Thailand the best scholar available to promote Buddhism in the country and to propagate the message of the Buddha in the world is Prof. Sivaraksa. The charges laid against Prof. Sivaraksa by the Military Government seem to be grossly unfair and unreasonable and if legal action is taken against him we are sure, would bring disrepute to the Monarchy and the country as well. Prof. Sivaraksa who is an able and an intelligent leader dedicated to serve the humanity in general, is rendering an immense service to mankind. He is very keen to return to his country, Thailand, and serve his fellow citizens in the country. For and on behalf of the entire Buddhist population of Sri Lanka, we appeal to your Honour, most respectfully, to withdraw the charges against our leader to render his valuable services to the people of Thailand and the rest of the world.

166

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Thanking your Honour for favourable consideration.

Yours truly, Raja Dharmapala (Executive Secretary)

Council on International and Public Affairs 111 United Nations Plaza, Suite 3C New York, NY 10017 January 2, 1993 Dear Sir: 1 am writing to urge you to use your good offices to drop any charges that may still be standi ng against my friend SulakSivaraksa. What an appropriate and auspicious way to inaugurate the New Year. Sulak Sivaraksa may be outspoken in his views, but he is no menace to anyone . He simply speaks forthrightly about issues involving democratic rights and social justice. Yours Sincerely, Ward Morehouse President CC: Ambassador of Thailand to the United States Shishu Koruna Sangha (children welfare society) EXCELLENCY, SHISHU KORUNA SANGHA, A CHILDREN WELFARE SOCIETY, CALCUTTA, TENDER FERVENT APPEALTO WITHDRAW THE CASE AGAINST PROFESSOR SULAK SIVARAKSA FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES. THIS APPEAL IS INITIATED TO UPHOLD THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS. SURA KRISHNA CHAKMA General Secretary SHISHU KORUNA SANGHA

Petitions

167

Diakonisches Werk Der Evangelischen Kirche In Deutschland Der Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland 10-12-1992 Your Excellency, We are deeply concerned that Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa is still facing criminal charges in Thailand, on the basis of the statements made in the public debate last year. We know Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa as an outstanding interpreter of Buddhism and of Thai culture, as well as a social critic of great personal integrity. We believe in the value of open and spiritual discussion as a basis for democracy and social development. Recent political events in your country have strengthened us in this belief. Writing to you at the time of International Human Rights Day, we hope the charges will be dropped as soon as possible and kindly request Your Excellency to use your influence in this matter. Network of Engaged Buddhists (formerly Buddhist Peace Fellowship) Affiliate of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists Plas Plwa, Cwmrheidol Aberystwyth, Wales SY23 3NB United Kingdom 1 1th December 1992 Dear Prime Minister, The charge of lese majeste has been commonly used by powerful interests as a convenient means of silencing unwelcome criticism. Its use in Professor Sulak's case is particularly curious. For although he has an outstanding record as a spokesman for human rights and democratic principles, he is also in many respects a traditionalist long known as a supporter of the monarchy. In the months since these charges were framed there has, of course, been a dramatic change in the political situation in Thailand. We suggest that in the new, encouraging climate the charges against Sulak now appear vindictive and quite out of keeping with the times. The UK Network of Engaged Buddhists therefore respectfully asks that the charges against Professor Sulak be dropped. Yours in Dhamma, Ken Jones Secretary

168

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Statement Concerning Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa It seems clear that the lese majeste charge against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa is another example of the abuse of power by those who control it in order to silence and to get rid of their critics. It is also a violation of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in which freedom of expression is guaranteed. In view of the democratization process in Thailand, there is no reason for the public prosecutor to go ahead with the prosecution. We believe that Mr. Sulak’s remarks were made in good faith and for the sake of justice and democracy in Thailand. We thus call for the charges against Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa to be dropped. In doing this, we join all those advocates of democracy, justice and peace, both in Thailand and around the world, who have voiced their support for Mr. Sulak Sivaraksa. issued on December 12,1992 by ACFOD VII Council Meeting, Bangsaen, Thailand N.B. This statement was made at ACFOD Council Meeting with 50 participants from 16 countries.

Amnesty International International Secretariat, London 10 December 1992 Thailand: Thai Government Critic Risks Detention Amnesty International believes that if detained on these charges, Professor Sulak Sivaraksa would be a prisoner of conscience and the organization would demand his immediate and unconditional release. He said that Thai people should “accept that the King, the Crown Prince and the Princesses are just ordinary people,” and that he believed the King was “open to honest criticism”. Amnesty International believes that his detention for his remarks about the monarchy would be a violation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression The organization is therefore urging that he not be arrested on these grounds. Professor Sulak Sivaraksa also talked about how General Suchinda and General Sunthorn had visited Burma for talks with leaders of that country's military junta immediately before they carried out a military coup in Thailand on 23 February 1991 overthrowing the elected civilian government. Professor Sulak asked, “Did they go to Burma to learn how to carry out the coup?” He also alleged the Burmese and Thai militaries “are actually working together, in logging, fishing and arms trading.” Amnesty International urges that, should Professor Sulak Sivaraksa

Petitions

169

be charged with “defamation”, he be given a fair trail at which he may be found innocent-if his remarks are judged to be true or to constitute fair comment made in good faith about matters subject to public criticism-as is provided in Thai law. Amnesty International is also urging that Professor Sulak's physical security be properly safeguarded if he is detained. 61 Hazelton Avenue Toronto Ontario Canada A5R 2E3 December 17, 1992 Dear Prime Minister Chuan: Through these and many other activities, Sulak Sivaraksa has celebrated and defended the accomplishments of Thai culture and has called upon Thais to appreciate the value of their own cultural roots. His deep spiritual insight, his thorough understanding of Thai culture and history and his broad global vision make his initiative invaluable and indispensable steps for the betterment of society Sincerely, John Ralston Saul Dharma Gaia Latte, Italy 22nd of December 1992 Dear Prime Minister, Sulak is a respected international authority on engaged Buddhism, and as a dedicated voice for democracy, he is well-known also here in Italy. Many articles written by Sulak are published on the best known Buddhist magazines. The painful events of May 1991 have proven to the world the Thai people's longing and willingness to sacrifice for democracy. We appreciate very much your own present government 'scontinuing struggle for democracy in Thailand. This struggle includes a reform of the lese majeste laws and anti-coup legislation. Because of this, we support the dropping of all charges against Sulak Sivaraksa and his free and safe return to Thailand. Sincerely Yours, in the Dhamma Sergio Orrao Hon. Secretary

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

170

International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development Ottawa, Canada April 19, 1993 Dear Prime Minister, I would like to begin by thanking you most sincerely foi your cooperation and that of your government in the recently completed Nobel Peace Laureates Mission to the Thai-Burma border. The Laureates and 1 are particularly grateful for the opportunity we were provided to share our views with you on the subject of democracy in Burma and the need to release Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest. In the course of the mission's activities, I was informed of the pending trial of Sulak Sivaraksa. According to the information I received, Mr. Sulak was charged with lese majeste following comments made in August 1991 atThammasat University. Understanding your government's commitment to human rights, I respectfully ask you to consider using your influence to intercede on the defendant's behalf to ensure that Mr. Sulak is not unjustly penalized. While 1 do not excuse any wrong action, 1 do think a closer examination of Mr. Sulak's motivations would be revealing. As a social activist, Mr. Sulak's comments were responding to the need to awaken the democratic consciousness of the Thai people following the military coup d’etat in February 1991 . Moreover, this democratic impulse came as part of a response to the actions of the Government leaders of the day, the National Peace Keeping Council. It seems to me that his statements need not be interpreted as a denunciation of Monarchy or as a criticism of His Majesty. In reviewing my request, 1 ask that you take into consideration Mr. Sulak's record as an individual working to improve the lives and the human rights of all Thai citizens. As you are no doubt aware, Mr. Sulak was recently nominated for the Nobel Prize for Peace in recognition of his commitment to justice and peaceful dissent. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Yours sincerely, Edward Broadbent

[These were only a portion of those sent to the king and three Prime Minister, . Many more were sent to the foreign minister, the public

prosecutor

and Thai Ambassadors

in many countries

.]

V. Testimonies

A patriot King is simply a King, who is possessed by a public spirit, one who, by a voluntary act of self-limitation, though he could create a despotism, chooses to restore liberty. Abandoning corruption, he recovers for Parliament her proper freedom, so that this body once again becomes a "real barrier to abritary power" Will it not be said that this is advising a King to recover a spirit, which may turn against himself, to reject the sole expedient of governing a limited monarchy with success, to labour to confine, instead of labouring to extend, his power, to patch up an old constitution, which his people are disposed to lay aside, instead of forming a new one more agreeable to those more advantageous to him; to refuse in short to become an absolute monarch, where every circumstance invites him to it. The Statescraft of Machiavelli by Herbert Butterfield, 1962 pp.119-120

IN T H E MIRROR LITERATURE AND POLITICS IN SIAM IN THE AMERICAN ERA If one considers the contours of that response between the installation of the Sarit dictatorship on October 20, 1 958 and the collapse of the Thanom-Praphat dictatorship on October 14, 1 973 in the face of the huge popular demonstrations, two features immediately strike the historian's eye. First, the critical reaction was initially cultural and limited to small groupsof young metropolitan intellectuals, then gradually spread through the rapidly expanding student population and the wider society, becoming steadily more political in the process. Second, this reaction, though firmly grounded in Thai traditions and contemporary realities, was nonetheless paradoxically shaped to a significant degree by quite another sort of “Americanization” than what has been detailed so far. The first ripples of the later tide manifested themselves in the last years of the Sarit autocracy. As was to be expected in an era of rigid political control, the reaction started in the confined sphere of the metropolitan intelligentsia. In 1963, the idiosyncratic conservative-monarchist intellectual Sulak Sivaraksa established, with the help of the Asia Foundation, a new journal somewhat misleadingly named Sangkhomsat Parithat (Social Science Review)*. Inspiteof his excellent American connections, Sulak maintained a pointedly critical stance vis-a-vis the Americanophilia and “developmentalism” of the Sarit era. Although his insistence on trying to repopularize traditional upper-class Thai costume, and to revive “Siam ” in place of the Plaek-period mongrel ization “Thailand, ” * ‘earned him ridicule in some quarters, the thrust of many of his articles - a defense of Thai cultural and political autonomy from excessive American influence - won him a small, but increasingly influential, youthful intellectual following.*** From a secure conservative political position, he was able to open the pagesof Sangkhomsat Parithat to more radically-inclined critics, such as Nithi Eawsiwong (Nidhi Aeusrivongse)****, as well as the poet Angkhan Kanlayanaphong, who, though largely apol itical, broke radically with the formal traditions of Thai poetic language to pursue a personal vision of Buddhist humanism. By Benedict Anderson and Ruchira Mendiones Duang Kamol, Bangkok 1985 'See Sulak's amusing account i n Siam in Crisis ,pp. 324-25. There is no reason to suppose that Sulak was aware that the Asia Foundation was indirectly receiving CIA funding, something the Foundation only conceded publicly in 1967. Sulak also served on the editorial board of Sionil Jose's Solidarity, a sort of Fil ipino counterpart to Sangkhomsat Parithat , o f CIA largesse (see New York Times, May 8 and 14, 1967). He was not the first to do so. When Pridi Banoyong returned to power after World War

174

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

II, he brought back the traditional name o f the realm, doubtless because Plaek's implied that the country belonged exclusively to the ethnic Thai, and he preferred a name g i v i n g the many ethnic minorities their share. The m i l i t a r y reimposed

“ T h a i l a n d ” after the coup o f 1947

• * ‘See, forexample, his editorial “ A n t a ray samrappannyachonkhon n u m [Dangers Facing Young Intellectuals], "Sangkhomsat Parithat, 2:1 (June 1964), pp. 3-6, warning recent graduates from American universities against initial arrogance and impatience and subsequent mental laziness and easy cooperation b y the establishment. Sharper still was his “ l l t i p h o n khongfarang [The Influence of the W h i t e s ] ” i n ibid., 4:3 (December 1966), pp.36, a b i t i n g attack on b l i n d imitation of the West and its consequences. He deplored the way Bangkok was being destroyed by the tearing d o w n of temples and f i l l i n g i n o f canals to b l i n d congested thoroughfares; satirized the absurd pride i n being the first nation i n Asia to have air-conditioned moviehousesand television; criticized wasting money on huge hotels rather than o n better educat ion; and warned against r i s i n g greed, declining morals, and a willingness to turn even funerals American soldiers.

into tourist

shows, especially since

the inflow of huge numbers

of

for example, Nithi's riposte to Sulak entitled " K r u n g Si Ayutthaya s i n k h o n d i (Ayutthaya Has Lost Its Good M e n ] , ” ibid., 5 : 8 (September 1967), pp.8 1-90 which, praising the editor for having the courage t o raise the issue of the bad influences exerted by the American bases, reminded h i m that the Thai have been absorbing Western influence for more thana century. He noted that for a l l Sulak's criticism of“ A m e r i c a n i s m ” he had nonetheless unselfconsciously adopted the American demonological conception o f World Communism. ( H e concluded w i t h some penetrating remarks o n the differences between Russian, Chinese, and Vietnamese communism). See also Nithi’s fine critique o f conservative-nationalist Thai historiography,” Somdet Krom PhrayaDamrongRachanuphapkap Arnold Toynbee [Prince Damrong Rachanuphap and Arnold Toynbee].” i n ibid., 7:1 (June-August 1969), pp. 17-36.

HONOURS The English Centre of INTERNATIONAL P-E-N 12 March 1992 Dear Sulak Sivaraksa, 1 am very happy to tel I you that at the last meeting of the Executive Committee of English Centre of P-E-N you were elected an Honorary Member. 1 am so glad to welcome you to our ranks and enclose your Membership Card. Your fellow writers have asked me to send their best wishes and sympathy. Yours sincerely, Josephine Pullein-Thompson General Secretary

Testimonies

175

International Campaign for Tibet December 7, 1992 Dear Sulak, On behalf of the Boardof Directors of the International Campaign for Tibet I have the honor to ask you to join our Council of International Advisors. The International Campaign for Tibet was founded in 1988 to investigate and monitor human rights conditions in Tibet and then work with governments and officials in appropriate form to address these injustices. The International Campaign for Tibet is the largest and most prominent Tibet organization in the west and we hope to continue to grow. The International Campaign for Tibet's efforts and initiatives on behalf of Tibet have expanded and intensified to put an end to pervasive human rights abuses, repression of religious freedom and the environmental devastation of the Tibetan plateau. Enclosed please find more detailed information on our organization and a list of people whom we plan to invite to join the Council of International Advisors. An International Council of Advisors has been formed to serve as a conduit of wisdom and experience, in the fields of human rights, international politics and leadership, for the international campaign for Tibet. Your support and advice is invaluable in helping us achieve our aims. A yearly meeting of the International Council of Advisors will be scheduled. Your attendance is encouraged but not mandatory. We will also be inviting Jimmy Carter, Mikhail Gorbachev, Mary Robinson, Bishop Desmond Tutu, Richard Nixon and other eminent friends to join the International Council of Advisors. Your distinguished service to your country and your commitment to justice and freedom is greatly admired throughout the world. I hope that you will promote the aspirations of the Tibetan people by becoming a member of our International Council of Advisors. We will be most honored if you accept this invitation to join the International Council of Advisors. Your support will be a source of great encouragement to International Campaign for Tibet, our Board and our many friends and supporters. Most of all 1 believe that the Tibetan people will be greatly inspired and emboldened in their struggle for human rights and freedom. Thank you for considering this invitation. Sincerely, Lodi G.Gyari President

176

When Loyalty Demands Dissent Council for a Parliament of the World's Religions USA February 1,1993

Dear Mr. Sivaraksa, In 1993, Chicago will host the Parliament of the World's Religions, bringing together representatives of faith traditions from around the globe to celebrate the unity and diversity of the world's religions in a spirit of openness, mutual respect, and shared humanity. We will gather to listen to one another, to be challenged to find new ways of living together, and to seek a new vision for the future. The Parliament will commemorate the World's Parliament of Religions held in Chicago one hundred years ago. That event was a watershed in world religious history: the dawn of religious pluralism. It was the first public gathering of representatives of the world's religions. It introduced Asian religions to the west. The 1993 gathering will be more than a centenary celebration. By bringing together the world's religious faiths in Chicago, it will provide a forum for religious and spiritual persons to address the critical issues which face the human community at the threshold of the 21st century We are honored to invite you to attend the 1993 Parliament of the World's Religions, to be held in Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A., from August 28 through September 4, 1 993. We also hope that you will participate in the Parliament Program in several specific ways. We ask you to take part in the Opening Procession (Saturday, August 28) and the Closing Ceremony (Saturday, September 4). We invite you to join the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual leaders, which will convene for the final three days of the Parliament, (September 2-4). This meeting will consider ways to continue interreligious cooperation for peace, the relief of suffering, and the preservation of the planet. Finally, we hope that you will be willing to join in one or more seminars or panel discussions during the course of the Parliament. Should you agree to participate in this way, we will communicate with you to work out details. We invite you to bring your thoughts, your presence, and your voice to this gathering. Please let us know at your earliest convenience of you will attend and if you are able to participate in any or all of the ways we have requested. Sincerely yours, Daniel Gomez-Ibanez Executive Director

Testimonies

177

The Naropa Institute Boulder, Colorado, USA. May 24, 1993 Dear Mr. Sivaraksa, In February, 1993 , the faculty and the trustees of The Naropa Institute decided to extend to you the Naropa Institute Founder's Award, which is the highest award given by this Institute. Originally, we had planned to present the award at our graduation in May, 1993 and were aware that we would probably have to send it to you instead of you being here in person to receive it. However, we realize that you will be in the United States in September, 1993, and, thus, we are extending a most cordial and sincere invitation to you to visit the Naropa Institute in September, 1993, and give us the honor of being able to present the award to you at that time. We would be most proud, also, to act as the sponsor of your visit to the United States, and we have done some fundraising from other organizations to be able to pay for the costs of your travel to the U.S. If your schedule permits, we would invite you to participate in a teaching program for the benefit of our faculty, students and community at the time of your visit. I look forward to hearing from you or your representatives concerning this visit and to further communications to discuss the details and substance of the visit. After your last visit, there was a longing to be able to welcome you again as so much of the vision you express and the activities in which you are engaged are in harmony with and a model for our work here at Naropa. Sincerely John Cobb President Omega Institute Friday 2:00 P.M.-4:00 P.M. 27 March 1993 Workshop SULAK SIVARAKSA SEEDS OF PEACE: A BUDDHIST VISION FOR RENEWING SOCIETY Course #0151 A leading social thinker and activist in Asia and the founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, Sulak Sivaraksa and his

178

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

work helped inspire this conference. In Asia he challenges people to rethink their acceptance of modern Western development based on the GNP as a measure of national vitality. In his view, this approach is overly materialistic and environmentally destructive, contributing in the long run to militarization, human rights violations, the deterioration of cohesive cultural values, and the growth of inequality. Instead, he is calling for a Buddhist, humanistic development that emphasizes popular participation, social justice, human rights, the satisfaction of basic needs, and reverence for all life. Sivaraksa shows us how to establish peace within ourselves, to look at social ills mindfully, and then to work to remedy them. A Revolution of Hope : Changing The World From The Inside Out 3 Day Conference March 26-28, 1993 New York City INTRODUCTION FOR SULAK SIVARAKSA “Biography And Buddhism In Thailand” Permit me to introduce Professor Sivaraksa at eye-level. Others either have or will tell you about him as a most modest, most generous, yet most illustrious figure bigger than life. Three years ago I had never.heard of Sulak Sivaraksa. But I was introduced to his mind in the best way: through an essay of his, “Global Problem Solving: A Buddhist Perspective,” in a book edited by Glenn Paige-one of the truly great souls at the University of Hawaii-Buddhism and Nonviolent Global Problem-Solving: Ulan Bator Explorations— sponsored by the Center for Global Nonviolence and published by the Matsunaga Peace Center. The words of the essay leap off the page by beginning uncharacteristical ly for this kind of writing: “To be honest and to begin by getting right to the point, I must state plainly that there is no serious contemporary Buddhist perspective for global problem solving.” A paragraph later, Sulak writes,” Members [of the World Fellowship of Buddhists] meet every few years to reaffirm how wonderful we Buddhists are.” But then later in the essay he shows his commitment to Buddhist principals such as “generosity of spirit” and the “interrelatedness of life” and the “caring for all existence” while at the same time dealing with contemporary realities through the activation of Buddhist Principles through organization and making common cause. So I asked Glenn who this Sulak was. Was he an Asian Buddhist? Yes, said Glenn. Well, I said, he reads like a British lawyer. Yes, said Glenn, he's a British lawyer, too. Then sometime after this, in 1992 I learned from a colleague that his PhD student from Thailand, Carina, recommended that a visiting scholar from Thailand might be interested in writing the Siam volume in our series on the histories ofl biography in Asia. One of the guidelines for

Testimonies

179

our series is that they must be written by a person native to the culture being written about. Lo and behold, it was our Siamese Buddhist British Barrister. The extraordinarily skilled Prof. Poranee Natadecha of UH arranged a meeting with Sulak when he was here a year ago. We agreed that he should write the volume on the history of Siamese biography. Two details of our meeting remain in mind: first, his enthusiasm for reading biography when he saw the books at CBR, and second his keen sense of the mutual understand ability of the Asian and Western sense of what constitutes biography, or perhaps I should say, what constitutes the universality of the human personality. Then, in response to my rather shamefacedly admitting that we had not raised the money yet, he said it was the idea that counted! I also learned at about this time that he had just barely escaped the clutches of the military dictatorship in Thailand, that he was one of the great spirits in world non-violence, but that the banana military in Thailand were trying their best to silence this voice of reason and compassion. 1 hope you have all enlisted in the struggle to acquit him, because he is now out on bail after being snatched when he returned home last December. (I use the Chicago slang because the action deserves no better.) Then about a month ago, I learned that he had been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, a nomination I heartily endorse. So I felt like Rick in Casablanca-what doesone tiny volume matter when there isso much suffering, injustice, and violence in the world? But as I read again Sulak's essay, he answered the question when he mentioned that one of the ten relevant issues to be tackled by Buddhists is the relationship between society and the individual. If we emphasize the individual side, we must study life-writing. Perhaps for atheists like me this book could be one vehicle for that “secular spirituality” that Sulak sees on the road to peace and justice. George Simson, Director Center for Biographical Research University of Hawaii 30/4/1993

180

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

GREETINGS Schloss Schonstein 5248 Wissen/Sieg For Your Sixtieth Birthday March 15,1993 Dear Sulak: These lines come much too late, of course Yet it is never too late to remember one of the greatest gifts of life: friendships. Long before 1 met you 1 had heard from Shepard Stone about you and your work for human rights and peace. It was he who gave me an introduction to you when I moved to Bangkok in 1968 with the Ford Foundation. And it was you who gave me an introduction to this wonderful person who came to personify for me the best in Thai heritage - Prince Sithiporn. I first met him in the end of 1968 at his farm in Bangbert near Hua Hin, an unforgettable memory. My first meeting with you was somewhat earlier in your bookshop on Rama IV Road. I remember that you introduced me to some of the youngsters meeting regularly at your place, that you suggested valuable readings and that you took me out to lunches at little places which I would never have discovered on my own. Your insights into Thai politics and society formed my own vision. 1 dare say that without your wise guidance I would have seen much less during my two years in Bangkok and 1 would have seen it differently, less clearly. For this I will ever be grateful to you. In particular, you helped me to understand that constructive criticism is borne of love. You were then as now deeply critical of many aspects of modernizing Thai society, particularly of the political process, and the modernization ideal in general. Yet I sensed throughout that your evaluation was firmly rooted in a deep love for everything Siamese, be it the monarchy or Buddhism or farmers, and that your lamentations were an expression of a justified pride being hurt. We met repeatedly later on when back in Germany, and you in semi-exile we corresponded about the Sithiporn Foundation which you had helped to set up after his death. Also,theexileofDr. Puey Ungphakorn was a common concern at that time. But the most vivid picture whlich comes to my mind whenever 1 think about our many encounters is this : Marion had come for a visit to Bangkok, we had arranged a meeting in| the hotel together with Prince Sithiporn. The door opened, two noblemen entered dressed from head to toe entirely in traditional Thai attire, contrasting miraculously with the tourist crowd and the unsiamese Thais in the modern lobby. It was like an apparition from the 19th, century. It

Testimonies

181

was a statement. With these wonderful memories and my affection, Yours ever, Hermann Graf Hatzfeldt The Community of Dharmafarers 24th March 1993 Dear Acharn, Felicitations & Reflections on Your 5th Cycle Your Five Cycles of Friendship reached my hands a few days ago and 1 read it several times, inspired and reflecting on the beauty and strength of kalyana mittata, spiritual friendships. I first met you in Bangkok some 20 years ago during the infancy of my monkhood in Siam, to whom I am ever grateful for having generously nurtured me spiritually. For some reason, I failed to know of your invitation to write a note for you on this important life-occasion. A few of the messages in FiveCycles have come from those who have known you for only a few years. Not to be left out, and out of a sense of gratitude for being inspired by your outspoken and outrageous courage, 1 write this birthday message and greeting, one which is shared by my co-wprkers, the Dharmacaris and other friends in Malaysia and Singapore. Having been familiar with your work for a longtime, I must say that you have admirably and wholesomely wedded academic excellence with social action, a truly rare blending. Most people are either professional (unbiased but self-biased) scholars or noisy one-track activists. For the last 40 odd years of my life, I have been very keen in scholarship (not that I am a scholar), and lately 1 have endeavored to become an activist (not that I am one yet). The environment I live in makes both ventures very difficult-that is, if 1 only look down, about and behind me but do not look up. When I look up 1 see in the far horizon the ideal figure of Buddha, but nearer to the eye 1 see you who dare to risk everything without fear or favour for the sake of what you feel is good and right. Just before the Buddha's Enlightenment his Five Disciples abandoned him simply because he decided to break his fast, so that no humans witnessed the most vital spiritual turning-point in our history In a way, you are fortunate in that your numerous friends all over the world stand by you as you once again face the cold machinery of power for trying to overhaul it and give it a heart. Not many can or dare do this - as such we feel you are doing it on our behalf, and suffering on our behalf. It is people like you who make

182

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

society human , and humans society. During the past decades, my monastic training had prevented me from being the kind of activist that is the hallmark of INEB and kindred enterprises. Now, with my second renunciation, I am more ready, though I am still struggling with where my greater love lies: in Dharma-spirited scholarship or in Sangha-spirited activism. I think the answer lies in Buddha-minded engaged scholarship. It is with this thought that I have some years before introduced Vidyananda to INEB, where he is more involved than I want to be. Through him (as if he were my emanation-body!), I vicariously enjoy the INEB fellowship . He is now in the US on my behalf (as well as for himself and the Community) to attend a very important international seminar on the Computer and Buddhist Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, and also to build our fellowship with the Buddhist Peace Fellowship. My US trip on a student visa is planned for August this year, but Prof. Lancaster wanted me to come earlier for the Seminar. When I tried to apply for a tourist visa to the US, I was turned down four times on the grounds that (having been a monk for two decades) I have neither assets, nor family ties, nor economic status to bind me to Malaysia. 1 take this as a reflection on how much I have renounced, and how unrenounced the world is! My rather limited exposure to the academic world, the nature of the politics and lawsof my country , and the Kiasu mentality of most Buddhists here leave me painfully struggling just to express what 1 see as wrong and weak that needs righting and strengthening in the Buddhism I know. In an environment that regards criticism as insult, books as ritual objects, and Buddhism as a source of wealth, power and status, 1 have (like you) suffered the shortsightedness the very people 1 care for. When 1 seemed crushed by the pious gossips of organizations, professionals and priests, when so-called Kiasu “friends” furtively flee, you stood uncomplaining by like a shady Bodhi above me, braving your own storm: what more can 1 say. And yet I know your sufferings are greater; for you speak with a louder and clearer voice and for a greater cause. This thought is a great inspiration and consolation for me, especially when I appear to have lost what is most precious to me. 1 suppose this is a kind of mudita bhavana. How greatly wise and compassionate is the Buddha whose blessings 1 now enjoy outside the burning house called Buddhism. 1 am now ardently seeking a wholesome environment for healthy social and spiritual growth, to pursue with ever greater fervour what 1 love most (critical and creative writing), to be socially and spiritually engaged. For this reason, I am travelling yatha kamman yatha balam, and I hope to

Testimonies

183

expose the whole Community to the open world and its lessons. Despite our problems, you and I , we surely feel a great freedom within ourselves. For only the unthinking, uncritical, unfree mind is a true prison and hell. And yet we cannot but laugh and cry to enjoy freedom amidst those chained by temple, high priests, doctrines and things. After the passing away of Sariputta and Buddha, Ananda reflected thus: The old have passed away; I do not get along with the new Today 1 meditate all alone, Like a bird gone to its nest. (Theragatha 1036) For this occasion, too, we will be reproducing the write-ups about you in The International Development Dictionary (Fry and Martin) and Political Conflict in Thailand (Morell & Samudavanija) for the benefit of the readers of Svasra, our newsletter. We are also distributing copies of “ A Plea from Siam” (12/3/93) to our friends. On behalf of the Community of Dharmafarers, invoking the power of the Three Jewels and all that is holy, and by the virtue of all our good karma and your own, I wish you the fourfold blessings of ayu. vanna. sukha. balam, and a fifth, vimutti (liberation)- one blessing for each cycle, as it were - on your reaching the 5th Cycle on 27th March this year. In Truth, Peace, and Happiness, Rev. Piyasilo March 27th, 1993 Dear Ajahn Sulak, Today you are completing your life's Fifth Cycle, and on this auspicious occasion 1 wish to extend to you my congratulations for all the remarkable achievements in your first sixty years, as well as my very best wishes for all the cycles still ahead of you -may they grant increasing good fortune, success in your endeavors, and the blessings of infinite good deeds leading you during this incarnation ever nearer towards the redemption from all bad karma. I should have liked to write to you sooner, in time for you to receive this message on the day of the festivities in your honour. Unfortunately some ill health prevented me from doing so. Permit me to mention that 1 remember so well that day of my own sixtieth birthday twenty years ago, which Thai friends in Bangkok most kindly arranged for me with celebrations in Buddhist fashion. Thank you also very much for the festive publication Five Cycles

184

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

of Friendship to honour your sixtieth birthday. I have perused it with great interest, learning more about your long -standing endeavors in favour of more democracy in your country, more complete respect for human rights and a reshaping of society according to the tenets of the teachings of the Lord Buddha. Since I, as you know, love Thailand and its kind people, admiring them towards greater freedom, more democratic ways, more perfect harmony and happiness. 1 understand that this, indeed, is your aspiration, and in this I am wishing you well-all the more so since I in my younger years experienced the fate of exile due to my energetic criticism of a government in my country which violated freedom and human rights. You, of course, are infinitely more fortunate, for any mistakes, failures and deviations from Buddhist commands that you may have to campaign against in your country cannot by any stretch of imagination be compared with anything that happened in my country during the thirties. And even more 1 envy you because you in your campaign for political improvements have a powerful ally in the monarchy. You have a reigning monarch for whose character, qualities and merits I, as everyone, have the highest admiration and respect, seeing how much he has contributed and achieved, within the reach of the power left to him, and even beyond this due to his great personal authority, for the well-being and advancement of the people of Sayam. And even apart from this, of course, you are like myself perfectly aware that the very existence of the institution of monarchy in a country is, as history and present experience all over the world demonstrate, a blessing of fate preventing any such extremes as we did and do witness among many regimes unfettered by such a highest authority Naturally, I am convinced that you are aware of this, and thus I feel it must be utterly absurd to construct, from whatever you may have said or done, a charge of lese majeste. This, regardless of my ignorance of whatever it may be, because obviously turning against your best ally would mean defeating your own cause. Permit me to add merely, from my own life's experience, that I arf) totally convinced that, had monarchy still existed in Germany in the thirties a totalitarian dictator could hardly ever have achieved power, and even if so, should never have gone to the extremes that were committed by the regime. The best proof of this is the case of Italy where the King, little power as was left to him, yet was able to prevent much of what happened in Germany in such atrocious manner. Once again, dear Khun Sulak, so many good wishes to your festive day and, as we say here, ad multos annos. Yours sincerely, V. Zuhlsdorff Lahnstr. 50, 5300 Bonn 2

Testimonies

185

26 March 1993 Dear Sulak, On the occasion of your 60th birthday all of us at I A D and ICT wish to of rer our heartfelt prayers for your long life! You have inspired all of us to continue to work for those whose voices are silenced by oppression. You are exemplary in your tireless pursuit of peace for all beings. We wish to extend to you our love and admiration for all you have sacrificed for the benefit of others. We further add our expressions to the countless others who hope that your travails of recent past will soon be over and that you will be able to prevail in your endeavors to help the people of Siam realize a fully democratic society and that your wisdom and compassion will be honored, as you so justly deserve. Institute for Asian Democracy International Campaign for Tibet 1518 K Street, N.W. Suite 410 Washington, D.C. 20005

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Karuna Center USA. September 12, 1992 It has been my great fortune to work closely with Sulak for the past five years, through the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Sulak is one of the strongest advocates for peace and justice that I have met in a lifetime of work in social change. Misbeliefs are deep, very thoughtfully constructed, based on a committed spiritual understanding and arising from that juncture where politics and compassion are one. Sulak also lives his beliefs, creating a seemless web between how he perceives the world and how he conducts his life. His values are consonant with his behavior and his life is completely dedicated to his mission of just societies. Through his experiences in Thailand, Sulak knows firsthand the results of exploitation and “development” based on greed and material gain. This has made him a strong advocate of “alternative development,” within his own country and throughout Asia. To this end, his organizations devote considerable energy to forming workshops and trainings that aid local leaders in envisioning and implementing schemas for sustainable

186

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

and appropriate development. I work with Sulak and the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB) on these training projects, which are most welcomed and useful in many regions of Asia. Indeed, at present there are more requests from local groups than we can fill in any given year. Just last month I returned home from Nepal and India where, through INEE , we facilitated workshops that empower local leaders to support human needs based on their indigenous cultures. Sulak has inspired my teaching in Asia, as well as my full involvement in the search for freedom and liberation in Burma. My organization, Karuna Center, grew into being under the influence of Sulak and the encouragement he offered for participation in INEB and its activities. Others are equally inspired, as Sulak is a masterful networker, inviting and creating conditions for ever more projects to fill needs and respond to issues of justice. Sulak and I have also facilitated workshops and spoken at conferences together in the US, where he is received as an important author and spokesperson for justice in the decisions about social change. Throughout the world , Sulak is loved and respected as a leading teacher-activist, who inspires with his words and deeds and lifts peace and justice concerns to the high levels of moral responsibility. Sulak's many books, the several important Thai and international associations he has founded, and his strong, inexhaustible energy and compassion conspire to make him a leading international figure in the world today. He is a visionary, but a visionary with his hands in the work, a clear mind, and a most compassionate heart. Paula Green Director The International House of Japan, Inc. September 14, 1992 Sulak Sivaraksa, whom I have known for more than 20 years, is regarded by many Asian intellectuals and religious leaders as an uncompromising crusader of democracy and human dignity. He has been engaged for many years in a lonely battle, more often than not with no prospect of winning, for the causes of democracy and human dignity in Asia, particularly in Southeast Asia, where fundamental human values tend to be easily eroded in the name of economic development and external and internal threats imagined by self-righteous authorities. Sulak Sivaraksa is a social thinker and activist and has written

Testimonies

187

many books, all dealing with crucial subjects related to social justice, freedom and development. Among these books are: Siamese Resurgence: A Thai Voice in Asia in a World of Change; A Socially Engaged Buddhism, Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society. Sulak Sivaraksa's booksand many articles are valuable sources of hope and inspiration for many Asian people hankering for democracy, peace, and human dignity. Mikio Kato Executive Director Coalition for Peace and Reconciliation 15 September 1992 We are among the countless individuals and organizations who have drawn inspiration from Ajan Sulak's relentless efforts at encouraging nonviolent solutions to conflicts in countries neighboring his native Siam (as he prefers to call Thailand). He has incessantly called on his government and compatriots to become facilitators, rather than obstacles, to peace in the region. He has continuously spoken out against Siam's exploitation of its neighboring countries, particularly Burma, Laos and Cambodia. Instead he has encouraged Siam to serve as a model of both positive and negative aspects of development. He cites disastrous consequences to avoid in Siam, while he recommends alternative citizens' initiatives to emulate. Mr. Sivaraksa's encouragement of compassionate, humane relations with Indochina, regardlessofprevailing ideologies, did not just begin as these countries began to recently open up. Rather he was at the forefront of urging friendly relations with Siam's neighbors. Immediately after the Vietnam War, he was one of the first Thais to visit Cambodia and Vietnam during the period of intensive government-controlled propaganda against the communist states. Upon his return he wrote a book about his trip to Vietnam and encouraged his compatriots to shed their 'enemy image' and cooperate with rather than ostracize their neighbors. More directly related to the Cambodian conflict, Ajan Sulak has sought creative ways to end the conflict and encourage peace and reconciliation, on individual as well as political levels. Indeed one of his main themes is the integration of the personal with the political, the inner with the outer. During the Cambodian conflict Ajan Sulak invited members of the Cambodian Buddhist Sangha (ecclesiastical order) from both Phnom Penh and the refugee camps controlled by various guerrilla factions to participate in the International Network of Engaged Buddhist's) annual conference.

188

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

As an outgrowth of this ground-breaking initiative, we at CPR have implemented several of these projects with INEB. These have included seminars on Buddhism and conflict resolution, integrating Western and Eastern philosophies, and bringing together Cambodians from various factions, including exposure trips of alternative development projects in Siam. He also helped facilitate a Dhamma Walk from Aranyaprathet, Thailand, to Phnom Penh led by Ven. Maha Ghosananda. These efforts have been exemplary of Ajan Sulak's approach of simultaneously dealingon many levels. At the same time as he encouraged his and other governments to cease support to various factions and adopt a more neutral, conciliatory approach, he also sought to break down barriers of years of “enemy image” conditioning by bringing individuals together. When Mr. Sivaraksa is permitted to return to Siam, undoubtedly his persistent work for a truly democratic Thai society will be inextricably linked with his contributions to neighboring countries, as he lives out his philosophy of interdependence. H is wi 11 be a strong voice for encouraging Siam to halt its exceedingly abusive exploitations of the natural resources of its neighbors that the Thai military and business sectors are presently engaged in. Rather than exploit its neighbors, Mr. Sivaraksa's philosophy will encourage them to pursue alternative development models. Here for Cambodia, as throughout the world, his plea will be for a true renewal of society. His is certainly a moral voice that will need to be heard in the future of Cambodia, as continued exploitation tempts, and the cracks of the fragile peace plan deepen; as the United Nations pulls out of Cambodia, and as the world shows increasing “Cambodia fatigue” As Ajarn Sulak has often said in many forums, “spiritual considerations and social changes cannot be separated.” We hope that Sulak will be able to continue to be that moral voice that cries out to a world that yields so painfully to change. Bob Maat, SJ

Liz Bernstein

September 8, 1992 Sulak Sivaraksa is generally called Ajarn Sulak in Thailand (or Siam, the old name which he finds morally preferable to Thailand) because he is considered a teacher (the basic meaning of ajarn) even though he has no formal position in any university or school. He is, rather, a teacher in an older Siamese sense of being recognized as one whose great learning is coupled with moral responsibility. Like any good teacher he seeks to make people question as much as he seeks to transmit knowledge. Ajarn Sulak's moral awareness was shaped by critical experiences

Testimonies

189

in his childhood. His father was of Chinese descent, his mother Thai. He grew up with a keen sense of being between cultures. This sense was sharpened by his education in both Christian and Buddhist schools in Thailand and then by his study in Great Britain. There he took a first degree at the University of Wales and studied law in London. After completing his education, he might have chosen, as did many other Thai who had studied abroad in the 1950s, to return to his country to teach in a university or to accept employment with a government agency. Ajarn Sulak was, however, already by this time quite troubled by the marked contrast between the moral ideals which Thai derived from their Buddhist religion and the reality of a society dominated by a corrupt military dictatorship. In England he has worked for a time as a Thai broadcaster with the BBC and had gained from this experience an appreciation of the media. As radio in Thailand was firmly under the control of the government, Ajarn Sulak chose on his return to become a writer and a publisher. In the early 1960s he founded and edited The Social Science Review, a journal which quickly became the leading intellectual journal in the country. The Review served as the only forum for critical analysis of Thai society, since the newspapers were subject to censorship. Ajarn Sulak himself and many of the writers who published in the Review pushed the limitsof criticism. Hehimselfwascharged with lesemajeste for oneeditorial he wrote, but he was not jailed because of help provided by powerful men who had become his literary patrons. I was personally aware of his bravery as editor of the Review , since he helped me publish a story (in Thai) about a village friend whose experiences with police and judicial corruption were all too typical of the time. Ajarn Sulak also began in the 1960s to publish articles and books about those Thai writers and officials whom he admired because of their moral commitments as well as professional talents. He soon was widely sought after as a speaker because his writing evinced a deep appreciation of Thai culture while at the same time offering critical assessments of the powerful who turned Buddhist morality on its head. He and his wife opened a bookstore, Suksit Siam, which soon became not only a market for books but for ideas as well. His office on the top floor of the store became a seminar room in which students, faculty, artists, writers, Buddhist monks, and others met to discuss how they might re-orient Thailand in accord with Buddhist values. It is not an overstatement to say that the student movement which was successful in bringing down the military dictatorship in 1973 was born at Suksit Siam and fostered by the Social Science Review. Ajarn Sulak himself became the leading proponent of a “socially engaged Buddhism” which he saw as having roots in the Thai tradition which the secular ideologies which were attracting wide support did not. Although highly critical of the military wide suppression of democracy in 1976 when hundreds of students were killed, he did not, as did many

190

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

younger activists, turn toward the Communist Party of Thailand. Later, in the 1980s, when many of these activists returned from the jungle where they had fought with the CPT, they found his approach more attractive. Many joined with him in organizing new groups to promote Buddhist ideals of charity, tolerance, and justice. Ajarn Sulak has been especially involved in bringing together Christians and Muslims as well as Buddhists to work together in addressing issues of social justice and human rights. Ajarn Sulak's criticisms of the periodic efforts to impose authoritarian rule in Thailand have on occasion provoked the powers-that-be to attempt to silence him. He was charged with lese majeste, a very serious crime comparable to treason in the United States, in the 1960s and again in 1984 . He went into temporary exile after a coup in 1976 which brought a very right-wing government to power. He is once again outside the country because of his outspokenness. On August 22nd, 1991, he gave a talk at Thammasat University, one of the leading universities in Thailand, about the role of the military junta which had seized power in a coup February 1991. Following this talk, an investigation was begun to determine whether to bring a new charge of lese majeste against him for comments about the relationship between king and constitution. The investigation was also to determine whether he should be charged with defamation for accusing General Suchinda Kraprayoon, the then effective head of the Thai junta, of arranging logging concessions with the military dictators of Burma to the benefit of the military in both countries. Even after General Suchinda was forced from power after the events in May 1992, the charges against Ajarn Sulak have yet to be withdrawn. There are many who still find his voice threatening and are quite happy for him to remain in exile. Despite this, he continues to write and publish his writings in Thailand. Ajarn Sulak has written dozens of books in Thai. Some of his essays have also been published or translated in English. His work includes biographical essays on a number of famous Thai intellectuals. Most, however, concern the role of Buddhism in the changing political and economic context of contemporary Thailand. Ajarn Sulak epitomizes the Buddhist ideal of right livelihood; he has chosen not an occupation but a vocation in the old Christian sense of this word. As an Ajarn he has dedicated his very great talents as a writer and aspeakerto promoting a Buddhist moral vision of social relations. He is read and listened to even by those who he criticizes. But more importantly, Ajarn Sulak's vision has motivated thousands of other Thai to make moral criteria the basis for their own choices of livelihood. Charles F. Keyes Director, Northwest Regional Consortium for Southeast Asian Studies Professor of Anthropology University of Washington

Testimonies

191

School of Social Science Hampshire College Amherst, MA 01002 U.S.A. 27 May 1993 Ajarn Sulak Sivaraksa truly represents the values and characteristics which can be seen in his writings, teachings and, especially, numerous projects within his native Thailand and around the world. These activities work to promote alternative lifestyles to the rapid industrial and environmentally destructive development occurring throughout the world. Ajarn Sulak's forward-looking vision provides moral, spiritual and practical guidelines for living within our means and with respect for the larger natural environment. He teaches people to recognize the long-term consequences of their actions and to live in ways which not only solve but work to prevent social and environmental ills, such as war, poverty, and ethnic or religious conflict. He also supports, both spiritually and materially, others who are engaged in similar efforts, in Thailand and elsewhere. Since 1986, I have been conducting on-going anthropological research in Thailand on the relationship between Buddhism and rural development and environmental conservation. I have predominantly focused on the role of Thai “ecology monks, ” and the response of rural villagers to their conservation work. In the process of carrying out this research and working with these monks, 1 have had the opportunity to get to know well the staff of the non-government organizations founded and supervised by Ajarn Sulak. Not only have 1 received significant assistance and important information from these organizations, I have also witnessed the positive impact their work has both directly and indirectly on the efforts of these monks. The Thai Inter-religious Commission for Development (T1CD) is only one of many different organizations Ajarn Sulak has established which work in Thailand and abroad on social issues. T1CD has long supported the work of monks engaged in appropriate development and environmental conservation. It provides not only financial funding, but knowledge, training, and moral support for these monks. It has sponsored numerous seminars for membersof the Thai Sangha (Buddhist monkhood), enabling them to come together, share ideas and experiences, and cooperate in searching for new means of solving the problems facing Thai society today. Far too often, individuals concerned about the social and environmental crises in the world are left to struggle to find solutions on their own. TICD provides a forum for bringing together monks who would

192

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

otherwise feel they were working in isolation in their social action and conservation efforts. Its support enables these monks to carry out projects which have significant impact on preserving Thailand’s natural environment and teaching people to maintain a sustainable relationship with it. The International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB)workson a broader scale, encouraging the communication and cooperation among active and concerned Buddhists (and members of other religions) in their efforts to deal with social ills and critical issues worldwide. It sponsors projects such as peace walks to raise awareness in Cambodia, teaching Burmese students about non-violent activism and federalism along the Thai-Burmese border, bringing Bhutanese monks to visit and learn social development methods in Thailand, among many other activities. Its annual conferences offer people from many different countries and cultures the chance to come together to exchange ideas and put into action ongoing projects aimed at improving the condition of the world. I have witnessed several cases of the impact of the activities of T1CD and INEB, and the major contributions Ajarn Sulak's ideas, influence and efforts have made within Thailand. For example, TICD and Ajarn Sulak have been the main supporters of Phra Prajak, probably the single most influential ecology monk in Thailand. Phra Prajak has not been afraid to speak out openly and directly in his efforts to protect the forests of Northeastern Thai land against encroachment and illegal logging. This has brought him into conflict with those who stand to benefit from ecological exploitation. He has been arrested and charged with trespassing on National Forest Land and leading villagers in protests against forest destruction and the creation of commercial forest plantation. Nevertheless, Phra Prajak has consistently based his actions on the Dhamma (the teachings of the Buddha), inspiring those who have the opportunity to know him to appreciate and respect nature and the interconnection between its well-being and ours. His well-publicized case has raised the awareness of people across the nation concerning the urgency of the environmental crisis facing Thailand today. TICD and Ajarn Sulak provided him with moral, financial and legal support, enabling him to withstand attacks against him personally and his work and to continue in his non-violent struggle for the greater good of the Thai people and nation. A second case which demonstrates the more indirect impact of Ajarn Sulak's ideas is that of Phra Khru Pitak Nantakhun of Nan Province in Northern Thailand. Phra Khru Pitak has been engaged with environment development workers, teachers, soldiers, farmers and monks to cooperate in ecological programs. His projects include helping villagers to establish and maintain community forests, raising awareness about environmental issues, sponsoring seminars for monks, villagers and government workers, and creating a program to conserve the Nan River.

Testimonies

193

He is an active member of Sekiyatham, a group for ecology monks coordinated by TICD. He recognizes the significant support and encouragement he has received from TICD and from monks from other parts of Thailand who know of his work through TICD and Sekiyatham. Although Phra Khru Pitak has never personally met Ajarn Sulak, he is aware of his leadership in social action based on Buddhist principles and appreciative of the work of TICD. Finally, when Ajarn Sulak visited Hampshire, Amherst, Smith and Mount Holyoke Colleges and the University of Massachusetts in April 1992, his talks and informal meetings were the source of inspiration for many students. Through his criticisms of developed countries such as the United States, he instilled in the students the importance of examining their own lifestylesand theirconsequences in the rest of the world. Several students spoke with me afterwards about how they could move beyond an intellectual study of the world's problems into action based on moral and spiritual rather than economic or materialist principles. Susan M. Darlington Asst. Professor of Anthropology and Asian Studies BUDDHISM I N S E ASIA Sulak Sivaraksa is an outspoken Thai intellectual who uses his position outsideof the government to criticize the establishment's “failure to serve adequately the spiritual as well as the material and social needs of the Thai people.” 1 He advocates reforming the social, political, and economic structures of his country to address issues like distribution of wealth, quality of life, and preservation of the natural environment. While advocating extensive structural change, Sulak argues for using traditional cultural and religious values to guide this change. Sulak argues that Thailandmust incorporate the values of its Budd hist heritage into its vision for the future, and claims that the essentially Western models of development which have guided Thailand's growth for the last century and a half have resulted in more harm than good. In this paper, I will see how his “Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society ’’relates to some of the theoretical perspectives we've looked at in the past few weeks. Specifically, I hope to look at the models put forward by Bellah and Obeyesekere, with maybe a dash of Bond and Jackson thrown in, too. Hopefully, I'll be able to convey the incredible range and depth of Sulak's vision: a vision for change that represents a level of understand! ng and compassion wel1 beyond that of the leaders of our modern world— with the possible exception of Jerry 1. Introduction,/! Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society, Bangkok 1986 p. xv from now on referred to as “ B V ”

194

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

“Governor Moonbeam” Brown. In terms of Robert Bellah's categories, we must classify Sulak's vision as a reformist one. According to Bellah, reformism is a movement which reinterprets a particular religious tradition to show not only that it is compatible with modernization but also that... the tradition vigorously demands at least important aspects of modernity...it provides the potential impetus to modernization, while also providing a continuity with traditional identity symbols, thus'furthering change with a minimum of traumatic disturbance. (Epilogue, p. 207) In some respects, this effectively describes Sulak's “platform.” He suggests that if Buddhists do not re-involve themselves in determining the direction their society takes, the religion will become merely a collection of cliches and hollow symbols. He exhorts Buddhists to influence the institutions of their nations in attempt to bring the policies of those institutions into line with Buddhist ideals: fighting against environmental destruction... against social injustice... must be the task of modern Buddhists... If we cannot... act accordingly, can we still call ourselves Buddhists? How can we be followers of the Compassionate One, while we let our Buddhist way go astray, by playing safe, i.e. by not doing anything for fear of upsetting the established social order... Such is indeed a cowardly way of living. It does not contribute towards the preservation of the Sasana.(BV pp. 124-129) This position, that Buddhism and its teachings be involved in determining the shape of the future, suggests connections between Sulak's vision and Bellah's criteria for reformist movements. Another quality of Bellah's reformist category is that reformers allude to the original teachings or “essence” of their tradition and reject the intervening developments; again, we can see this tendency within Sulak's thought. Generally, Sulak is less concerned with the process of individual enlightenment than he is with the social or political side of the tradition. He does admit the importance of individual purification, since enlightened individuals embody religious ideals and provide an example for society. But social activism, and the ideal of the virtuous ruler are Sulak's primary concerns. Accordingly, his allusions to the original “essence” of Buddhism are most often concerned with these ideas. He legitimates his critique of current governments through allusion to texts like the Agganna Sutla and the Cakkavatti Sihananda Sutta, figures like Asoka, and ideals like the ten duties of the monarch.2 In these texts and 2

’ See, for example “ A Buddhist Model for Society,” i n Seeds of Peace, 1992

Testimonies

195

examples, Sulak finds examples of the type of benevolent leadership which he advocates; by doing so, he gives his positions the authority of tradition. In this way, he satisfies Bellah's model. Bellah's classifications may be helpful tools to see how certain figures or movements fit into the spectrum of responses to modernity. However, this emphasis on “response to modernity” is also one of his model's weaknesses. Bellah defines modernization as involving: the increased capacity for rational goal-setting because it gives the system... a more comprehensive comm unications network through which it is possible to assess the needs and potentialities of all parts of the system. Where modernization means only an increased effectiveness in goal attainment, with no increase in the rationalization of the goal-setting process, very serious pathologies can result (p.195). While suggesting here that goal-setting must take into account the needs of all sections of the system, in fact, Bellah fails to retain this criteria in his discussion of modernization in Asia. He continues that modernization often poses a difficult challenge for a religion's adaptation to the changing world. In Asia, Bellah argues, “where modernity has come largely from without, wrapped in the symbols of an alien culture, the problems have been doubly difficult” (pp. 207-208). Bellah first defines “ modernization” as an increased ability for a system to adjust to its internal needs, but later suggests that in Asia, modernity comes from the West. He equates the ends of modernization not with an Asian country's ability to determine its own goals, but with its ability to imitate or follow the examples of western countries, which are assumed to be universally desirable. In this model, for a country to be modern, it must be Western. Thus, his analysis of a reformist movement as one attempting to reconcile tradition with the modern world becomes one which refers to the ability of a native tradition to adopt Western means and ends. It is the essential equation of ‘ ‘ progress’’ and“ modernity” with “Westernization” within Bellah's model which makes its application to Sulak problematic. Sulak emphatically rejects Western ideals of development and progress — “The Think Big Strategy” —as misguided and immoral. The Western model of development centers essentially around increasing a country's GNP, and incorporating it into the international economic system. As 1 have read, this process often results in limiting wealth to a small percentage of the population, exacerbating the gap between rich and poor. “Developing” countries are advised to maximize their “comparative advantage,” specializing in monoculture agriculture and industrial projects which result in increased urbanization and the declining status of both rural and urban poor. These development schemes also lack any concern with sustainable growth or economic destruction. For all these

196

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

reasons, Sulak rejects Western development models— both their means and their ends— and argues that Southeast Asians must thoroughly rethink their priorities and encourage “fundamental reforms.” This rejection of Western development model i s the central problem with Bellah's reformer categories. “Reformers” like Sulak would reject the notion that they are re-interpreting Buddhism to support “ m o d e r n i t y ” as Western ideas of progress. He uses the power of the tradition not to uphold previously existing goals, but to challenge the desirability of those goals and offer new ones. I think a potentially more useful model of interpretation for Sulak's thought may be found in Obeyesekere's discussion of the Sarvodaya movement. Overlooking for a moment the numerous problems with the “Protestant B u d d h i s t ” label, I think w e can find some useful comparisons between S u l a k ' s i d e a s a n d t h o s e o f t h e Sarvodaya m o v e m e n t in Obeyesekere's presentation. The protestant Buddhism of Ariyaratne, according to Obeyesekere: i s a radical critique of contemporary capitalist (and also Marxist) theories of economic development which focuses o n mindless industrial and mercantiledevelopmentofthe cities...Sarvodaya and similar philosophies try to reverse this trend: economic development should emerge from the villages of South and Southeast Asia, which is the true social reality o f those nations...economic development (e.g. in the crude sense of Milton Friedman) should not b e carried out in a moral and social v a c u u m : it must be related to tradition and articulated to the values of the society. In other words development should not be primarily economic, ( p p . 62-63). The goals outlined here are strikingly similar to those outlined by Sulak. In advocating new directions for development, Sulak asserts that “ v a l u e systems and ethics are not peripheral to science and technology,” (Seeds, p.53). Development theories must address more than s i m p l e economics, they must consider the impact which economics have on real people. In addition, as the devastation of the natural environment becomes accelerated, ecological concerns must also be taken into account. Discussing the similarities between Ariyaratna and Sulak brings m e to another point.3 Obeyesekere levels the criticism against Sarvodaya that 3

AN ASIDE : A parallel can also be found in the ways in which Ariyaratne and Sulak use the ideas of respected Bh i kkhus to val idate their positions. Obeyesekere writes that Sarvodaya co-opted “one of Sri Lanka's most erudite and influential monks, Venerable Henpitigedera Gnanaseena...[who states that] monks...will...involve themselves not only ‘in the emancipation of the individual but also the material development of the country as well.’ ”(p.56) I think that Sulak's use of the thought of Buddhadasa serves a similar function. Both social activists/reformers hold up the socially aware stances of respected monks to legitimate their own positions. Maybe we can talk more about this in class

Testimonies

197

it is basically shaped by bourgeois individuals and their values. Given the similai ities between Sarvodaya and Sulak's thought, 1 think it is interesting to consider the largely bourgeois character of Thai reformist Buddhism as presented by Peter Jackson. Jackson describes reformist Buddhism as one which emphasizes “human life in this world here and now and a religious validation of the hope for socio-economic development and material prosperity,” (p.48). Following from this orientation is the de-emphasison the distinction between Aamrnic and /nMwmc realms. According to Jackson, Thai reformers have encouraged “ a lay assumption of religious authority [which rejects] the establishment form of Buddhism which teaches that the role of the lay person is to perform merit by supporting the efforts of renunciate monks,” (p.49). Rather than representing an empowerment of the poor, however, this socially directed Buddhism represents the effort of the Thai bourgeoisie to legitimize their own power. Thai religious reformers envision: a social order in which equity and justice are in principle available to all. The reformist religion of the Thai middle class can thus be interpreted as representing the development of a Buddhist legitamatory system for Thai capitalism...[similarly, the] view of the universal relevance of nibbana parallels the desire for a democratic political system in which individuals, in particular individual members of the middle class, have more direct access to the manipulation of political power, (pp. 51-52). According to Jackson, the reform of Buddhism in Thailand is essentially aimed at aiding and legitimizing the middle class attempts to gain control of the country. Jackson's arguments appear sound in places, but seem overstated at other times. Specifically with regard to Sulak, Jackson's analysis strikes me as partially invalid. My impression of Sulak's work is that it is in opposition to the bourgeois-empowerment type of tendency. I see his concerns with women, the environment, and the impoverished representing a stance which rejects allowing the bourgeois to maintain power. His stances against allowing multi-national corporations to run the country— even the world— suggest to me a reflection of the tendency to allow a new elite to control economic and political structures. Sulak's vision for society strikes me as one which advocates fundamental changes of the type which would prevent the upper and middle classes from maintaining control over the poor. To use some more of Bellah's terminology, 1 see the bourgeois movement Jackson describes as one resting firmly on the notion of individualistic liberalism, while Sulak's vision appears more socialist. Perhaps I am hopelessly naive or perhaps I've not given Jackson a careful enough reading. In any case, I end with these questions to raise them, not answer them. Perhaps we'll get to cover these issues more deeply in class.

198

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Adam Skaggs Swarthmore College Week 10,4/2/92 Works Cited Robert Bellah, “Epilogue,” in Religion and Progress in Modern Asia, edited by Robert Bellah. Peter Jackson, Buddhism, Legitimation & Conflict. Gananath Obeyesekere, Article on Sarvodaya from Week 8 Sulak Sivaraksa,/! Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society. Sulak Sivaraksa, Seeds of Peace.

SULAK’S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT Prof. Sulak Sivaraksa's contribution to Thai society over the past three decades has been to foster what could be called a ‘‘civil society”. He has passionately stimulated young people and other grassroots leaders to participate actively in the decision-making processes of society. In order to mobilize these groups he has earnestly written and published books and articles. In this vein, he has also served as the editor for several magazines promoting alternative solutions to society's ills. Additionally, he has founded and encouraged others to set up alternative non-governmental organizations to organize seminars and cultural activities, run training courses, promote grassroots leadership and implement model projects to demonstrate the viability of appropriate alternatives for the future. As an Editor and a Publisher Sulak began his career as an editor in 1963, when he founded the Social Science Review. This heralded the beginning of a new intellectual renaissance after a period of fear and despair among Thai intellectuals following the arrest, killing and exile of progressive writers, academics, politicians, artists, and social activists when Field Marshal Sarit seized power in 1957. The main message of the magazine was to encourage Thai people, especially the young and the educated, to create an open critical culture and to question the mainstream western model of development, which had been strongly imposed by the military regime. Sulak asked the readers to look critically at their cultural roots and to apply the indigenous wisdom in searching for an appropriate development model for a better future. Though he realized the importance of the monarchy, he felt that it should be balanced by positive criticism and the concept that a King should be a dhammaraja or righteous king according to the original teaching of Buddhism, not a deveraja or divine king, a concept which has been promoted and used by the military for their own legitimization.

Testimonies

199

This was the first magazine to publicize and provide information about the US bases in Thailand and their involvement in the Vietnam war. It helped to form a bridge between Thai activists and the anti-war movement in Japan and the West. Together with the anti-authoritarian and anti-elitist tone of his writings and speeches, his public commitment to his ideals means that he has always been threatened and harassed by those in power. This situation continues today. He was the editor of this magazine for six years, until a younger editor who had worked with him was able to take over, allowing Sulak to become editor of another magazine, the Vidayasara Review , a bi-weekly publication. He hoped to conscientize the teachers and others interested in education, who were the readers of this publication. He worked on this magazine for two years, and then the owner, feeling that his ideas were too radical, asked him to resign. Sulak then supported a group of younger friends in starting a new magazine called Pajarayasara, as a main organ for educational reform. After the bloody coup in 1976, this magazine became a forum for people who were interested in nonviolent social change. Since the eighties, it has been the only journal initiating and promoting discussion of alternative ideas among the Thai. Sulak himself was the founding editor of another magazine called Future, the first environmental magazine in Thailand. This magazine was owned by the Society for Conservation of National Treasures and the Environment. Some years later, this society found Sulak too radical and once again he resigned. Between 1972-75 he edited the “The Chronicle”. During these years the atmosphere of violence was very strong in the country, as it was the peak of the leftist movement and its confrontation with the military. Sulak used this newsletter to caution both sides and remind them of possible nonviolent means of solving conflicts and social transformation. Since then he has not been the editor of any Thai journal, but has been writing continuously, both in Thai and in English. As he approaches 60, in 1992, he has published over 100 books, both his original writings as well as translated works. The themes that underline all of his writings and speeches are the importance of linking the past with the future, the inner spiritual world with the outer material world, the local with the global. Besides all of the above-mentioned Thai magazines, he was also an honorary editor of Visakha Puja of the Buddhist Association of Thailand for more than ten years. He was also honorary editor of the Journal of the Siam Society for some years. A few years after he set up T1CD he created Seeds of Peace, a tri-annual journal which reports on local and regional alternative ventures. Seeds of Peace is now the official journal of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, which will be detailed later.

200

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Sulak always tries to honour ordinary people who have made great contributions to Thai society, contrary to the tradition of exclusively honouring the monarchy and the military. In 1969 he set up a foundation in honour of Phya Anuman Rajadhon and Phra Saraprasert, the two most prominent scholars whose work helped to bridge the past and the present. In 1988, the 100th anniversary of the birth of Phya Anuman Rajadhon, at Sulak's nomination, UNESCO honoured him by naming him for his important contribution towards cultural enrichment. Through this foundation Sulak organized exhibitions of his life and work locally and internationally. Later on he founded a few other organizations in the same manner, which will be detailed below. One unique quality of his speech and writing is the courage to criticize authority, which tremendously expands the right to freedom of expression in a rather closed society, such as that in Thailand. In 1968, Sulak was nearly charged with lese majeste for his article criticizing the King's behaviour. In 1976, when the student movement was completely crushed by the ultra-rightist movement, thousands of his books were removed from the warehouse and burnt and as a result one of his bookshops went bankrupt. He was forced to live in exile for two years, teaching at various universities in Canada and the US. Seven years later, in a similar situation to the events of last year, he was charged with lese majeste, and subsequently arrested. To this date, he remains in exile. Working with the New Generation As well as publishing the magazines mentioned above, he also organized and participated in many seminars for social awakening. In 1966, theSocialScience Review was instrumental in forming ParitasSevana which drew student activists from many universities and high schools throughout the country to discuss and share experiences. The students were then given the responsibility of producing a students' edition of the Social Science Review. Members of this group also organized other groups such as the high school-based "Young Siamese" group. In 1970, three years before the 1973 uprising, one of the young members of the Paritas Sevana group, a newly graduated student named Komol Keemthong, decided to abandon the luxuries of urban life and despite' being offered a position as lecturer at a Bangkok university, travelled to a remote area in the south in order to open an alternative school. In 1971, he was shot dead because of the political violence between the communists and the government that was gripping the countryside. A foundation named after him was set up by Sulak to promote youth idealism. Many of the members of this new foundation were drawn from Paritas Sevana. One of the Foundation's main activities was to organize an annual

Testimonies

201

lecture to which a model for youth idealism was invited. This annual lecture has been very successful since then and many other organizations have followed this tradition, thus providing an additional avenue for mobilizing youth. Another very successful aspect of this foundation has been the publishing of original works in Thai and translations of quality books by authors such as E.F. Schumacher, Ivan lllich, Paulo Friere,Thich Nhat Hanh, FrijofCarpaand Fukuoka. These books have had great effect instimulatingnew thin king and opening the mi nds of a traditionally closed society. Such literature helped to establish in the minds of Thai people the links between indigenous wisdom and the new alternatives that the authors expounded. It encouraged the questioning of the consumer culture and the authoritarianism of both the left and right. Students associated with the Paritas Seminar, Young Siamese, Komol Keemthong and other related groups became leaders of the popular uprising in 1973 which overthrew the Thanom Kittikajorn military regime. Following the uprising, the students' movement became very powerful. Large sections of the movement began to consider the use of violence as a means ofchanging social structures. Sulak remained firm in his commitment towards and promotion of nonviolence, despite the fact that his position soon became unpopular amongst certain circles of the student movement. In 1976, together with progressive Muslim, Christian and Buddhist friends, Sulak helped to form the Coordinating Group for Religion in Society (CGRS) to create a nonviolent alternative to the increasingly violent and polarized extremes of the left and right. In addition, a small group of young people inspired by Sulak independently formed a group called “Ahimsa” to study and promote nonviolent action and literature. This group played a crucial role after the bloody coup of 1976, as members of the CGRS in giving comfort and support to the thousands of political prisoners and running national and international campaigns for their release. Many young people who had associated with and drawn inspiration from the above mentioned groups have later taken important initiatives for social change. One such person was a doctor who formed a Rural Doctors Association, which has been instrumental in promoting health care reform in the Ministry of Public Health. Another example is an educator who set up an alternative school in Kanchanaburi province. As the first alternative school in the country, it seriously challenged the mainstream educational system. A strong foundation was also formed side-by-side with the school to work with the abandoned children and raise public awareness about their plight.

His Work in Culture and Religion So far we have discussed some of Sulak's achievements in the areas

202

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

of writing and organizing for popular social change. In fact he has also been heavily committed to cultural renewal in a less-publicized way. Throughout his life, Sulak has targeted potential artists and writers who would otherwise have been ignored by society. In 1969, Sulak. was the driving force behind the setting up of the Sathirakoses Nagapradipa Foundation (SNF), in order to promote writers and artists in various f elds. The Foundation was named after two of the most prominent writers and scholars on Thai culture, whose writing provides a bridge between the past and the present. The Foundation supports the work of artists and writers who are struggling to make a living while trying to remain faithful to their work by organizing exhibitions and buying their works of art. It also supports elderly or sick artists who require assistance with health and other expenses in an area in which the mainstream has completely neglected the arts. Poet and artist, Angkhan Kanlayanaphong, who is now recognized as a national artist and has received a SEA Write Award was discovered as a diamond in the mud by Sulak 30 years ago. One of Thailand's most prominent contemporary artists Fua Haripitak, was commissioned by Sulak through the SNF to restore the centuries-old murals in the library at Wat Rakhang, the original home of King Rama I. Without Sulak's activities in restoring this library, it would have been destroyed. Fua later received the Magsaysay Award for his lifelong service to Thailand’s artistic heritage. He and other artists supported by the Foundation have been involved in restoration work to preserve works of art at other ancient temples such as the murals at Wat Suwanaram, Phetchaburi Province, the pulpit used by monks for giving Dhamma talks at Wat Worajanyawat in Bangkok and the traditional monastic library at Ubon Ratchathani Province. This Foundation has also supported artists and sculptors involved in the restoration of other historic buildings. Another important contribution of Sulak's has been his insight into and mobilization of the Thai Buddhist Order (Sangha). Sulak has seen the tremendous spiritual and cultural power of the Thai Sangha, but has also realized the Sangha's identity crisis in finding their role in modern society. In 1966, he collaborated with Thailand's two Buddhist universities to create a monk training program for initiating community development. The program developed awareness of modern social problems, knowledge of basic practical tools for community work such as health care and community organizing skills. The initial group of students were volunteers who offered their free time in the summer and after graduation to work in the local communities. Eventually, however, the two universities made one year post graduate service in the local communities compulsory, and the training program became a part of the regular undergraduate curriculum.

Testimonies

203

A few years later, Sulak initiated another monk training program— this time in artistic and environmental preservation. The program began in Thonburi province next to Bangkok with the help of the local Sangha governor. Subsequently this governor was promoted to the administrative head of more than 15 provinces in the North, and the program spread there as well. As the program spread geographically, its content expanded as well to include training in basic health care. This part was conducted in collaboration with the Public Health Ministry and Mahidol Medical University. With the success of this pilot program, other Sangha governors adapted similar program for their own constituencies. With this experience in developing the Thai Buddhist Sangha, Sulak further formalized his experience by creating the Thai InterReligious Commission for Development (TICD). This program represents a further expansion of the two aforementioned programs in reaching out and working with other religious groups in promoting community development. However, TICD's efforts have become more selective by reaching out to specific monks with special aptitudes for community development, indigenous health care techniques, and environmental preservation. Developing these specific relationships more deeply has enabled TICD to expand the work to new monks and communities while building an interconnected and versatile network of unique individuals and programs. TICD has divided their efforts into 3 specific areas: 1 . training programs for the monks; 2. an information network of development skills and methods; 3. publication and other news information to inform the public of the work. When TICD began 15 years ago, it was a small group of 15 monks working with a unique community development vision. Today, the work has spread to include over 200 monks with such well known success stories as the environmental work of Phra Prachak in Buriram province, the Buddhist cooperative programs of Luang Po Nan in Surin province, and the herbal treatment centers of Phra Somnuk in Nakhon Pathom province. As the network grew larger, Sulak encouraged these monks to form their own network called Sekhiya Dhamma (Dhamma for self-cultivation). Their group has sought to redefine and apply Buddhist teachings for the changing modern condition. In order to engage in such progressive development work, Sulak and the monks saw the need to bring their discipline up to date; for instance, the need to set a Buddhist standard for dealing with modern materials like plastics and hazardous chemicals which were not spoken of by the Buddha. Through a bi-monthly magazine, preaching, and workshops, the network has sought to create a grassroots consumer protection agency. Ultimately, these programs have educated and conscientized both the monks and the local communities on the dangers of, and alternatives to, global consumerism.

204

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

One dream of Sulak's that has been recently realized is to create a place for socially concerned people, activists, writers and artists to renew their intellectual and spiritual energy. An Ashram for Life and Society was set up about 5 0 km. northeast of Bangkok so that people can come and live a simple life while using their talent creatively to serve the society. They are invited to stay for short retreats to rejuvenate themselves before returning to their work. It also serves as a place for meetings, seminars and training courses. In the recent past the Ashram has hosted trainings for local Thais, Cambodians, Burmese and Sri Lankans on nonviolent conflict resolution, alternative development and meditation for social action.

Regional and International Work Aside from his work in his own country, Sulak has also devoted his attention to neighboring countries by promoting alternative models for development. In 1970, with a group of friends, a Southeast Asian study group forcultural relations in the future was formed. This was the first time that intellectuals and activists from Southeast Asia met to exchange ideas and get know one another seriously. This study group provided a forum from which they could contact people outside of the region, particularly Indians, Japanese and Americans, at an equal level. Although at that time the Vietnam war was still going on, this group also got in touch with Lao, Vietnamese, and Cambodian people to encourage friendship in the region. After the Vietnam war, Sulak and his colleagues were the first group of Thai people to visit Indochina. Upon Sulak's return he proposed that Thailand not see these socialist countries as enemies, contrary to the prevailing propaganda of the Thai military. When these countries recently opened up, Sulak was again at the forefront of criticizing theThai business and military sectors for exploiting their neighbors. During the time of hostile propaganda against communist China, Sulak also proposed that Thailand maintain friendly relations with China, as with the U.S., without allowing themselves to be dominated by either big power. He has been earnestly supporting oppressed groups of people in every country, such as Tibetans, tribal Buddhists in Bangladesh, Nepal and Ladakh, and the untouchables in India. From 1974-1975, together with friends from other countries, he organized the first Pacific Ashram, in Malaysia and in Chiang Mai, for socially concerned youth of different countries to cultivate and synchronize both intellectual and spiritual development. This ashram provided space for these young people to meet among themselves and with elder activists so that they had enough free time to get to know themselves and one another. Later on, this idea was further developed in Japan, and became the Youth Forum, and later the Asian Cultural Forum. Soedjatmoko, the former rector of the UN university , was the president of this forum until

Testimonies

205

he passed away. When Soedjatmoko was the rector of the United Nations University, Sulak was appointed as coordinator of a sub-unit called “The Buddhist Perception for Desirable Societies in the Future”. He also organized a successful meeting on this topic. One failure was his involvement in founding and directing the Asian Cultural Forum On Development (ACFOD). Through ACFOD he wanted to provide an alternative to the "think big policy". He attempted to integrate cultural and spiritual depth with the development process, but ACFOD ended up with excessive compartmentalization and socialist rhetoric, limiting its ability to act effectively. Sulak also founded and served as director of the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute (peace-democracy-righteousness) in 1988 as a nongovernmental organization with the major aim to promote the pursuit of Santiprachadhamma in Thai society. The two main objectives of the institute are to deepen the knowledge and thought on peace/nonviolence, democracy and righteousness as well as their application to current situations in Thai society, and to search for and develop the human resources conducive to the realization of these principles. Its activities include participatory research and publication, training and teaching (such as a program for newcoming and prospective workers of non-governmental organizations), exhibits, seminars and community activities. Also in 1988, along with his Japanese counterpart, Sulak initiated the formation of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB). It was the first international Buddhist network that linked socially-active Buddhist individuals and groups worldwide to support one another. INEB's areas of concern center around alternative education and spiritual training, women's issues, human rights, the environment, alternative development and the integration of spirituality and activism. It also serves as a clearing house of information and creative solutions to local, national and international problems. INEB further encourages the sharing of diverse traditions by publishing and sponsoring the translation of various booksand pamphlets, as well as by sponsoring, organizing and conducting training workshops locally and internationally. INEB's greatest concern is empowering Buddhists and people of all denominations in areas under great duress, such as Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia and Sri Lanka. Recently, INEB has conducted trainings on socially-engaged Buddhism for Sri Lankan monks, Cambodians, Burmese and Nepalese. By helping to create leaders at the local level skilled in nonviolent social and political interaction, alternative economics, ecology and spiritual development, INEB desires to empower local communities to solve their own problems and create strong, wholesome societies. Sulak has often been invited to address universities, meetings and conferences in Europe and North America. His main message for people

206

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

in the "first world" is that there is a viable alternative to development based on spirituality, particularly, from his point of view, Buddhism. He also emphasizes the interdependence between those in the "first" and "third" worlds, noting that we are all inextricably linked. The structural exploitation between the two must be ended, and that ordinary people have the power to do so by changing their lifestyles and exercising their rights and responsibilities justly and compassionately. In conclusion, Sulak's role within the country is to remind the Thai people to be aware of the value of their own cultural roots so that they won't blindly follow the western model of development which encourages violence, materialism, power and centralization. He wants the Thai to have self-respect, respect their own ancestors and indigenous wisdom, without turning the clock back to the "golden past", but able to skilfully apply those values for the present and future so that they can live simply, happily in harmony with nature. At the same time the Thai need to develop a new attitude towards their neighbors, to respect their cultures and religions, which may be different from their own. This includes stopping the exploitation of their natural resources from their neighboring countries. At the international level, Sulak encourages westerners to pay more attention to inner cultivation, to develop inner peace for personal transformation, which will lead to social transformation. The Green Movement and the Peace Movement should have more peace within themselves, otherwise their members will hate themselves, hate theirown families, which is antithetical to working for peace in society. For western Buddhists, Sulak's message is that meditation alone is not enough. They must face the suffering in society and understand the unjust social structures, otherwise their Buddhist practice is just another kind of escapism, or relevant only for rural society. For Buddhism to be meaningful in the present time, it must be appl icable to industrial and postindustrial society, and able to respond to global issues.

Sulak's Potential Contribution in the Future Sulak's deep spiritual insight, his thorough understanding of Thai culture and history, and his broad global vision contribute to his unique perspective which make his initiatives invaluable and indispensable steps for the betterment of society. The reason he was able to initiate so many diverse projects thus far, was that as soon as he began a new endeavor he would look for younger people whom he trained to carry on, enabling him to move on to other projects. However, although the capable, motivated people that he has attracted to work on such projects can continue functioning in his absence, he is indeed needed to provide his unique depth of perspective and vision for the future. At the same time, for the people

Testimonies

207

who carry on his work the relationship is not merely one of a boss and an employee. Rather it is one of a teacher and student in the traditional sense of a lifelong teacher, so that they often seek his advice not only for work but other aspects of spiritual growth. In addition, innovative people who instigate new projects or new publications without his initial involvement also look to him for advice and suggestions. For example at the Ashram mentioned above, there is a plan for an international school for social activists from the poorer countries. This will be a kind of alternative higher education center for which Sulak is needed to guide through the crucial initial stages of integrating visionary dreams with practical realities. Last but not least is his provocative and courageous criticism of the society in nearly all aspects which is always needed on the alternative road to a more just, green and spiritual society. Uthai Dulyakasem Pracha Hutanuwatra Nibondh Chamduang August 1992

“ What do you think about this, great king? Suppose a trustworthy and reliable person came to you from the east. . . west. ..north. ..south and said, ‘Please know, great king, that I come from the east (etc.) and there I saw a large country powerful a n d rich, very populous and crowded with men; there are plenty of elephantry, cavalry, chariots and infantry, there is plenty of ivory, gold and bullion both worked and un worked, and there are plenty of women for wives. With such and force you can conquer it. Conquer it then, great king’ How would you a c t ? ” “We should conquer it and live there as its owner, Master Ratthapala. ” “Great king, it is on account of this that the Blessed One who knows and sees, Arahant and Fully Enlightened, said: ‘Life in any world is incomplete, insatiate and the slave of craving. “A king who has by force conquered the earth And even lords the land the ocean bounds Is yet unsated with the sea 's near shore A n d hungers for its further shore as well... ” (Ratthapala Sutta, Middle[Majjhima] Collection), trans. Ven Nyanamoli Thera

VI.Lectures &* Articles by Sulak Sivaraksa

Experience teaches that hereditary succession is not a good way of producing ability. Yet we go on treating kings as though they possessed the sort o f ability shown by men who had to fight their way to the top. Of course we acknowledge bad kings.... but we also find good kings and even great kings ..... Looking around the crowned heads who have bestrewn the European stage over the centuries, I cannot see any other than Frederick the Great as a man of more than common abilities, and even his abilities were on the thin side. Of course many kings conducted the affairs ofstate in a reasonably competent way just as the wealthy man who inherits a great industrial undertaking makes a tolerable chairman of the board. But we cannot be content with that. We manufacture heroes simply because they occupy great positions. We forget that most o f these heroes were mainly concerned to show off and enjoy themselves — hunting, running after mistresses, building palaces, collectingworksofart,ormerelyeatinganddrinking. I f they carry this too far, we rebuke our heroes for neglecting what we regard as their true historical duty of ruling. In m y opinion, most great men of the past were only there for beer — the wealth, prestige and grandeur that went with power. What blinds us to this is the occupational disease o f the historian : assuming, when we think back into the past, that we loo w i l l be in the top drawer. AJP Taylor : Essays in English History (Fiction in History) Pelican 1976 pp 14-15

THE NEED TO BE AWARE O F OTHER TRADITIONS I am glad that I am talking with those who claim to be practising Buddhists— not to Indologists, Buddhologists or hardheaded western scholars of Buddhism. As you may know, in the nineteenth century, not all Euopean scholars were even prepared to accept that such a historical person as Gautama the Buddha had ever existed; and though such an extremity of scepticism now seems absurd, many scholars since have been prepared to argue either that we no longer have the Buddha's authentic teachings or that we have only a very few, the rest of the purported teachings being garbled or distorted by later tradition. Western scholars have indeed contributed a great deal to Buddhist studies, especially in the field of textual criticism and the development of Buddhist thought in various schools. Yet, their approach is claimed to be objective and scientific, as if Buddhism were a physical object or they were learned lawyers calling the Buddhist texts as witnesses into the dock, and declaring after cross examination that their testimony leaves much to be desired. Do the texts claim that there are four Noble Truths? Western or Aristotelian logic tells them that the third is a corollary to the second, so there should only be three. And is there any need for the Noble Eightfold Path? Three will be sufficient, since the path deals only with thoughts, words and actions. Worse, it is alleged that the very accounts of the Buddha's enlightenment are inconsistent. For example, he or his followers could apparently not make up their minds whether the crucial step is to get rid of all moral defilements or to know that one has done so. Many similar failings are alleged, each scholar selecting his own and, accordingly, devising a different line of development for early Buddhism. Those of us who claim to be practising Buddhists should be aware of the scholarly western traditions. We should not believe western scholarseasily nor should we reject them outright. Ifwe firmly believe that the teaching of the Buddha is “to be seen here— now , beyond time, inviting one to come and see, leading onward, to be realized by each wise person for himself or herself,” then one should be patient with western scholars who at one time even doubted the existence of our historical Buddha. They will eventually become wise and see the authenticity and the truth of the Dhamma as expounded excellently by the Buddha. I do not wish to mention other religious traditions' approach to or criticism of Buddhism. However, I would like to quote a contemporary English Christian Divine, Dom Aelred Graham, who said, “Buddhists, like Christians,, have their mutual differences and a variety of sects; but if one may risk a generalization, Christians appear to differ fundamentally

212

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

with regard to superficial matters, whereas Buddhists differ only superficially on that which is fundamental.” I think if we take this remark by our Christian friend seriously, we shall be aware of different Buddhist traditions mindfully and positively. Otherwise, Buddhists, too, can be sectarian, egocentric, nationalistic and sexist at the expense of others. To be a practising Buddhist, one must have faith in the Three Gems, for, without faith, no virtuous Dhamma will grow. Faith (Saddha) is the Mother of all preliminary practices. It is the source of all qualities. It is faith which removes all confusion and all our illusions, especially pride. If scholars have less pride, they will be humble and may find happiness. However, differences do exist in different Buddhist traditions. First, let us remind ourselves of the usual interpretations between the Greater and Lesser Vehicles. It is in the Mahayana texts that the work “Hinayana” first appears. A very common “explanation” by Mahayana is that the Lesser Vehicle represents a “provisional teaching,” which the Buddha preached for disciples of lesser ability. This explanation stresses that all teachings in the world, including the religions of outsiders, are, in fact, expedient means (upaya) for leading beings to the highest truth as taught in Mahayana. On the other hand, Hinayana schools, when they deign to mention Mahayana at all — though no reference is made to the term— usually label it as “going beyond the Buddha's word.” Yet, followers of both Yanas go to the same three Gems for refuge, and, moreover, they wish ultimately to attain the same fruit as that enjoyed by Gautama, the Buddha. Now, let us examine a few historical and doctrinal aspects of the two Yanas. (I do not mention Vajarayana, or Tibetan Buddhism, here, because it is part and parcel of Mahayana, although it has its own uniqueness and Tibetan monks adhere to Hinayana disciplines too.) According to the facts agreed upon by both Schools of Buddhism, Guatama, the Buddha, followed the way of the wise being (bodhisatta or bodhisattva) with the aspiration to become a Fully Enlightened One, so he traversed the long and difficult course. In order to realize his aspiration, both schools of thought also agree that the Buddha-to-be had systematically cultivated the Perfections (parami) for a longer period than was necessary for an Enlightened Disciple (savaka) . At the same time, we should also remember that the Buddha is also called an Arahant. Although in the suttas of the Pali canon the Buddha denies he is omniscient (in the sense of being all-knowing in one instant as Creator Gods are said to be), he seems to admit the possibility of total knowledge regarding any particular subject of enquiry in one who is Sabbannu (all knowing). However, later sources in both schools make reference to the

Lectures & Articles

213

Buddha as though he was all-knowing, all the time. This is, of course, part of the p. ocess of glorifying the Buddha, which went on for many centuries. One of its results was to widen the rift between the attainment of the Arahant, called an Anubuddha, and that of the Samma Sambuddha. There is also a Paccekabuddha, the Fully Enlightened One who is not a Disciple, and who does not teach others to be enlightened. T h e three levels of Buddhahood— Samma Sambuddha, Paccekabuddha and Anubuddha— are accepted by both schools of Buddhism. The Venerable Walpola Rahula, who wrote the famous book What The Buddha Taught, once told me that in Sri Lanka a devout Buddhist would always make a solemn vow to be a Samma Sambuddha; and if failing at that, to be a Peaccekabuddha; and if failing at that, to be an Arahant, an Anubuddha. In my country , it is widely believed that the late Venerable Phra Acariya Mun Bhuridatto was a Fully Enlighted Disciple. In his hagiography, which is now available in English, it is said that at first he aspired to be a Samma Sambuddha, but feeling that it would take so many aeons more to achieve this end, he therefore resolutely determined to be an Arahant in this very life. A question usually asked is whether one who wishes to become an Arahant trains only for his own good, and whether it is possible to call an Arahant selfish. The first question is answered by the Commentary to Majjhima Nikaya, which praises the best sort of disciples as those practising “for their own good and for that of others.” Many other Pali passages can be found to underline the altruistic nature of the Arahant and other disciples. The second question begins to lose its meaning when one considers that the Arahant must have penetrated the experience of Anatta or Sunyata, and thereby shattered all misconceptions about the self (atta).Therefore, how can we speak of “selfishness” in this context? To be enlightened, both Schools of Buddhism stress that one has to be accomplished in Paramita — Perfections. The Mahayana started with a well-ordered set of Six Perfections: giving, moral conduct, patience, endeavour, concentration and wisdom. Later, it added four more. This, again, is almost the same as in the Hinayana, or Theravada, tradition. Both schools emphasize that anyone who seriously attempts to practise the Paramitas must be accounted as a Bodhisattva, and if he or she does not receive a prediction in this life, then he or she may have already had this in the past or it may be yet to come. Almsmen, almswomen, laymen and laywomen in most Mahayana countries take the initiation into the Bodhisattva vows, which may be either 58 in China or 64 in Tibet. In fact, they are all derived from the 10

214

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Param itas. In Theravada countries of South and Southeast Asia, all the 1 0 Paramitas are always stressed in Jataka stories which are preached in all traditional temples. From what I have said so far, one can notice that the differences are not at all significant, if we study and respect other traditions. And I limit myself to the areas where great differences have been stressed. 1 do not wish to go into the details of different dress, habits of eating, etc. This depends much on the time, place and circumstances. Yet, these seemingly superficial matters have created many Buddhist Councils and sects. 1 sometimes feel sad when the so-called practising Buddhists claim that their method of meditation alone is the right one. Only their meditation master is enlightened; others are only mediocre. It would indeed be a great help to all of us if we bear in mind what the Buddha says: ‘ ‘The essentials of the holy life do not consist in the profits of gain, honour and good name; nor yet in the profits of observing moral rules; nor yet in the profits of knowledge and insight; but the sure heart's release, brethren. That, brethren, is the meaning; that isthe essence; that is the goal of living the holy life.” Theravadins, or Hinayanists, may doubt why there are so many Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in the Mahayana tradition — not to mention Buddhasaktis and their emanations, as the Dalai Lama, etc. Concerning this matter, Venerable Buddhadasa Bhikkhu has helped us a great deal with his concepts of worldly language and Dhammic language. When one see the Lady Kuan Yin or the thousand armed Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva, one should realize that this is an expression in worldly language. In Dhammic language, this is the Buddha's compassion, which is boundless and cannot be expressed adequately in any language or symbol. Likewise, the Dalai Lama could be a simple monk or could be a Bodhisattva. In the Mahayana tradition, there are Dyani Buddhas, Divine Buddhsakti and Divine Bodhisattvas, as well as Mortal Buddhas, Mortal Buddhasaktis and Mortal Bodhisattvas. Indeed the Lotus Sutta and the Pureland Sutta are very unique too, and the more Theravada Buddhists understand their uniqueness, the more it will strengthen their “faith ” and their broad-mindedness in their fellow Buddhists of different schools of thought. Likewise, in the Theravada tradition, the local spirits— Nat in Burma and Phii in Siam— as well as the Hindu Gods have all been converted to worshipers of the Buddha. These deities could be helpful or harmful. If one is not skillful in the practice of the Dhamma, these iconographies and images can be real hindrances; but if one is aware that

Lectures & Articles

215

all these deities can help those who are resolute in practicing the Ten Perfections, they can enrich various Buddhist traditions so that practitioners will be able to walk on the Noble Eightfold Path or the Buddhist Middle Way for the ultimate goal of liberation. Let me now return to a major observed difference between the Greater and Lesser Vehicles. The last point to be clearly understood concerns helping oneself as against helping others. Verses in the Dhammapada clearly indicate that one should first help oneself. The simile used by the Buddha, who asks whether one man stuck in the mud would be able to pull out another stuck in the same predicament, points to the same teaching. Much is said in praise of Mahayana altruism, but how can this be given expression while one remains in the midst of selfishness? The vow to save all beings is a noble aspiration, but as Acariya Shantideva, the great Mahayana master, says: “ I f one like me, still not free from the defilements, should propose to set free from the defilements the beings extending through the ten directions, I should speak like a madman, ignorant of my limitations. Hence, without turning back, I shall always fight the defilements.” Th is practical attitude has also characterized the lives of many great masters of meditation in the Mahayana. Besides numerous Chinese Ch'an teachers, for example the famous Sixth Patriarch Hui Neng who lived for may years in remote places, we have the wonderfully inspiring life of Milarepa, who dwelt throughout his life in the mountain vastness of Tibet. Yet, he declared that by doing so, he was truly benefitting all beings, and those who became his disciples, no doubt, had great cause to thank him for his strictness in this respect. The sort of “ h e l p ” that one can give before one has pulled oneself out of the mud is always liable to be stained by meddling and self-interests, as one can clearly see in the recent case of Mr. Bush on the Persian Gulf crisis. The “do-gooder” is a typical example of one who would like to set others’ houses in order before he or she tidies his or her own. The world suffers from such missionaries and development agencies form western lands, including the World Bank and IMF, while the successful Dhannaduta bhikkhu or bhikkuni is harder to find. Before helping others, one must, to some extent, have helped himself or herself. And as Milarepa stresses, the greatest help that one can possibly give to others is to personally experience Enlightenment — in whatever degree. For at this stage, all self-interest and selfishness disappear and one’s conduct manifests only wisdom and compassion. Indeed, one comes across many paradoxical utterances which are not at all logical. They are usually by well-known Zen teachers. These are,

216

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

again, similar to the sayings of many meditation masters in the Theravada tradition. This shows that for those who really practise Buddhism, the outward differences become meaningless. Before reaching that stage, one should be respectful of other traditions. Do not assess others as heretics or as having wrong views merely because what they believe and practise does not appear to tally with our own limited traditions. The best guide to bear in mind, as to whether one's own or another's tradition is in the right or wrong direction, should always be the words of the Buddha given to his aunt and stepmother, the first Bhikkuni in the world. “Whatever are the states of which you, Gotami, may know, these states lead to passion, not to passionlessness; they lead to bondage, not to the absence of bondage; they lead to wanting much, not to wanting little, not to solitude; they lead to difficulty in supporting oneself, not to ease in supporting oneself; of such states you should know with certainty, Gotami, this is not Dhamma, this is not Discipline, this is not the Teacher's instruction.” Bearing the above quotation in mind, one must admit that each tradition has its own limitations. While one should respect one's own tradition and practise the Dhamma accordingly, one must also be critical of one’s own tradition. At the same time, one should develop deep respect and broad understanding for other Buddhist traditions that are just as important as one's own. Then one can learn from other traditions what one lacks in one's own. For instance, the Theravada or Hinayana tradition should acknowledge that the disappearance of the Bhikkhuni order is a great tragedy. It could be restored if we would ask for help from our Mahayana brothers and sisters. Y et, that is easier said than done, because most religious traditions are conservative and it is difficult to maintain a proper radical conservatism, which a livingreligion should be. In this regard, the Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu is not waiting to have the order of Bhikkhuni restored in Siam : he is just starting a new order of Dhamma Mata —in honour of our mothers. Members of this new order will be trained to lead the holy life, not to be involved in household affairs, but in passionlessness, detachment, decreasing worldly gains, frugality, contentment, delight in the good. Fifty-nine years ago, the now octogenarian monk Buddhadasa Bhikkhu started the Garden of Liberation for almsmen, laymen and laywomen. Yet, he feels he has not done enough to honour his mother. Hence, for its diamond jubilee in May there will be a new order of Dhamma Mata to properly honour women , including mothers. From this very practical step, let us hope that the Order of Almswomen will eventually be restored meaningfully in all Theravada countries.

Lectures & Articles

217

In Mahayana tradition, it is wonderful that the Bhikkhuni order still exists. Yet, the order of almswomen, as well as the status of lay women, should surely be uplifted to be equal to that of almsmen and laymen. After all, the Buddha said the two orders were equal, as men and women are equal. It is true that the Buddha's injunction was for Holy men to take precedence over the Holy women. One must also bear in mind that the Buddha conformed to the tradition of his time, although he was much ahead of his contemporaries. If the orders of almsmen and almswomen are to be equal, bearing in mind the Vinaya that their practices of the Dhamma are for their ultimate liberation from the bondage of births and deaths, then, I think, we should interpret our Buddhist traditions rightly in the essence, or the spirit, of the Buddha's instruction for our time. Before ending my talk, let me quote a passage from the Ven. Kyabgon Sakya Trizin Rinpoche, head of the Tibetan Sakya tradition, who said: “Nowadays there are very many people who wish to study Dhamma, and they follow different schools, different orders, and one thing which is very important to note is that all these orders are from the same origin; they all have the same effect and the same value. Of course, 1 do not mean to say that everybody should follow all the schools, which is difficult to do, but whichever specific order one follows, that is of course due to one's own karma. Whichever school one has the karmic link with one must follow that, but at the same time, it is very important to have complete faith and respect for all the different schools, because if you hold one particular order, but have less respect for another school, then it is a great mistake and very harmful, and everybody should bear this in mind. Apart from that 1 don't have anything to say, but I wish you all a very successful spiritual Path and with this I conclude the course. Whatever merit we have earned through studying and meditation, we dedicate so that all the people gathered here ay get ultimate Enlightenment in order to help limitless other sentient beings to be free from the ocean of sufferings of samsara.”

A lecture prepared by S. Sivaraksa for the First International Conference on Buddhist Women held Ot Thammasat University, Rangsit Campus, from October 25-29, 1991, but it was delivered by someone

else

as he had

to be abroad.

BUDDHISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS In terms of Buddhist thought, human rights, righteousness and morality are all related to the natural environment. In the Agganna Sutta it is clearly stated that when the king is righteous, the ministers are righteous; and when the Brahmins, householders and villagers are ighteous, then the rain, the sun, the moon, the seasons will be in proper order. Rice will ripen properly ; plants and trees will bear fruit properly. All aspects of the environment and the landscape are related. From the Buddhist point of view, human rights is not only for humans. From the Western point of view, human rights is something great and something good. I appreciate the Western philosophy of human rights and the Western stand on human rights. 1 appreciate Western democracy and the Western approach to the environment, but I feel that whatever the West contributes to the world, the East ends up ruining. From my point of view, the universal declaration of human rights is a wonderful document. But it is certainly not universal. It is a Western declaration. After World War II, the victorious party made a declaration, and it was probably influenced by Roosevelt's four freedoms: freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of speech, and freedom to pursue happiness. But, Roosevelt is the product of the old Western way of thinking. You can go right back to the French revolution to find the first declaration of the rights of human beings. And of course the American Declaration of Independence states that we are all created equal. It sounds very good. We are all created equal, but in that sense, the underlying “ w e ” here means “white people.” After that declaration, Americans taught that the blacks were not equal. They also killed many of the indigeneous American people, the socalled Red Indian people. How many of them died? And for the celebration of the 500th anniversary of Columbus' landing, I have heard unofficially that the King of Spain and the Pope are coming to visit America. If this is true, there is a real irony here, because it means that the greatest destruction of human rights took place at least five hundred years ago. To be honest with you, 1 benefit from the Western perspective partly because I am also connected with the West. I was educated in the West. I have so many friends in the West, and they care for me. I am very grateful forthat. But what about others? In my country, which is supposed to be a Buddhist kingdom, we have 300,000 monks and over one million prostitutes. Does that disparity have anything to do with human rights at all? Do prostitutes have any chance to choose other occupations? In which way could we apply human rights to this? My country is supposed to be the rice bowl of Asia, but sixty percent of our young children are now suffering from malnutrition. Does this have any connection with human

Lectures & Articles

219

rights? Of course there is a connection. If human rights means, from the Western point of view, a declaration of equality like the French revolution and Declaration of Independence - then, theoretically, we are all supposed to be equal. But in reality, we are not. Approaches to human rights stress the fact that we will not be equal. Some will be more equal than others. And perhaps this is why the Marxist approach is so challenging to Western liberal thinking. The Marxist approach says, “O.K. Human rights means that we shall be more equal.” At least in most Marxist countries, they try to do that. For instance, when I went to Vietnam, the minister o f foreign affairs told me that he had to borrow a thick jacket to wear. He did not have a jacket. He only had two shirts and two or three pairs of trousers. At least theoretically, they are more equal economically. It can be seen quite clearly that in Vietnam, even in the Soviet Union, except for some few privileges, on the whole they are poor together. In North Korea, they also believe that human rights for them is the equality of human beings - as equal as possible. Then personal, individual liberty is luxurious. You cannot have both. Whereas in the Western world, in the USA, liberty and freedom of expression is most often viewed in terms of human rights. You must not have prisoners of conscience, but you can have economic disparity as much as you like. Even President Bush, when he went to Asia this time, brought all the top people from various companies. How much are each of them paid? They are willing to maintain their salaries or privileges while they are willing to lay off all those laborers without pay. Obviously, there is somethingwrongwiththissortof human rights. You have to go right back again. Human rights in the West came out against the old religious traditionsof the West. Christianity has many good points and many weak points. I have often said that Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. represent Christianity at its best; for them it is a religion of love, a religion of the oppressed, and a religion for the suffering people. But in the West, it became the religion of the oppressors. And the church as an institution became the oppressor, knowingly or unknowingly. Obviously, those who fought for human rights, fought for democracy, fought for freedom - they fought against the church. They fought against the monarchies and feudalism as I do now too. But unlike them, I believe in “radical conservatism.” You must preserve whatever you can. Even the church with all its weaknesses, ought to be preserved as an institution - its role should be rationalized and updated. The same is true for the monarchy, however weak - we should maintain it. Indeed, even trees, however old, however weak, ought be preserved. We should not be throwing them away nor cutting them down. Yet we continue to eliminate them. My understanding or approach comes out of a Buddhist back-

220

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

ground. O n the contrary, Western intellectuals, for the last two hundred years, thought that there was nothing good with the church, and the state did away with it. And at least in France they were successful, until Napoleon came. And certainly, they had no time for the church whatsoever. So the declaration of the rights of human beings sprang from those intellectuals who were against the church. At least the church, however bad, however oppressive, had a spiritual linkage, that is, something about it was mystical. This I think the intellectuals of the West did not understand or did not want to. We can go right back to Newton, to Bacon or to John Locke, who is to me the father of human rights. But at that time there was nothing spiritual left, although many people were supposed to be practicing Christians. For Locke, the most important thing for human beings was life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I think this culminated in American ideology. Life means now. My life. Not a previous life, of which they know nothing. Not the future life. Not heaven and hell, which they do not believe in anymore. That is why the priest used to be very important, but now the doctors are very important, because people do not want to die. They are afraid of death. And liberty, of course, comes along with individualism. I explain whatever I want and whatever I can, which, of course, is wonderful. But it has its weaknesses, and it is not very easily defined or agreed upon. Speaking as a Buddhist, 1 believe that something in the middle ought to be sought. I think Western liberty has its strengths and weaknesses. In the same way life is wonderful, but when you are not careful, you are only concerned with your life. This applies even to our lifestyle, myself included. Although I come from the Third World, my lifestyle is very much like the First World. The way we conduct our lifestyle is at the expense of those in the Third World. If you are not careful, then you have people in London going to buy lungs and kidneys from the poor Indians. The third of these rights is the most poorly defined, the pursuit of happiness. How can we find happiness? Without the spiritual tradition, we cannot define happiness anymore. What is happiness? Locke himself changed his mind later. He said that the pursuit of happiness means the pursuit of property. The more property, the more money, the more wealth you have, the better. I think this is the paradigm of the world right now. What he said very clearly is that the Indian chiefs in North America were so stupid. They were content with feathers on their heads and a few blankets around them. And so, if we can, we should take advantage of them. I think this is old now. Neither the pursuit of property northe pursuit of human rights works. They become real addictions. Mr. Bush said he cared for the human rights of the students of Tienanmen Square in China. But in the back of his mind, he is thinking that he wants more commercial enterprises in China. That is why the issue

Lectures & Articles

221

of Tibet is so touchy, because China is now much more important than Tibet. My main argument about the Western approach to human rights is that it comes right back to the old Western philosophy. Western philosophy since the enlightenment has become compartmentalized. This is political science. This is social science. This is the humanities, and so on. And we have lost the woods for the trees. So, when we talk of human rights, it means nothing very specific. On the one hand, it is good. On the other hand, it has many, many weaknesses. 1 am very grateful that Amnesty International took my case and even paid for me to go to London. But Amnesty International tends to perform a very specific task. If you are a prisoner of conscience or resist a government non-violently, they will help you. They also stand up against capital punishment - specific issues like that. But then if you look at the International League of Human Rights around the world, it is very weak; those people have nothing to do. 1 went to them in France, talked to them in Berlin, because to me the issue of human rights in the West is quite weak unless you make it very legalistic. As in the communist world before the break up of the Soviet Union, human rights can mean economic equality - forget about liberty. For the West, it means political rights, political equality, but disparity on economic grounds. But even as for political equality, I am not quite sure about that. I recently viewed the film JFK. I thought that a coup d'etat could only take place in my country, Siam, but now I know it could also take place in America. Political rights. A lot of people have been fooled with the name of democracy. Anyhow, you may think that this is not related to human rights, but 1 think it is all related. Now if you make things compartmentalized, specialized, on the one hand it is good. It is ethical. On the other hand, you lose the woods for the trees. You lose the wholeness of life. Yes, to be efficient is good, to be successful is good, and so on. But sometimes, being efficient results in a lot of waste. And you may think that waste is not related to human rights, but to me, it is all related. Out of Western human rights, Western traditions create capital ism, consumerism and imperialism, which are all part of a package deal. Now, as a Buddhist, what do I mean by human rights? The word “rights” in Buddhism is translated as Dhamma. Dhamma is righteous living in accordance with the law of nature. But how can you come to know the law of nature? We can go back to the natural rights, and so on, the law of God, but that has become theory and theology. That is why the people, including the intellectuals, two hundred years ago fought against that. But for the Buddhists, first and foremost rights means cultivating peace within. You must know who you are. I am not the last one to save the world, but we do not even save ourselves. So you must at least cultivate peace within.

222

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Try to be as unselfish as possible. That is why meditation in Buddhism is very important. It is reflecting to know who you are. Are you a greedy type? Are you an angry type? Are you a deluded type? The deluded types are mostly in universities. They feel like they can teach everything; but they do not teach themselves. The angry types can be found at the Pentagon, and the greedy types are in multi-national corporations. Let us look at rights in terms of the Buddhist precepts. I think that first you must know who you are. You have to be at peace with yourself and eliminate fear. You do not want to be killed. Nobody else wants to be killed either. I think that is very basic. The idea of killing is bad for you already, because hatred arises in the mind. Non-killing is not only important foryour life, but for your family, yourethnic group, your culture and the whole of humankind. The more selfless you are, the more you care about the animal kingdom. Plants, trees and rivers are all related. That is why the first Buddhist precept dealing with not taking life is not a commandment, it is for your own good, for your own peace. It is for the good of all that you do not kill and then develop compassion and lovingkindness to help those who are suffering. Likewise, the second precept relates to not stealing. Even the idea of stealing is bad for you. It amounts to greed arising in the mind. So stealing things is not only pinching things from the pockets of others, stealing here includes the international banking system. Is the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank stealing? Is the First World stealing from the Third World? What about selling arms to the Third World? Eighty-seven percent of the arms produced in the First World are sent to the Third? Is that stealing? And is it also killing? And those who are very positive about human rights, who speak so much of human rights, and care so much for freedom, end up selling all these arms. Does this contribute to an unjust world economic system? The third precept deals with the exploitation of the sexes. Again, this is not simply adultery. That is a small thing. This precept concerns the exploitation of women, the exploitation of the weak - not only women - even those among the same sex, and this is wrong. If you exploit others, then you have no respect for others. The fourth precept deals with lying. When you talk of human rights, lying has no place. As soon as you lie, you delude yourself. You lie to yourself and to others. Currently, so much lying is accepted. Turn on the television any night: advertisements, political propaganda, all the politicians talking - it is all lying. And it is accepted. And yet there is still so much talk about human rights. The last precept relates to drug abuse, drug trafficking and so on. From the Buddhist point of view, you must come to understand human rights yourself. We each have to discover how not to exploit others and

Lectures

& Articles

223

how to be of service to others. The more selfless you are, the more contented you are; the more restful you are, the more critical selfawareness you can develop. If you develop your state of mind, you might have a chance to discover what is right in the proper sense of the world. You can understand Dhamma. You can see things as they really are. In technical terms, this is called yathabhuta-nana - seeing things as they really are. Human rights ought to exist in this sense. It is not only our rights. It is everyday's rights and every being's rights. 1 was in Frankfurt in November. There was a symposium on human rights held by leading theologians. When I mentioned that human rights is not only for humans, everyone has a right, every being has a right, a friend of mine, an Australian Catholic theologian who used to live in Papua New Guinea, said he understood this very well, not only from the Buddhist point of view, but from the perspective of Pacific island peoples. Those people believe that the sea has its rights, animals also have rights. The fish also have rights. The mountain has a right. And I think the native people in Hawaii believe the same thing. The local people there are interested in discussing how to preserve some part of it as sacred. A lot of people believe in human rights, but they believe more in development. They want to have more money. They want to have more golf courses. They want to have more high-rise buildings. A theologian friend in Germany is fond of claiming that we who are created by God ought to be supreme: we can exploit animals; we can exploit others; the natural environment is for us - it says so in the Bible. Of course, the Bible says many things. But to me, if religion is for the living, we must practice radical conservatism. Conserve something that is wonderful, something that is good and makes radical changes for the benefit of all. Not only for the benefit of humans, or our race, or our people. I think that is why human rights, from the Buddhist perspective, has to be rights defined by those who can synchronize peaceful thought with a peaceful heart. In the West, w e develop only our heads, only intellectually. I think love is the key element. To be meaningful, love has to be compassionate. And if compassion is to be real, it must be guided by knowledge. That is why in Buddhism, wisdom, knowledge and compassion must go together. So human rights is the expression of wisdom and compassion. 1 gave a talk in Oslo in December, just the day before Aung San Suu Kyi was to receive the Noble Peace Prize. She was given the award for standing up, for being a guiding light, not only for the Burmese, but the whole of Asia and the whole world, because she has such compassion. She maintains a compassionate feeling for those who put her in jail, who kill people, and who destroyed her political party. Her political party won the majority, but the military junta refused to recognize the outcome and pass

224

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

the power on. Without that compassion, she would destroy herself. Of course, if you take up arms against the oppressors, you will end up destroying each other. And you are also inviting superpowers to come in. Suu Kyi's book came out on the day that she received her award. The title is very appropriate: Freedom from Fear. If you are not afraid, then I think human rights becomes more universal. Human rights means not only rights for you or rights for me, but rights for all. In this respect, again from the Buddhist point of view, you must cultivate peace within. You must cultivate critical self-awareness. Otherwise, we do not really know. We can only know from our practice. The more humble we become, the more we know. We know up to our limitation for we cannot know everything. We try to be as compassionate as far as we know. The more we know, the more we understand that we are all interrelated. This is the basic teaching of the Buddha: we are all interrelated. I believe it was Thich Nhat Hanh who said that when we look at a piece of paper, we must think of the trees. Without the trees, there would be no paper. We must think of the sun. Without the sun, there will be no clouds, no rain. You must think of the earth. We must think of the rivers. All of these are interrelated. And so, we must think of the tree cutters. If we look at the paper, we may not realize that those tree cutters have abused human rights. They got away with their own destructive ways in most places. In my own country, a Buddhist monk who wanted to protect the forest was arrested by the military. If we are aware, we had better be careful. We must use and reuse the paper. We recycle it. We should not throw it away unconsciously. If our Japanese and Korean friends were to fully realize this, they would not throwaway their chopsticks so easily. At the intellectual level, we may not think that chopsticks are related to human rights, but if we apply the heart, we can see that everything is interrelated. Once we know that, we can try to develop critical self-awareness, be at peace and see that we are interrelated with others in a meaningful way. Once we are interrelated in a meaningful way, we need friends who will help us, because we alone cannot do it. The Buddha said that it is most important for each individual to have good, supportive friends. The First World must work with the Third World; the Thai must work with the Burmese; and so on. Human rights must not be compartmentalized. Rights must be made more meaningful. And to be meaningful, we must be humble. We must be able to listen to criticism in order to change our view in order that the suffering in the world, not only of human beings, be lessened in the world. We all have our small part to play in that role, provided we are humble, provided we are self-critical, provided we are ready to suffer with others in our effort to rid the world of suffering. Experiencing suffering is a Buddhist truth, but bringing an end to suffering

Lectures & Articles

225

is the final goal of Buddhism - t h e true realization of human rights entails this same truth and this same goal.

A Talk given by S.Sivaraksa Honolulu, January 1992.

at the University

of Hawaii,

CULTURE, DEVELOPMENT AND DEMOCRACY THE ROLE O F INTELLECTUALS I should like to define intellectuals as a tiny group of people who provide for their society — be it the world or the nation state — the most articulate, persuasive, precise and perhaps accurate definition of the society from their experience. They also have a serious commitment to improve that society. Often, they are major living writers, educators, technocrats, members of Parliament and intellectual leaders of religious institutions. They dare to write and speak openly against the current public opinion, especially against the policy and administration of the ruling elites. Scholars or academics and journalists who do not perform such function cannot claim to be intellectuals. In the Northern hemisphere, intellectuals enjoy a large degree of freedom, but in the South, they are often oppressed by the regime currently in power. Intellectuals feel, perhaps wrongly, that they have replaced the priests of the older tradition, who had done too much, perhaps, to maintain the status quo. Their voice is like that of the prophets, but however much they try they are unable to solve the most fundamental problems of society— to bring about social justice that concerns itself with the welfare of the common man as well as ending the exploitation of the world's natural resources. While they were alive most intellectuals felt that they had failed in their objective to improve the lot of humankind, politically, socially, ethically, aesthetically and ecologically. Select any name from Russeau, Voltaire, Karl Marx, Lord Acton, Bertrand Russell, George Orwell to Soedjatmoko. They all feel frustrated that their intellectual ability had somehow been wasted. The reason for this sense is obvious, because by definition intellectuals are independent thinkers and those who are in power in controlling church, state, the media or multinational cooperations certainly do not like intellectuals to tell them orthepublic that those in power tend to corrupt. Although in a more open society, they have no absolute power; hence, they cannot corrupt absolutely. Yet, the power they hold behind thescenes can also make life for any intellectual difficult, especially if he or she does not tow the line of the prevailing political climate or policy. In the European context, one can see very clearly why Marx could not even live in Germany, France or Belgium. Luckily, he was allowed in Britain. Yet, in England itself, Bertrand Russell was not only put in jail, but was not even allowed to teach at Cambridge University because he disagreed fundamentally with the British Government on the virtue of entering the First World War. In the Spanish Civil War, started in 1936, it was clear to most

Lectures & Articles

227

western intellectuals that the fascist movement in Europe might suffer a serious set-back, because the common people like the Spanish workers had taken up arms to oppose General Franco's revolt against the nation's elected government. Up to that point the fascist powers had been enjoying a long string of fairly easy successes, including Mussolini's conquest of Abyssinia and Hitler's reoccupation of the Rhine land. Hence, many committed intellectuals of the socialist persuasion not only wrote and spoke for the cause of democracy and freedom against totalitarian regimes but went to fight in Spain. Yet, the Spanish elected government compromised with the Soviet Union — another dictatorial regime, which claimed to be socialist. George Orwell had a hard time fighting in Spain. He was shot and nearly died. Yet, the Spanish Government believed the Russian KGB that he was Franco's spy. Luckily, he escaped back to England with his wife, where he wanted to tell the world the whole truth of the messy war, that the government of the Republic “has more points of resemblance to fascism than points of difference”. He was not allowed to tell the truth by respectable magazine editors and publishers like Kingsley Martin of the New Statesman and Victor Gollanze of the Left Book Club, because leftwing opinion was too accustomed to thinking of the Republic as a victim of fascism to accept this. Not many people were prepared to see the element of truth in the broad generalisation, namely, the Republic was wrong to think that it could use fascist methods to achieve socialist aims. This footstep was repeated over and over again in China, Vietnam and Cambodia. This classic example could be cited almost anywhere in the world — be it in China or Siam. In the case of Soedjatmoko, he fought the Dutch for Indonesian independence and supported Sukarno for democracy and socialism, but when the guided democracy of the father of the nation became more and more oppressive, Soedjatmoko could no longer serve the government in which he painfully took part to create. Again, when Suharto toppled Sukarno in 1965, Soedjatmoko was called to help as Indonesian Ambassador to the U.S.A., to get the nation recognized for her development towards democracy and decency. Yet, Soedjatmoko must have felt frustrated that the new president and his henchmen were perhaps even worse than those of the Sukarno period. The case of Soedjatmoko illustrates that intellectuals do not need to be outside the corridors of power all the time. But when they are with the power that be, if they are not themselves corrupted by the authority and the glory they enjoy, the best they can do is to improve the economic conditions (a little) of the country, not the cultural aspects or the fundamental development towards equality, freedom and fraternity. The case of John Maynard Keynes with the British Government and Puey Ungphakorn with the Thai Government are clear examples of intellectuals

228

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

with moral courage who tried hard to use their economic expertise to guide the government towards a sound financial policy which could benefit a large majority of its citizens. But both by and large failed in their endeavors. In the case of Puey, he, like Soedjatmoko, had to serve under a dictatorial regime. Then it was not possible even to look for the rule of law or freedom of speech. In the case of Keynes, who served under the Labour Government which had swept to power after defeating Churchill and the Conservatives in the general election after the Second World War, what changes were made in the administrative personnel even though there had been a change of government? Did the police officer, who had a vague notion that “Socialism” meant something against the law, carry on just the same when the government itself was socialist? The Labour Party, with a lot of intellectual backing, could pass all the new laws it wanted, but that would mean little if the changes were not accepted wholeheartedly at the bottom of the system — with the policeman on the street, for example — as well as at the top. Britain prided herself on being the mother of modern democracy, and with the Industrial Revolution, she claimed to have so developed economically and culturally that eventually Britain ruled the waves, with the English sense of justice and fairness. They felt other countries should develop in the British image, i.e. the Indians were forced to sell their wool to British industry and Ceylon was forced to grow tea instead of rice so that the price of tea was settled in London. Yet, just before the Second World War, Orwell wrote The Road to Wigan Pier describing the social condition of British mine workers in the north. His research in the public library revealed that miners were suffering a phenomenally high rate of accidents. He learned that nearly eight thousand had died in the mines in the period from 1927-1934. He calculated that “every year, one miner in about nine hundred is killed and one in about six is injured ... more men are killed and injured in our mines every year than the whole of the casualties sustained by the Gallipoli Expeditionary Force.” To be sure, many of the non-fatal injuries reported by the mines were insignificant compared with the wounds inflicted on the troops in the disasterous Gallipoli campaign. Nevertheless, this reference helps us to see that there was a kind of war being waged in the North of England at that time — and that only one side was taking casualties. This very fact is still relevent in the Third World, for instance Siam, the Buddhist kingdom, has 300,000 monks but more than one million prostitutes. It is known as the rice bowl of Asia, yet 60% of its children now suffer from malnutrition. Most of its farmers have left home for the Bangkok slums or to work in the Arab World with a social guarantee less than those enjoyed by the British miners in the 1930s. Similar cases are found in Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Do our Asian

Lectures & Articles

229

intellectuals regard this phenomena as a war within our country while they •themselves lead luxurious lifestyles not unlike those of the elite leaders in the West, allowing the multinational corporations, as well as the great economic powers like Japan and the U.S.A, to exploit their national resources, as well as our common people with consumer goods through advertising in our mass media? A lot of political leaders mean well for their country. Their rhetoric is for the welfare of the people, but at the same time they want to maintain the status quo. As Tolstoy once said “ 1 shall give you all the things you want, except that I won’t get off your back.” Quite a few political leaders are honest and some think that they are intellectuals as well as technocrats. At least, they are rationalists and are often optimistic that they can cure the social ills if they are in power. They even compromise by serving totalitarian regimes. The discovery of truth satisfies their self-esteem. They believe that it will light the way to a wiser, happier future, and this fires them with the ardour and eloquence so that they are popularly supported. They too have a vision: the vision of the present forging the shape of the future. Yet, in reality their vision is tragic. For if they are honest, they know that their hopes will be dashed. The crassness of human stupidity, the evils corrupting society, the dreary aimless course of peoples and governments exasperate and frustrate them and whisper that tyranny, misery and calamity are the eternal lot of man. Thus, unable to remold the scheme of things nearer to their hearts' desire, they work on, now in this vineyard or in that, trying to bring order into one small corner of the chaos to which they inescapably belong. The belief that order can be created, and the realisation that their own efforts will change little in the world are the two central facts in their experiences that dignity enables them. Thus, British socialist intellectuals — ranging from Beatrice Webb, Harold Larki, Stafford Cripps to Maynard Keynes— did their best to make the Labour Party. Victorious after the Second World War. Yet, it did not necessarily mean the beginningof fundamental change in British society. That victory, through the democratic process, reflected merely a drift towards socialism, not accompanied by any strong revolutionary yearning or any sudden break-up of the class system. The majority of people who voted for the Labour Party were not really for real change, but wanted only the adoption of a certain specific improvement. In the popular regard, the Labou r Party was the party that stood for shorter working hours, a free health service, day nurseries, free milk for school children, and the like, rather than the party that stood for equality and fraternity in the real sense of the word. It is true that the Labour Party helped in giving independence to India. The Indian masses, however, have not been able to improve as their counterparts in Britain.

230

UTien

Loyalty Demands

Dissent

If the intellectual really cared about the destitute people whose suffering he shared— there should not be any national boundaries to divide humankind. By joining the government, the intellectual has to compromise so much his best chance is to remain independent and hope he is able to do a little for social justice — and not eliminate the cause of suffering all together. For the intellectuals who really care for humankind, it is a question of sticking to essentials, and the essential point is that all people with small insecure income or the landless labourers are in the same boat and ought to be fighting on the same side, if the intelligentsia could talk a little less about “capitalist” and “proelitariat” and a little more about the “robbers” and the “robbed”, socialism could then offer a way for the robbed to protect themselves from’the robbers, but it can work only if its base support is broad. The people who have got to act together are all those who cringe to the boss and all those who shudder when they think of those who suffer, as well as those who oppose the gigantic dams that will destroy their environment for the benefit of the electricity board and the super rich who care more for golf courses than rice fields and forests. This means that the common person has got to ally himself with the factory-hand, the typist with the coal-miner, the schoolmaster with the farmers. There is some hope of getting them to do so if they can be made to understand where their interest lies. Unfortunately, in many countries, the school master wants to become a member of parliament by lying with political propaganda or betraying the farmer once they are in the corridor of powers. They are even willing to kowtow to the military which controls “democracy ” behind the scenes. The problem is that the practical men have led us to the edge of the abyss, and the intellectuals in whom acceptance of power politics has killed first the moral sense, and then the sense of reality, are urging us to march rapidly forward in the name of development without changing direction — hence the catastrophy of modern development, where the rich get richer and the poor become poorer, while nobody is happy, and with the great expense of environmental degradation. In the minds of active revolutionaries, at any rate, the intelligensia who “got there”, he longing for a just society has always been fatally mixed up with the intention to secure power for themselves. One has seen so many revolutions in the U.S.S.R., China, Vietnam, Burma and Cambodia which claim to be on the left. Everyone of them was a violent conspiratorial revolution led by unconsciously power-hungry people. Likewise, the coup d'etat of the Thai, Indonesian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi varieties is essentially the same, i.e. it can only lead to a change of masters. Indeed, during Home Rule when Parnell was

Lectures & Articles

231

hailed by a laborer who built roads and shouted “Independent Ireland”. The great politician replied to him that “Yes, Ireland shall become independent, but you will remain building roads as you are doing now.” The revolution may effect a radical improvement when the masses are alert and know how to check their leaders as soon as the latter have done their jobs. In Animal Farm, Orwell wrote, “The turning point of the stoi wassupposed to be when the pigs kept the milk and apples for themselves. If the other animals had had the sense to put their foot down; then it would have been all right. If people think 1 am defending the status quo, that is, I think, because they have grown pessimistic and assume that there is no alternative except dictatorship or laissez-faire capitalism...what 1 was trying to say was ‘“you can't have a revolution unless you make it yourself, there is no such a thing as a benevolent dictatorship.’ ” In 1984, he went further that under Big Brother's rule, it is certainly true that public opinion has no power, but that is because the common people have not awakened to the fact that they have always had the power to make their voice heard. Without this power, dictatorship can win the day very easily, whether in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia or Siam, most of which claim to be or prefer to be democratic. Fascism, after all, is only a development of capitalism, and the mildest democracy, so called, is liable to turn into fascism when a hitch comes. Intellectuals who join any government can pass many laws for the benefit of the people — to have the law on the side of the people is better than the law that oppresses the people — even so the good law is no protection. If large number of people are interested in freedom of speech, there will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it. If, however, public opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be prosecuted, even if laws exist to protect them. Hence, those minorities who dare to speak out, to denounce the regime, will have to suffer. To avoid suffering means compromise, which may end up in the worship of power. Indeed, the worship of power for its own sake is not limited to any particular group of people. Its appeal is widespread, and once a leader begins to exploit it effectively, it can grow by great leaps until it encounters another force which can meet its power with equal power. Intellectuals who serve dictatorial regimes anywhere have the tendency to become functionaries or technocrats who go along with whatever regime they claim they can influence — hence the Berkeley mafia in Indonesia and the Cambridge mafia in Siam, because power worship blurs political judgement. It leads almost unavoidably to the belief that present trendswill continue. Whoever is winning at the moment will always be invincible. Yet, if one looks at a long range view, one can see clearly that the great power that is feared one year is often destroyed

232

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

by its own overreaching ambition within a few years and inevitably loses its aura of invincibility, if not its actual force. When Correll i Barrett wrote The Collapse of British Power in 1 972, he had this to say: ‘ ‘The power of a nation-state consists not only in its armed forces, but also in its economic and technological resources; in the dexterity, foresight and resolution with which its foreign policy is conducted; in the efficiency of its social and political organization. It consists most of all in the nation itself; the people; their skills, their energy, ambition, discipline and initiative; their beliefs, myths, and illusions. And it consists further, in the way that all these factors are related to one another. Moreover, the national power has to be considered not only in itself or in its absolute extent, but relative to the state's foreign or imperial obligation — it has to be considered relative to the power of other states.” If the intellectuals want to have any role in culture, development and democracy they should keep the above quotation in mind. Their role is not to bow down to the dictatorial regime of the left or the right. They should have a long range view and firmly believe in the common man — not in the superman or Big Brother. As early as the 1930s Orwell said ‘‘The Russian regime will democratize itself or it will perish ... one way or another the regime will die because ... the common man will triumph in the e n d . ” The key thing is to bring the restraining force of public opinion into play. As long as it has a chance to make itself heard, the State will have to curtail its appetite for power. Even the multinational corporation, with its power to brainwash people through advertising and the mass media which addicts people to consumerism, will have to be confronted with the fact that the development of a luxurious lifestyle is harmful to everyone and is wasteful as well as exploitative to the environment. The whole society fails when the people of that society allow the state, the mass media and the multinational corporation to strip them systematically of their rights to be an individual human being — taking away their rich language and indigenous culture, and replacing it with an ugly, utilitarian one — with fast food, Cola, jeans and plastic and foam — and denying them the ordinary pleasure of a private life — beyond the decadence of television programmes. If people are willing to fight for such things, and are willing to see that freedom to enjoy them means more than any “ ism ” or any leader, then there will be hope for the future. The role of the intellectuals is not that of the prophets of doom. Though they may criticize the regime in power, the direction of any development which gears for technical and material advancement at the expense of social justice and ecological balance and the prevailing

Lectures & Articles

233

consumer culture, they must have hope for the future and completely trust ordinary men and women. In a peaceful age those of us who write might have written ornate or mere descriptive books, and might have remained almost unaware of our political loyalties. But in the circumstancess of our time, while the “robbers” and the “robbed” face each other mercilessly everywhere, it is necessary for us to choose between the life devoted to those “ornate” books or one devoted to political literature. Ifthe intellectual cares about the destitute people whose suffering he shares, and he wants to help them, then he must be aware of his limitation, i.e. he cannot ignore the fact that he is not one of them. H e has talent, education, family and friends willing to help him, whereas they have none. The best that he can do for those who are less fortunate is to speak out for them, to articulate their aspiration, to remind the rest of the world that they exist, that they are human beings who deserve better and that their pain is real. They should not be robbed. And he should also remind those in power — the church, state, military and civilian, as well as the commercial sectors — that we, himself included, are often times “robbers”, who should re-examine our lifestyle thoroughly and develop our critical self awareness to be less greedy, less hateful and less deluded. The intellectuals must not play God, i.e. he is not able to shape the culture or development of his society or his age — he can, however, propose alternative models to the prevailing ones. Since he is not in power he can only criticize and be persuasive. His moral courage must be strong. H e needs not be apolitical as Blake was, but there is more understanding of the nature of the capitalist society in a poem like “ 1 wander through each charted street” than in three quarters of Socialist literature. Good novels are not written by orthodox writers, nor by people who are conscience stricken by their own orthodoxy. Good novels are written by people who are not frightened. As Aung San Suu Kyi said, “People are usually afraid, but I have no fear.” Hence, this little woman, locked u p for over two years in Burma, is a real intellectual with strong moral courage. Those with strong moral courage can really make moral criticism, which may prove more revolutionary than some politics or economic criticism which is fashionable at any given moment. Whatever he or she stands for, the foremost should be cultural freedom, i.e. any man or woman must have the I iberty to lead h is or her own life, and have the right to decide his or her own destiny — with dignity. There must be a place in the modern world for things which have no power associated with them, things which are not meant to advance someone's cause, nor to make someone's future, nor to assert someone's will over someone else. There must be room for beauty, for goodness, for

When Loyalty Demands

234

Dissent

spiritual development as well as for trees, animals, paper weights, and fishing rods. The intellectual's role is to help the society to achieve this, i.e. he must be articulate and have enough moral courage to speak out. If liberty means anythingat all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. By so saying, the intellectual may face grave consequences, he must pay for it, and the society may not improve while he is alive. But he will not be a failure, if the light of truth prevails even in the dark corners of the globe where he lives. With such a light, the people's power will certainly dawn and it will be democratic in essence, not in form. The Chinese people, the Tibetan people, the Burmese people, etc. will certainly have a democratic future, while those who control them will sooner or later be doomed and disappear. With this democratic essence, the people will develop their culture and society to be non-exploitative and peacefully co-existent. This certainly is not wishful thinking or a dream, but it will be a reality — otherwise human-beings will not be able to maintain this global village meaningfully into the next century. What the intellectual wants to envisage is that in future we must be able to choose our political leaders from an unworldly type without being saintly, unambitious without being inactive, warm-hearted without being sentimental. Through good report and ill, such men and women work on following the light of truth as they see it, able to be skeptical without being paralysed, content to know what is knowable and to reserve judgement on what is not. The world must be driven by such men and women, if we want our culture, development and democracy to be meaningful. It is they who are the beacon in the tempest, and they are more, not less, needed than ever before. Yet, even with these men and women in power, there must always be a freedom of speech and system to counterbalance them for the posterity of humankind.

First draft for United Nations University by S. Sivaraksa the conference to take place in Yogyakarta, Indonesia December

19-20,

1991, but

he could

not

attend.

for on

ENGAGED BUDDHISM FROM A THERAVADA PERSPECTIVE Buddhism in Traditional Siam Thai Buddhism, together with the Buddhism of most of Southeast Asia, belongs to the Theravada school. The defining characteristic for this school is that its teachings are in Pali rather than Sanskrit, Chinese, or Tibetan. In regard to its basic teaching, however, Theravada is very similar to Mahayana Buddhism. The most essential teachings of all schools of Buddhism are the Four Noble Truths: Suffering, the cause of suffering, the elimination of suffering, and the Eight-fold Path of right understanding, right mindfulness, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right attention, and right concentration. The Four Noble Truths are linked to one another by inter-dependent arising (ya\\:paticcasammuppada). Interdependent arising is, in fact, according to Buddhism, how everything is linked together - this exists because that exists, this is because that is. The heart of Buddhism, then, is the elimination of suffering. Its essence is not to exploit ourselves or others. Most people, however, do not strive to eliminate suffering. Their aim in life is to exist as meaningfully as possible while, perhaps, exploiting others as little as possible. Even so, we exploit ourselves, our spouses, or our children, knowingly or unknowingly, from time to time, and they also exploit us. To help us reduce this exploitation we need external help - from friends, neighbors, or the unseen world. In Theravada Buddhism, we not only pay homage to the Buddha for helping us, we also call on the spirits. We Thais call them p’i, the Burmese call them nat. They are local spirits who existed in the land before the entry of Buddhism. After Buddhism arrived, some of these indigenous spirits converted to Buddhism, while some did not. We say that the good p'i believe in the Buddha, and the bad p'i do not, and, just as with humans, we have to be compassionate and try to help the p'i. Subsequently, we imported many Hindu deities, and they too were converted to Buddhism. We have many festivals in honor of Shiva and Vishnu, such as the swinging festival of Krishna, when a large image of baby Krishna is placed on a swing. Such events may be of minor importance to scholars and serious practitioners, but for the majority of Buddhists in Siam, Burma, and other Southeast Asian countries, they are a vital part of their faith. Until 1855, when Siam was open to the West, the country was divided roughly into two categories - ban, the homes and villages, and muang, the towns and cities. Buddhism had the strongest influence at the ban level. In South and Southeast Asia, Buddhism developed to serve simple societies.

236

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

At the ban level, almost every village would have a wat, a temple or an open monastery, where the Sangha - the community of monks - had their own more or less ideal society. The temples were divided into two categories: theArannavasi, or forest temples, and the Gamavasi, or village temples. In the Arannavasi, monks practiced meditation with the aim of liberating themselves. T h e fruit of their practice was selflessness, the knowledge of reality, wisdom and compassion. The village monks operated the Gamavasi. They did not spend as much time meditating as the forest monks, but they tried not to be as hurried as the rest of the villagers, or as involved with power, or as deluded. Until 1855, the temple was the center of learning and culture in most villages. Some functioned as hospitals, art museums, and so on. The monks would teach literature, folklore, astrology, and arts and crafts to the villagers. At the same time, they set the moral standard for society, i.e., not to exploit ourselves or others. Every living being was safe within the temple compound. It was forbidden to shoot birds, or to fish. But, if you did engage in fishing, you were, at the least, forbidden to do so on the quarter moon, the full moon, and the day before each of these. The simple, sane lifestyle of the Sangha in the temple set the standards for the villages. Even until thirty years ago, if you went anywhere in Siam, you could hardly see a difference between rich and poor. Of course there were rich and poor people, but their lifestyles were very similar. The rich may have had larger houses, but the houses were still simple, as they were mainly used for sleeping. Almost all social activities were at the temple. Even if an activity had to be at home, the temple would provide whatever we needed. If the village became rich, the temple became rich. If the village had artists, the temple would have good paintings and sculptures. Buddhism set the tone. If there were any problems with the spirits and the p'i around there, the monks would help the villagers deal with the unseen world, as they would also help with difficulties in the visible w o r l d - if there were quarrels among the villagers, the monks would serve as mediators. That was the usual pattern. The lifestyle of the monks had a great deal of influence on the people, especially when the monks would stay together for the threemonth retreat during the rainy season. During the remainder of the year, the monks wandered around, so when they came together like this, it was an opportunity for us to offer them food, to learn from them, and to practice the five grave precepts, i.e., not to ki 11, not to steal, not to commit adultery, not to lie, not to take intoxicants. We also made an attempt to observe the supplementary precepts of the novice monk (samanera), refraining from sex altogether, from eating after mid-day, from using perfume or anything that would lead to a sensual life, and from sleeping on a luxurious bed. That was the nearest we laypeople could come to the life of a monk. For us, the

Lectures & Articles

237

three-month retreat was very important. The muang level was arranged as a triangle consisting of the king, the Sangha, and the people. The Sangha helped individuals, and also helped deliver the authority of the king. Sometimes the Sangha would become corrupt, because they had to deal with the feudal hierarchy, but usually the monks at the top level behaved excellently. They practiced meditation, were well-educated, and would teach the king, princes, and nobility. The monks, then, had a very strong influence, not by directly administering the country, but by influencing the rulers. They tried to influence them not to be too wicked, but they were only partially successful in this regard. The Sangha also served as a bridge or a buffer between the king and the people. In the Buddhist tradition, running a country is likened to driving a chariot. You depend on two wheels: the wheel of power, anacakka, and the wheel of the Dhamma, dhammacakka. Most Southeast Asian kings, including the Thai king, depended more on the [Hindu] brahmins than on the [Buddhist] Sangha. Traditional Hindu law (Dharmasastra) emphasizes the use of power, and the role of Buddhism at the muang level was to mitigate this power. If the ruler became too strong, the monks could exert the pacifying in fluence of the dhammacakka. Most Thai Buddhists at the village level would not enjoy being in the court - t h e y did not want to be near the center of power. They preferred to live in the villages, where there are canals, rivers, trees, and the rest of nature. Buddhism requires that you live in harmony with nature. Ecological issues, therefore, are very important for Buddhists. You must live in a way that does not exploit yourself or others, including animals, vegetables, minerals, rivers, and trees. This kind of understanding was supported by indigenous Thai beliefs that preceded the coming of Buddhism. In Thai, the word “river” translates literally as “mother water”, the word “land” is “mother earth”, the word “rice” is “mother rice”, and so on. In the old days before Buddhism, we paid respect to “mother water” every year at the Loi Kra Tong Festival, asking for her forgiveness that we polluted her water. When Buddhism came, it accepted this ritual, but added that we should also pay respect to the footprint of the Buddha which, it is said, he left in the Namadi River. In the recent past, from about one hundred and fifty years ago until about thirty-five years ago, the king did not have much power, and therefore was quite popular. Most of the power was in the hands of the cabinet. Eventually, one family, the Bunnag family, gained control of the king. The Effects of Westernization I have painted a rosy picture of life in Siam before 1855, but there were of course unpleasant things. For instance, the order of nuns was

238

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

discontinued over a thousand years ago, before Buddhism arrived in Siam, and we only have monks, even though the Buddha regarded men and women as equal and accepted both almsmen and almswomen. There was also exploitation, but it was relatively minor, because the king didn't have the requisite power or technology. Most of the bans were autonomous, and even each city was fairly autonomous. Most kings tried also to be a Dhammaraja, a king who ruled by righteousness or the Dhamma. In the Ayudhya period the concept of the God-king was badly abused, but even then the wickedness was limited to the court and did not extend to the general population. Even in Westernization, Siam differed from other countries. The Burmese said, “ W e will not let the British come.” The Vietnamese said, “We will not let the French come.” This was because they knew that the alien Western civilizations would destroy their own culture. But, as a result of their resistance, they became colonies or protectorates against their will. But the Siamese said, “Let them come. We may have to lose something in order to preserve what is essential to us.” so King Mongkut said, “Let's open the door to the British.” But he was very clever. He also opened the door to the French, the Danes, the Swedes, the Belgians, and others. Therefore, no single country was able to subjugate us. But the West didn't treat us with equality. Westerners in Siam went to their own courts in our territories, not to our Siamese courts. We were allowed to impose only a three percent import duty. 1 think that the biggest mistake we made was trying to prove to the West that we were as good as they were. King Chulalongkorn, who succeeded King Mongkut, sent all his sons to be educated in Europe, and a lot of people followed the king's example, including my own father, so that it came about that 1 was educated in the West. We had the idea that the way to get the West to recognize us as equals was to imitate them. If we could learn from the West, we thought, we would be able to administer our affairs, but until then, we had to ask the European countries to help us, although the king had the final say. Our police force was run by the Danes, the ban courts were influenced by the French, the British served as advisors to our treasury, and the Belgians helped us conduct our foreign affairs — we felt it was better to have a smaller nation to advise us on foreign affairs! America did not come into the picture until much later. The main result of all this was centralization. Because of the colonial system, we had to be like Burma, India, Sri Lanka, and so forth. Centralization meant that the muang had to be subjugated, and that all autonomous power had to be neutralized. Education determined what everyone in Bangkok should read, and the administration used its power to make Bangkok supreme. To me, that was their biggest mistake. By

Lectures & Articles

239

telling educated people to admire Bangkok, we began to look down o n our own villages as inferior. Because of this, Bangkok is today one of the worst cities in the world. Another practice, that seemed to make good sense at first, was sending many people abroad. We learned to dress like Westerners, to have motor cars, refrigerators, air conditioning, and all the technological trappings of Western culture. But we didn't understand the spirit of the West. We sent students to Europe for over a hundred years, but no one studied Latin, Greek, o r the Greco-Roman classics, even though these are the roots of Western culture. Also, no one studied Christianity with a critical eye. Quite a few were converted and followed Christianity blindly, but no one studied it properly to discover how wonderful the original teaching of Christ really is. Christianity became a vehicle for Westernization, and it became very dangerous. Not only did we fail to understand the West accurately, we also lost touch with the depths of our own culture, in word and in deed. As we became educated using the modem system, we lost the essential teaching of the Buddha. We no longer understood the Four Noble Truths, or interdependent co-arising. Buddhism became a kind of national religion, and sometimes a chauvinistic one - to be Siamese meant to be Buddhist. We also looked down on our neighbors who had been colonized while we had not. The Burmese were under British administration, and the Vietnamese had a French Governor General. Indonesia was not even a country - Java and Sumatra were divided, and run by the Dutch. So, we in Siam developed a superiority complex and, at the same time, we admired the West blindly. Most Thais don't realize what has happened. The so-called ‘ ‘ American Period ” of the last thirty years has been part icu larly damaging. During World War II, we were “occupied ” by the Japanese but, luckily, we also had the Free Thai movement, which cooperated with the Allies, so we were recognized in the post-war world and were admitted to the United Nations even before Sweden. Duing the Vietnam War, we allowed the Americans to be in ourcountry while they were bombing Hanoi. In effect, they occupied us. We claimed we were not occupied by the Americans, but I think we lost our soul. We admired the West so much, because we wanted to be rich and powerful. We were deluded; we no longer knew ourselves. For example, Siam is supposed to be the “rice-bowl of A s i a ” , yet sixty percent of our children are now malnourished. In our Buddhist kingdom, where we have three hundred thousand monks, we have more than one million prostitutes, amongst whom AIDS is epidemic. In Buddhism the balance of nature is very basic and the forest is very important, particularly for the Arannavasi monks, yet, whereas in the past

240

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

more than seventy-five percent of our land was rainforest, now it is only ten percent. The cause of suffering is always greed, hatred, and delusion. Greed is now controlling my country. The rich do not care how they became rich, the powerful do not care how they became powerful, or how, having become powerful, they use their power. We do not respect our neighbors, and we blindly follow the West, including Japan. This is the dilemma of Thai Buddhism today. For most of the Thai people, greed has become the standard value. Farmers even sell their own daughters to be prostitutes and their sons to become child laborers.

The Contribution of Thai Buddhism to the Modern World In my opinion, Thai Buddhism does have somthing to offer. How can we eliminate suffering? In Buddhism, first of all, we are encouraged to practice dana, generosity, cutting away a bit of our selfishness. This does not just mean giving what we don't need. We should also give what is most dear to us, not only money, but also time and thought. To do that, one must practice sila, the moral code. In the old agrarian society, the moral code was simple: “ D o not kill.” But these days, we have to apply the moral code in a new way. Isn't the very existence of militarism against the first precept - not to kill? Isn't dictatorship against the second precept - not to steal? What about the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank? What about sexual exploitation - the third precept? Isn't most advertising against the fourth precept - right speech? We must interpret the precepts in a modern way. We practice generosity because it helps our meditation, samadhi. We must question everything, including our every motive. Did we do it because of our own ego, because we want to look big? Or did we do it because it was the right thing to do? To be a Buddhist, we have to practice mindfulness, not just for our own happiness, but to share the suffering of others. That is how not to exploit ourselves and not to exploit others; how to be of service to others and also to ourselves. Mindfulness, when developed properly, will lead to wisdom, panna. We know our potential, how much wecan do, which ways we can and cannot change. We can to everything in a nonviolent way. This is the three-fold training - sila (precepts), samadhi (concentration), and panna (wisdom) put into a modern context. We This have to look at our own society. With mindfulness personal as well as social - we see that we have been resourceful in not being colonized. But if we are egocentric, feeling superior to others, that is a problem. Siam is the only Buddhist kingdom left in the world. It has its strengths and weaknesses. On strength is its Buddhism, which has been there all along. One weakness is a very corrupt regime. How can we

Lectures

& Articles

241

separate the Sangha from the present regime? The Sangha has to be developed to include monks, nuns, laymen, and lay women, as it says in the canon. Many Thai monks come from the poorest families and some, because they have no chance of a secular education, join the monkhood merely in order to rise in the social scale. At the same time, there are many others who are proud of their culture, which is being destroyed very quickly, who realize that they are custodians of something that goes directly back to the Buddha, and who have not become corrupt. Particularly now, many monks want to preserve the forest, because their lives are there. But, too many still believe in the old muang triangle of the Sangha, the king, and the people- and the king is represented by a government that steals from the people. Roads, dams, electricity, and tourism only benefit the very few w h o are wealthy enough to use them, and television only lures us into the consumer culture. The monks at the bottom of society are finally beginning to realize all of this. If we identify with them, we will help reserve the forests and restore the indigenous culture. We cannot return to the good old days, but we can adapt the beneficial elements in their way of life to the modern situation. In every town now, we have at least four or five socially engaged monks who are trying to adapt the old ceremonies to the modern way of living. How can they learn to practice reforestation, avoid plastic bags and styrofoam, keep their ceremonies from becoming commercial, and still remain meaningful and relevant to people's needs? These are very important concerns. We are very lucky to have leading monks 1ike Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, who, at eighty-five, is ashining light. Sixty years ago, he started Wat Suan Mokkhabalarama (The Garden for Empowering Liberation), and he has become a very powerful voice. Although many people will not listen to him, some monks and laypeople do get his message. In 1992 he will form a new order: Dhammamata, the “Mothers of D h a m m a ” . If women are recognized with this sanctity, with this deep cultural commitment, we can even confront prostitution. Shining lights like Buddhadasa have a tremendous effect on our young people. Many of them have now turned to Buddhism for the best reasons. Although, as 1 have mentioned, most monks come from the poorest of the poor, we now also have educated young people joining the monkhood, and these people always practice meditation. They try to cleanse themselves, to be mindful, and, at the same time, to see the social issues- the need for social justice. These monks are now working with the people and with the other monks. In Sri Lanka, many monks do wonderful social work, but very few of them practice meditation, and now, in times of turmoil, they have become violent. The same is true in Burma. It is very important that we

242

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

link Thai monks with Burmese, Khmer, and Laotian monks, so that we can practice meditation together, for our own security and selflessness, and to help other people. Last year in Siam we hosted a six-week training for Sri Lankan monks on reconciliation. We treated the Sinhalese Buddhists and the Hindu Tamils as equals, as brothers and sisters. Then we had a ten-day training for the Khmer monks - ten from Phnom Penh, twelve from refugee camps, and eight from the border, and we taught them how to trust one another. We are also working with Burmese monks, laypeople, and non-Buddhists. We have a lot to learn from all of these people, whom we have looked down upon for the last hundred years. The cause of suffering is always the same - greed, hatred, and delusion. But we mustn’t leave it in conceptual terms. What is greed? Consumerism. How does consumerism arise? - Advertisements and so on. How can we use contentedness to confront consumerism? The same goes for power, militarism, and dictatorship; how do we confront these things? We have to confront them. We have to denounce them. We have to alert the people. When, on August 22, 1991, I made a speech against the Thai dictatorship, there were only two hundred people listening, and, frankly, most of them were sleeping. But now my talk has been quoted all over Siam, as well as in Germany, England, Japan, and the U.S. Why? Because I discussed the cause of suffering in a concrete way, as greed, hatred and delusion, and we all understand the importance of speaking the truth. Hatred is power; it is dictatorship; it is militarism. We must transform it into democracy. Democracy is not only Western. Democracy is at the heart of Buddhism. The Sangha is democracy. The Sangha is fraternity. The Sangha is equality. The Sangha is there for liberation, for freedom from fear and freedom from selfishness. How do we bring the Sangha back? In our Siamese culture, the villages, the ban, were democratic. The heads of villages were elected. How can we bring this back? Especially now, just past the sixtieth anniversary of Siamese democracy, we want to make democracy real. It means we have to challenge those who are runing the country illegitimately. Now the Sangha is alert as never before, because, for the first time, a monk has been put in jail while still a monk. In the old days, a monk had to be disrobed before being jailed, but the present junta has no respect for the monks. The monk was jailed because he tried to protect the forest from the military leaders who want to destroy it. Thai monks are now working with Khmer and Burmese monks, and they are beginning to assert power. To me, this is wonderful. How can we prevent the politicians from wreaking such havoc? We have to use the Buddhist way. If the leaders lie, we must tell the truth. If they act out of greed, we must act out of generosity.

Lectures & Articles

243

As Thai Buddhists, we must work very closely with the Burmese. I proposed this exercise to the Burmese: Stop quarreling amongst yourselves; Be positive; Get the facts right on the abuse of human rights, the abuse of the environment, and the drug trade in Burma. But, we must also work closely not only with our immediate neighbors such as the Burmese, but with all our neighbors, including the Nepalese, who have also been oppressed by their Hindu brothers, and the people in Ladakh, where there is a lot of oppression by the Muslims, and the Buddhists in Bangladesh who have been treated very badly by the government. When weconfront the Muslims and the Hindus, however, we must do so nonviolently. The worst situation is that of the Tibetans, who have been oppressed by the Chinese for forty years. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is a very good example of Buddhist nonviolence. For four decades now he has been confronting the Chinese with hope, truth, and compassion. In Oslo, recently, His Holiness gave a lecture on religion and democracy. He claimed that religion at its best, particularly Buddhism, is democratic. If you are not careful, he said, even the guru, the meditation master, can become a dictator, and so, regardless of his good intentions, you must always challenge him. He also pointed out that religious institutions sometimes become dictatorial. Even in Tibet, in the old days, with all the best people and with so many good intentions, there was a tendency to become autocratic. His Holiness knows that, so he is now setting up a democratic government, precisely because the Tibetans have endured so much suffering. Thich Nhat Hanh tried to change the situation during the Vietnam War, but unfortunately it was too late. So now he has been helping the Vietnamese in exile everywhere. They come with tremendous physical and psychological pain; many of the women have been raped by pirates, many have been treated very badly in Thai refugee camps, many have been treated badly by their own people in the re-education camps. Now, many Vietnamese and others are benefitting greatly from Thich Nhat Hanh's retreats. We need that. It is what a Buddhist would do, healing in a nonviolent way. Even Vietnam, with all its shortcomings, will hopefully one day allow Thich Nhat Hanh to go back. We see the same thing in Mongolia. The people there suffered throughout the time of Soviet rule. Now Buddhism is asserting itself in Mongolia, and I'm sure it will do so in a democratic way. There are wonderful things happening all around the world, beginning with the dismantling of the Soviet Union. Although 1 do not think that the Chinese empire will completely fall apart, I do think that the ruling group will

244

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

destroy themselves. The same is true in Burma, and for the Thai junta, although perhaps not as soon as I would like! I have to practice patience, and also mindfulness and compassion towards them. If they are to be overcome, they must be overcome nonviolently. We Thai Buddhists are very hopeful, but at the same time we must always remember to practice mindfulness, to be critical of ourselves, our motives, our culture, and even our Buddhist tradition. By being critical we will learn how much we can do. We cannot do it alone. We need good friends. We must work with others - young people and old people, Buddhists and non-Buddhists, in our own country and in other countries. This is essential. The Buddha said that the most important thing for each of us is our critical self-awareness; to develop insight and awareness in ourselves. The second most important thing, he said, is to have good friends, so the Thai are now learning to establish good friendship with the Burmese, the Bangladeshis, the Americans, and the Japanese. It is wonderful that, in America, you have the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, which is working very closely with us. Meditation is wonderful, but we must also address the real problems of the world. In our International Network of Engaged Buddhists meeting in Bangkok in February 1992, we began to deal with issues of social justice and peace in Asia. A woman from Washington, D.C., representing the Institute of Asian Democracy, has been a big help. We need to learn from each other. 1 am sure that in the next decade, and the next century, Asia will become more democratic, more Buddhist, and more spiritual. Buddhism will reassert itself to make people more humble and more authentic. Real democracy means consulting with each other and progressing together, respecting human rights, the rights of animals, and the right of the environment. Working towards peace and social justice, so as not to exploit ourselves or others, is, to me, the essence of Buddhism. We can revive this essential element of Buddhism by working together. I would like to end my talk on this hopeful note: Even dictators will eventually have to work with us. We all must become more humble.

This essay was first given as a talk, entitled ' 'Not to Exploit Ourselves or Others: The Essence of Buddhism'', at the University of Hawaii at Manoa on January 9 , 1992. It was transcribed by the staff of Parallax Press, Berkeley, California, and then edited for Studies in Formative Spirituality a special issue : A Buddhist-Christian Dialogue, Journal

of Spiritual

Formation

Vol

XIV

No.l

Feb

1993.

BUDDHIST ETHICS AND MODERN SOCIETY A THERAVADA VIEWPOINT I. Buddhist Perceptions of an Ideal Society In 1985 the United Nations University held a meeting in Bangkok for its sub-project on “Buddhist Perceptions of Desirable Societies,” attended by several leading scholars and practitioners. The aim was to examine how religious thinkers and activists perceived the human predicament of our times. The meeting operated within a tripartite framework : 1) a diagnosis of current problems, 2) an examination of specific Buddhist responses to these problems, and 3) a projection of how it might be possible to progress beyond the contemporary situation to a more ideal society, grounded in Buddhist principles. Two kinds of study are needed to deal with religions : faith, principles, and ideas on the one hand, and historical experience and social expression on the other. Apathy, confusion, and selfishness were identified as the roots of human hopelessness, although these were not explicitly related to religion. Recall the slogans of the French Revolution— liberty, equality and fraternity. Why did the Buddha not preach these instead of the Four Noble Truths : the fact of dukkha, its causes, the means to end it, and the Eightfold Path? The three slogans are idealistic, while the Buddha taught people to come to terms with the reality of human existence, the essential problems of pain, loss, suffering, sickness, and death. The Buddhist approach was deemed by those meeting in Bangkok to have much to offer contemporary society. Attention was drawn to Sri Lanka, which claims to be a righteous Buddhist state, but nonetheless has witnessed a massive outbreakof ethnic violence. Why have Buddhist teachings of compassion and non-violence failed to be observed there? Why has Buddhism not brought liberation to the people of Sri Lanka? The Sinhalese Buddhists have adopted a nationalistic ideology based on a racial concept, although the Buddha explicitly rejected the division of humanity into distinct races. Traditional terms of reference and categories of thought in Buddhism have not been translated into modern language and ways of thinking. The Buddha himself was a strong critic of the exploitation practiced by Brahmin society in his time, but this aspect to his thinking has not been enshrined in those parts of the Canon endlessly repeated and taught. Both the clergy and the laity have failed to bring out the social implications of this aspect of Buddhist teaching. It was pointed out that an obstacle to the implementation of religious principles is the mixing of culture and religion. Usually religion has a major influence on culture, but when culture influences religion or is equated with religion the result is often sectarianism. In some cases it

246

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

becomes chauvinism and irredentism— leading to violence and slaughter in the name of religion. Religious literalism and idolatry also are the products of cultural influences. Religion itself has no permanent form. Although its basic principles do not change, its practice does. In teaching Buddhism in the West, for example, a Tibetan should not attempt to establish Tibetan Buddhism as it exists in Tibet, but nonetheless still may teach Buddhism. This does not mean that one's culture should be rejected, rather it should be carefully separated from religion. The Thai or Japanese should honor their own culturesand not expect others interested in Buddhism to adopt their culture along with it. Western science and technology are not necessarily detrimental to religion, but religion must prove itself to influence them. Buddhism teaches that there are two kinds of truth, the relative and the transcendent. Science and technology are concerned with material matters, and thus are limited, involving truth as related to what is accessible to our sense. In reality, however, nothing is permanent; material things have no absolute existence. Western science has progressed enormously in its understanding of the material world, but has made few contributions beyond the fact that transcendent truth belongs to religion The Buddha never taught people to throw away or reject material things. Rather he taught that human beings must not form attachments to such things. After all, objects do not form attachments to human beings! What we must renounce is the desire to possess or cling to things— not the things themselves. If we succeeded in doing that, that is liberation! For clinging to things brings enslavement while being free from attachments to material things bring liberation. II.The Sangha as an Ideal for Human Society The Buddhist approach to peace does not suggest that if only everyone were to profess Buddhist creeds or meditate using Buddhist methods the world would be a better place. One of the fundamental teachings of Buddhist psychology, as well as cultural, socio-economic, and military structures, is Karma, inclusive of individual and social implications. Simply modifying one's link in the wheel of Samsara will not put an end to the process of violence and warfare. Buddhism aims to set up a wheel of Dhamma to address every aspect of the process holistically. We need to adopt not merely a counter-psychology, but a counter-culture, a counter-economy, and a counter-policy. The prototype for this wide-ranging counter-civilization is the Sangha.The Sangha reverses the process of degeneration described in Buddhist creation myths. Coercion is replaced by cooperation, family and home by a community of androgynous wanderers, hierarchy by egalitarian

Lectures & Articles

247

democracy. The Sangha symbolizes the unification of means and ends in Buddhist philosophy, the movement toward resolution of conflict and liberation of society that must embody a sane and peaceful process. The discipline of the early monastic Sangha was designed to channel anticipated conflicts of interest among its members into peaceful democratic means of resolution. To spread peace and stability in their communities, the Sangha sought to establish moral hegemony over the State, to guide the communities by means of a code of non-violent ethics in the interest of social welfare. The liberation of humanity was not to come about through violent revolutions against society nor through passive withdrawal from society, but rather through a gradual and conscientious process of bringing Buddhist principles of moral persuasion to bear on oppressive structures of power. Since the death of the Buddha over twenty-five hundred years ago, the historical Sangha has been divided vertically and horizontally by cultural, economic, and political alliances. Sectors of the Sangha in many different countries became dependent on State patronage for their support. With the growth of monastic wealth and landholdings, the Sangha became integrated into existing social structure as a priestly cast of teachers, performers of ritual, and chanters of magic formulas. Its members degenerated into a land-owning elite with their own selfish interests and tremendous cultural power. With the centralization and hierarchical development of the Sangha, came increasing control by elitist elements of society and the State. Instead of expounding the ethics of non-violence to the State, a part of the Sangha increasingly was called upon to rationalize violence and injustice. In a pattern which has parallels in every religion or ethical crusade, the liberating voice of Buddhist ethics and morality was silenced by co-opting the Sangha into the structures of opposition. On the other hand, the lower depths of society consisted of the impoverished and poorly educated. Some property-less and detached clergy upheld the critical perspective of the Buddha and continued a grassroots level call for the liberation of the masses. To this day, scattered communities of Buddhists continue to assert a radical disregard, even fiery condemnation, of the official “State Buddhisms” with their elite hierarchical structures and legacies of secular accommodation and corruption. In looking to the future of humanity it is imperative that we return to the original Buddhist position. The State and its elite groups, with their natural acquisitive and combative tendencies, must remain under the hegemony of popular institutions embodying processes for non-violent, democratic conflict resolution. In traditional Buddhist terms, the ruler always should be under the control of the Sangha, not vice versa.

248

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

IILCommitting the Modern World to Righteousness According toTheravada Buddhism, a commitment to peace and the prevention of war are among the the ten duties of the ruler. Other qualities demanded of the ruler are self-sacrifice on behalf of the people, honesty, benevolence, austerity, empathy, tolerance, charitable liberality, and nonobstruction of the will of the people. Clearly Buddhism felt that the path to social peace and liberation involves holding governments accountable to high ethical standards. What does it mean to seek liberation in the world by enjoining rulers to uphold ethical standards? Although the personal ethics of the ruler are important, the Sutra of the World-Conquering King makes clear that not merely the personal behavior of the ruler is to be governed by ethics, but also the behavior of the entire populace. The downfall of ancient dynasties of ideal rulers was due not to some personal flaw in the ruler, such as drunkenness or licentiousness, but rather to the ruler's failure to prevent the rise of poverty. The most basic ethical precepts in lay Buddhism are the Panca-sila (Five Precepts): the vows to avoid killing, stealing, lying, intoxication, and sexual misconduct. When the Righteous World-Conqueror gains the fealty of the four quarters of the world, his liberation of the world is achieved through enjoining all people to uphold the Panca-sila as a fivefold code of personal and social conduct. What relevance does this have for us today! The Five Precepts entail a commitment to abstain from taking life, taking what has not been given, including sexual misconduct, false speech, and intoxicants that cloud the mind. The Venerable Buddhagosa, the great Theravadin commentator, explains that: taking. life is then the will to kill anything that one perceives as having life, to act so as to terminate the life-force in it, in so far as the will finds expression in bodily action or in speech. With regard to animals it is worse to kill large ones than small ones, because a more extensive effort is involved. Even where the effort is the same, the difference in substance must be considered. In the case of human beings, the killing is all the more blameworthy the more virtuous they are. Apart form that, the extent of the offense is proportionate to the intensity of the desire to kill. Buddhagosa goes on to list the five factors involved in killing: not only life, but the perception of life; not only the thought of murder, but also carrying it out and the resulting death. Gradations are recognized in terms of the intensity of the intention. The gravity of the consequence does not diminish the ethical force of the command. All killing is bad, but some

Lectures & Articles

249

killing is worse than others. Moreover, the norm extends to all forms of life. If we understand liberation as an impulse which seeks to enhance life in all forms, then the Buddhist ahimsa (non-killing) norm becomes a precondition for societal liberation and world peace. To generate peace and to bring about liberation requires eliminating, or at least reducing, violence. The problem is that there are several kinds of violence. The clearest is direct violence as described in the first precept, entailing the five factors listed above. There is also structural violence, violence that kills slowly and is built into a structure. Of the five factors noted, only three apply here: there is life and the perception of life, but there is no thought of murder and hence no follow-through. Death is the end result— but the result of what? Death results not in the sense of one's carrying it out, but in the sense of a desperately unjust social structure that gives much to the few and very little to the many. Is this form of violence not covered by the Five Precepts? The second precept, abstaining from taking what does not belong to one, seems relevant here. Buddhagosa explains again the five elements involved: someone else's belongings, and awareness of that fact, the thought of theft and the act of carrying it out, with theft as the outcome. However, theft is not quite the same as structural violence. Something is taken, but there is no awareness of a theft having taken place. A landowner has land, but the landless have only their ability to till the land. The landowner says, “You may till my land, but you have to give me 70 percent of the harvest” (a figure fairly typical in most Southeast Asian countries).The landowner may feel he is being generous, since the alternative is to use a tractor to till the fields. The peasant may feel grateful, for the alternative may be starvation. Yet we feel that there is something morally wrong in this arrangement. To maintain an oppressive structure of this kind something else is needed, such as keeping the peasants isolated so that they cannot organize a revolt, or giving them an ideology or religion that supports the existing structure. Is Buddhism such a religion? I would argue that it is not, but in so saying I cannot directly quote any specific Buddhist scripture, as is possible in making the claim for non-violence in Buddhism. I would have to refer to another Buddhist rule: “neither too much nor too little.” If a social structure can be shown to produce excess, as in the case of the landowner, and deficit, as in the case of the peasants, in the great chain of being is this indicative of a structural defect? Not necessarily. It also may imply a welfare State, which taxes the landowner and uses the regions to provide free health care and education for the peasants, along with subsidizing school meals. 1 do not think Buddhism seeks radical structural transformation of what might be called structural justice, but certainly it

250

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

is concerned with a minimum of distributive justice. A third type of violence, cultural violence, is any element in a culture, particularly religion or ideology, that legitimizes direct and/or structural violence. Again, Buddhism has much to contribute here. Of course, there are Buddhists past and present, and there will be some in the future, who commit direct violence and participate in structural violence. They will not, however, find much support within the Buddhist scriptures. To claim this support would be a violation of the fourth precept against false speech. Although that precept is more concerned with lying in the conventional sense than in legitimizing violence, if Buddhism is invoked in defense of violence it constitutes an act of lying. From the above arguments one can conclude that Buddhism is a very strong ethical system supportive of peace. Its precepts against violence represent a liberative impulse. But there is a weakness: strength in personal commitment is combined with the silent mechanisms of evil. The larger a structure is, such as a nation-state, or large corporation, or merging of the two, the more we become accustomed to it, and the more violent it becomes. Can a Buddhist fulfill the obligations of military service? Should Buddhists remain silent when the government continues to increase the national budget for military armaments at the expense of basic health and education? Some might argue these issues are political rather than moral. Of course, they are both. The major question is exactly how the ethical inspiration of Buddhism might enlighten politics by being courageous enough to question social structures, nor merely the individual acts of people or their governments. If Buddhists understand structural violence and its roots in dosa — and learn how to eliminate it mindfully and nonviolently— Buddhism will not only be relevant to the modem world but could be a source of its liberation. Similarly, consumerism is linked directly and indirectly to greed (lobhd) and lust (raga). One can see this clearly in advertisements and the mass media, which exploit women's bodies to seduce would-be buyers, artificially creating needs. Modern education deals almost exclusively with the heads, not the hearts, of students. The clever are recognized and rewarded materially and financially, although they need not be good or aware of social ills. Most of the rich and powerful are not happy. Directly or indirectly, their exalted positions rest on mass poverty and ecological destruction. This is indeed ignorance (moha) ordelusion (a vija). If Buddhists are to make a meaningful contribution to the liberation of the modern world from violence and oppression, they must confront the three root causes of evil— greed, hatred, and delusion or ignorance. Please note that greed, hatred and delusion are not only in the individual person but have social dimensions. Therefore these root causes of evil must be dealt with by the Buddhist moralists. The moral precepts must exist not

Lectures & Articles

251

only for moralists; all practicing Buddhists must develop right mindfulness. We must heighten our awareness of our limitations and restructure our selfish natures to become increasingly selfless. Moreover, we must build inner peace along with an understanding of social reality, or structural violence, as a prerequisite of liberation from it both individually and collectively. Full liberation is individual as well as societal.

IV. An International Network of Engaged Buddhists Some of us are attempting to meet the challenge sketched above. I hope that what we do in connecting inner peace with the outside world engagingly and mindfully will contribute to a better world. This includes social justice, non-violence, and ecological balance— the Middle Way for each individual and for society at-large, but living in harmony with each other and with Nature Groups of young people in the West who believe in these principles and try to act on them and have established chapters of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship in the United Stares, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Some of us have, attempted to meet with like-minded Buddhists to resolve global problems concretely, through issues of social justice that are near and dear to us. We feel we will be able to confront these problems with the help of good friends (Kalayanamitta) in other countries and cultures. In February of 1989 in a small city outside Bangkok some 45 Buddhists from throughout the world met to address the following problems: 1. to identify urgent social problems existing in one's own country as well as those affecting other Buddhist communities; 2. to explore ways in which participants could cooperate to act on these issues; 3. to establish a network of engaged Buddhists on a global scale. Since some Buddhists have become aware of the shortcomings of the World Fellowship of Buddhists and like organizations, they now are determined to establish an International Network of Engaged Buddhists with the following objective: 1. to promote understanding between Buddhist countries and various Buddhist sects; 2. to facilitate and engage in problems in various countries; 3. to develop the perspective of engaged Buddhists to accomplish these objectives; 4. to act as a clearing-house of information on existing engaged Buddhist (and relevant non-Buddhist) groups and activities, and help in the coordination of these efforts whenever possible.

252

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

Initially, individuals and groups will work in the following areas: 1. alternative education and spiritual training 2. peace activism 3. human rights 4. women's issues 5. ecology 6. family concerns 7. rural development 8. alternative economics 9. communication 10. monastic concerns. This list may well be expanded in the future, as new issues arise. 1 trust that this newly established network will collaborate with organizations everywhere to apply Buddhist ethics meaningfully to our modern society.

Sulak Sivaraksa Ching Feng, Hong Kong, 35/1 March

1992

BUDDHISM AND NATIONALISM IN THE WORLD TODAY I will use my country as an example. Siam (Thailand) is labeled a Buddhist country. If this is so, why were atrocities and killings committed last May? First of all you have to define the meaning of Buddhism. In Germany there are at least 20,000 Buddhists. In Germany, if you are born a Catholic or a Protestant, part of your tax money goes to those churches. If you refuse to belong to the church then you do not have to pay taxes to the church. You still pay the taxes, however, to the government. The German Buddhists want that part of taxation to go to their Buddhist organization. The German government requested a definition of their dogma. That is, a statement of the Buddhist faith. German Buddhists have been meeting for the last two years and they have not come to any conclusion thus far. There was a similar meeting in Japan two years ago. Many of the Japanese Buddhist sects and denominations participated and many came to the same conclusion that Sakyamuni Buddha is not relevant for them. I think that the two cases cited above are crucial points and warrants a definition of Buddhism. So first let me define what Buddhism is to me. I hope that my definition of Buddhism would be accepted by most Buddhists, if not all. The Buddha never used the word Buddhism. Buddhism was coined by the Europeans. The Buddha only asks or says whether you have the right view or the wrong view. Those who follow his teachings and put his teachings into practice are those who have the right view. Who are the people who have the right view? The people who have the right view, are those people who do not wish to exploit themselves nor to exploit others. I think that this is the minimum teaching in Buddhism. You do not want to exploit yourself, and you do not want to exploit others. This sounds simple, acceptable, and very good. It is, however, very difficult to put it into daily practice. The Buddha recommended - and most schools of Buddhism agree that the Five Moral Precepts, or Sila, are essential to his teachings. Those of you who go to Thai temples, Theravada temples, or the Southern school of Buddhism would take the FiveMoral Precepts. The Five Precepts are not commandments: You are not to kill. You are not to steal. You are not to commit sexual wrongdoing. You are not to lie. And you are not to take intoxicants. These are not commandments but precepts. They are recommended, however, you can take them or you can leave them. But why is it wrong to kill? It is wrong to kill because the idea of killing is bad for you. Because hatred arises. Andofcourse when you kill it is bad for others. The same for stealing - greed arises. When you take something that belongs to others, then you deprive them of it. Form sexual wrong doing, lust arises and someone suffers. And from lying, illusion

254

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

arises. Once you are attached to something, it is an illusion and not true. And of course someone is misinformed. These are the basic principles and if you do not follow them, it will be at both your own expense and at the expense of someone else. These are the basic teachings of the Buddha. But in fact, throughout our daily life- we exploit others and exploit ourselves all of the time. Both knowingly and unknowingly. In the USA, I have seen people who want to be fit. They jog so very hard - without realizing that jogging is very harmful to them. They bicycle at home and watch television. Their minds are very much polluted by television advertisements. They are not aware. They think that it is good for their bodies. When theyjog they listen to music— polluting their ears. Because not exploiting yourself means that you must develop your body and your mind to be harmonious. If you only want to develop your body so strongly, sometimes it is not very good for you because there is an imbalance between your body and you mind. At most universities in the West, there are big sports stadiums. We love the footballers. They are great-great stars. However, they exploit their bodies. The mind and body never fully develop together. In Buddhism the phrase “not to exploit yourself” means that you must develop both your mind and body to be harmonious. This is the first step. The less that you exploit yourselves, then the more that you would be aware of not exploiting others. You come to or obtain this state through Sila: sila, usually translated as precepts that comes from the Latin word meaning recommendations and advice - not commandments. Sila, in Pali and Sanskrit, means to be normal and to be natural. Not to exploit yourself, nor to exploit others is normal and natural. But how could you become natural or normal in the Buddhist context - you must be trained. First you are trained to be generous-daria. Once that you have the idea that to give is more important then to take, then you are in the process of getting the right view. Modern living stresses that to take is more important then to give. Buddhism's fundamental teaching, however, stresses that to give is more important then to take. If you have a doubt about giving and taking, then you give. When you have a doubt about whether you are exploiting youself or others, it is better to exploit yourself rather than others. The next step, is to be trained. If you are in doubt, you train your mind. That is the next step of training - Samadhi : meditation practice. That is, you plant seeds of peace within you. Without peace from within, it is impossible to have peace from without. Once you have peace from within, then you have inner-strength. Then, your mind and body become harmonious. Then your relationship with others will be harmonious. You respect other people. You respect the enemy. You respect animals, the trees, the whole environment. You do not pollute the river; you do not

Lectures & Articles

255

pollute the earth. They are all related and from your inner-strength and inner-peace you develop political self-awareness. You transform the selfish-being into becoming a selfless being. And in that process of transformation, you will see things as they really are. You have an understanding which is called Panna in Pali, or Prajna in Sanskrit. You will see things as they really are. Then, if anger arises, you will know that anger has arisen from within yourself and you will be able to stop it. If greed arises, you know that greed has arisen and you can stop it. If delusion arises, you will know that delusion has risen and you can stop it. You see things with an understanding. When you see things with an understanding then you have to respect other people. They may even have a different view and may even want to exploit you. Your understanding, however, becomes compassion. Compassion is very important. The Thai people, who used to be farmers, have now become landless laborers. Many ofthem have migrated to the West. More of them immigrated to the Middle East where they work with no security at all. Many of them have sold their daughters to become prostitutes. Many others have sold their children to become child laborers. I think that if you practice Buddhism seriously it means that your understanding becomes compassion. And you want to share the suffering with other people. And you want to change the system to make it more just. And you want to do it non-violently. That is why people hit you and people defame you. You cultivate love and kindness. Why? If you don't do that and cultivate hatred, it is bad for you. It is bad for your body and bad for your mind. If you cultivate love and compassion, you can always smile. And once you can smile, you can see things as they are. Then, you are clear. You are mindful and you can change things. In sum, this is my definition of Buddhism as I understand it. Of course I'm not an expert nor am 1 a guru and 1 could be wrong. However, it is open for discussion. But having said what Buddhism is, why then, in so many Buddhist countries, are atrocities taking place? The answer, I think, is due to our attachment to the concept of modern development which makes the rich become richer and the poor poorer. The gap between the rich and the poor has greatly expanded, coupled with the destruction of the environment. My country one of the only Buddhist kingdoms left in the world. Burma is supposed to be a Buddhist country, as well as Cambodia, Sri Lanka and Laos not to mention China, Japan, and Korea which used to be Buddhist countries. What is wrong with it? The difference is between Buddhism with a capital “ B ” and Buddhism with a small “ b ” . It is the same as Christianity withacapital “ C ” and Christianity with a small “ c ” . The same goes for Islam with a capital “ 1 ” and Islam with a small “ i ” . The original teaching of Christ, the Buddha, or Mohammed were for love,

256

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

compassion, and sacrifice. You must be willing to turn the other cheek to those who torment and persecute you. When it becomes an institution, however, the chu rch and state develop into something strong. You identify youself with that religion. You identify that religion with your nation. It becomes chauvinistic and sometimes becomes exploitative. Sometimes if becomes capitalistic. That is why I am very much against calling my country Thailand. Using the name Thailand connotes chauvinistic tendencies. Even before the name Thailand existed - during the reign of Rama the sixth, the king was educated in England, he adopted the English jingoism for the empire, in England they have God, King, and Country. You are supposed to serve God. You are supposed to die for your king. This is all for the glorification of your country. That is how the first World War came. The Germans worshiped the same God as the British. They killed each other in the name of God. The Thai adopted the God, King, and Country concept and they changed the triad into chart - t h e Nation, sansana — the Buddhist religion, and pramahakasat - the king. You are supposed to give your life for your king, religion, and country. This is all rubbish and is Buddhism with a Capital “ B ” Buddhism became so nationalistic that if you are not a Buddhist, you are not Thai. In fact, when the word Thailand came into being, Pibun Songkhram, the great Thailander, made it clearthat nobody could join the civil service unless you were a Buddhist. You could not attend the army or naval academies unless you were Buddhist. Unfortunately, many of the Catholics and Protestants had to change their religion. In Sri Lanka now, to be Buddhist is to be Singhalese, to be Singhalese is to be Buddhist. The Tamils are Hindus and they are labeled bad people because they are not Buddhist-Singhalese. The killing continues among the Singhalese and the Tamils. Once Buddhism, or any religion develops in this fashion, it can and often becomes very chauvinistic and can be very oppressive. Religion can be both oppressive and liberative. When it become oppressive, it identifies with certain groups, cliques, and certain elements in the name of nationalism, in the name of development, and in the name of whtever it is. But for me this capital “ B ” Buddhism is very much against the fundamental and original teaching of the Buddha. How did this come about in my country? In 1855, my country was opened up to the West with the signing of the First Bowring Treaty. This meant that we were saved from being colonized by the British. The Thai are very proud that we were not colonized by the West - the only country in Southeast Asia. But being proud is the first downfall in Buddhism. Being good is not bad, however, but once you are attached to goodness that is the first step in your downfall. We were so proud that we were not colonized by the West. We did not realize that we became colonized intellectually by the West. We felt so superior to our neighbors. We

Lectures & Articles

257

looked down upon the Khmer, the Lao, the Burmese, etc., because we were not colonized. We like to identify and associate ourselves with the West. We admire the.West for all of the wrong reasons. We were not converted to Christianity but we were converted to Western materialism without understanding the strength and weakness of the West. I have been talking and discussing this subject at many campuses. We have sent students abroad for over one-hundred years but how many of our students have gone back home and refused to serve dictators. The country has been run by dictators since 1947. Before 1932 it was run by absolute monarchs. Only two or three have challenged the absolute monarchy. So, obviously those who have been educated abroad did not understand the spirit of the West. That is, the negative and positive sides of Western materialism. They do not understand the spirit of Buddhism either. They think that Buddhism is now a form, an institution. Buddhism to them means Buddha images, temples, ceremonies, which is only a external manifestation. The essential teaching of the Buddha is nonexploitative and compassionate service to others. And the essential teaching according to the four-Noble Truths means that we must confront suffering. To me, the root cause of suffering is hate, greed, and delusion and how to overcome suffering non-violently. That is the Noble EightFold Path. To have the right thought, speech, and action. We feel that we were not colonized by the West and we thought that we would peserve our Buddhism. And in fact, we were not colonized by the West, but we introduced Western colonialism, centralization, and Western education that looked down upon our indigenous cultures. One hundred years ago we introduced a colonial administration into our country because we imitated the British in India, and we imitated the Dutch in Java and Sumatra. The administration continues today ! The British were forced outoflndia. Likewise, theDutch were forcedout of Javaand Sumatra. But in Siam, we still have our own people colonizing our own country. The Ministry of the Interior, is the head of the colonial administration. Unfortunately, we are all of the same race - we look the same, however, we are divided. The civil-service and the military are at the top and they are the masters of the Thai race. The military has become a state within the state. Most of our national budget is spent on arms, and who do we fight? We fight our own people! We kill our own people as illustrated last May. We kill our own people as further illustrated in 1973 and 1976. And yet, the military kills the people in the name of the Monarchy, in the name of the Buddhist Religion, and in the name of the Nation. But in fact, they kill the people because of their selfishness. So Buddhism with a capital “ B ” is really alienated from the teachings of the Buddha. The economic development model that most Thai elites admire and wish to model our

258

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

development after is dangerous and harmful. Yet, my people want our country to be like Singapore, Taiwan, Hongkong, and South Korea. Indeed we want to be like Japan. Japan is the ideal model of development. I go to Japan every year. In fact, during my current exile, I will spend the rest of the year in Japan. The Japanese are the richest people in the world, however, hardly any of them that I have come into contact with are happy. They exploit their own people. The Japanese have become workoholics. The male exploits the female and Japanese women have become feminists. They refuse to marry the Japanese chauvinistic males who have to import wives from Siam and the Philippines. This is very pathetic. One would think that development would provide everything. Japan is now the richest country in the world. Buddhist temples in Japan are the most impressive and beautiful temples to be found anywhere in the world. I talk to my Japanese Buddhist counterparts there noting : your Buddhism is great and wonderful, however, it is dying gracefully. You make money on funerals, but your Buddhism has no social message whatsoever. If Buddhism has only a personal message, it is one-sided. Buddhism must cater for personal development as well as social development. Without social concern, without social justice, there is no Buddhism. Europe is rich too, comparatively speaking. I want to ask you sincerely how many of you are really happy? How many of you are at peace? Buddhism cares for happiness. And happiness means that you have harmony with youself and your family. You have harmony with your society. We have many generals and prime ministers who are not happy. They take pills to make them go to sleep. They hate themselves so much that they kill others to seemingly vent their hatred. I don't know whether most of you realize it or not, but more Gls, who returned from Vietnam, committed suicide than died during the war. Obviously, because in this modern age, in the name development, you do not really care about personnel happiness and spiritual growth. You only care for social success, political power, and material comforts. Buddhism that is expressed as a state religion is devoid of the spirit and the teaching of the Buddha. Having said that, how could Buddhism be relevant in the modern world? How could Buddhism tackle nationalism? Look at my own country and take a serious look at last May. Buddhism teaches us to look at everything seriously. If you do not take it seriously you are deluded very easily. When you look at Miss Universe - a beauty queen, she looks very beautiful. Buddhism says that you must look beyond her skin. You must look beyond her face because we are all bound up by old age, sickness, and death. Likewise, when you look at what happened in May, in my country, it is all rubbish, dreadful, and the killings were reported all around the world.

Lectures & Articles

259

If you look carefully, you can see Buddhism at work in a wonderful way. The demonstrations against the military began on the the seventh of April. The demonstrations were not reported by the press because they were peaceful demonstrations. The Buddhists were there. The monks were there fasting, praying, meditating, and giving loving kindness and compassion to the oppressors. The oppressors sent trucks to the peaceful demonstrations. The passengers threw bricks and bottles at the military to discredit the demonstrations and to provide an excuse to kill people. You can see that the non-violent movement in my country is very strong. We have not won yet. The man that we demonstrated against resigned his premiership. He remains in the country. He is backed by the military. But at least he resigned. The generals who have ordered the killing have all been removed from their important positions. At last in Burma, three years ago and in China four years ago, the top leadership who ordered the killing of ordinary citizens still remain in power. What happened recently in my country has had a tremendous influence for the Burmese resistance movement in Burma. It has had a tremendous effect over theTibetan and the Chinese dissidents in China. For the Thai case, you have to look back beyond May. Demonstrations took place in December of last year against the drafted constitution. Demonstrations took place in October 1991 against the World Bank and the IMF meeting in Bangkok. The demonstrators did not want the kind of development that the World Bank advances. That is, development that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, coupled with the destruction of the environment. In fact, when 1 gave my speech last August - denouncing the February coup, people were not aware of the military's wickedness. But since then my speech has become widely quoted around the world and people are now beginning to understand. My speech attacked military rule, dictatorship, and my government's advancement of a development model that is wrong for my country. So in my country the people are now looking for alternative development models. After I gave my speech, a warrant was issued for my arrest. A country monk named Phra Prachak was arrested at about the same time. He was an unknown monk who had ordained about ten years ago. Why was he arrested? He was arrested because he tried to protect the forest. He ordained the trees to protect the forest. Once the trees are ordained, the people (country people) respect them and they do not cut them down. This is very important. You make use of the indigenous culture which is relevant to the people. But the military could not care less. The military cuts the trees down because they are controlled by greed. When they arrested Phra Prachak, however, the whole monkhood supported him. Throughout the demonstrations last May, our young monks were

260

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

fully engaged in nonviolent activities. Our monks, for the most part, are people who come from the poorest of the poor. They represent the poorest of the poor. They care for the poor. Unfortunately, some monks use the sangha for social mobility. Some monks who reach the top of the Buddhist hierarchy forget about the poor. They support the military and the rich people. Luckily, very few of them forget the poor. Even some of the high monks care for the poor. And once you care for the poor, you care for suffering. When you care for suffering, you are not content nor are you able to remain politically inactive. You become politically active because you look at the cause of suffering. And you hope to eliminate suffering through the Noble Eight-Fold Path. That is, you use a non-violent approach. Many monks support alternative models of development. Some monks are now exploring community farming. Some monks are now exploring the use of buffalo and rice banks. This is tremendous because for theThai to work and to play is the same thing. Y et, the Thai elite imitate the West by separating work and play. Ngan, in Thai, means enjoying oneself. Play and work are the same word. When you are farming you also harvest rice and sing songs and everything is joyful. Once you have a joyful life you do not need much money and security. When your work is no longer joyful, then you work for money. You become a slave to the bank. TheThai movement for an alternative development model is viable and is providing a tremendous affect which include : the protection of the environment and alternative farming without chemical fertilizers; alternative medecine which goes back to traditional medicine with monks as the custodians; weaving our own clothes; building our own housing — the four basic requisites in Buddhism. I think that this is wonderful. This movement is not only for us, it is all interrelated. In Buddhism, the fundamental teaching is interrelatedness. That is, the law of Paticca Samupapada. The Paticca Samupapada is usually translated as dependant origination from within your body and within your mind. But if you put it into a social context, then we ‘ ‘ inter are’ ’ - as Thich NhatHanhsays. When we see a piece of paper, the paper came from a tree. There must be a tree cutter. The tree cutter in some way has been exploited. Many forests have been destroyed for this piece of paper. This paper came because of the cloud, the sun, the moon, the rain, and the earth. So, Buddhism teaches you to be aware to the paper and to be aware of the whole environment. We are all interrelated. We respect each other. Another writing by Thich Nhat Hanh, which I find very powerful is in his book called “Please Call Me by My True Name.” He said: “ I am a frog in a small pound. At the same time I am the snake who eats the frog.” We are both. So do not condemn the oppressor. If we want to condemn him,

Lectures & Articles

261

we condemn ourself. He continues that: “ I am a fourteen year old Vietnamese girl in the boat escaping from Vietnam. I am the Thai pirate who raped and killed that girl. I am a nine-year old skin and bone boy in Uganda. I am the arms merchant selling arms to Uganda.” So we understand that Buddhism teaches us that we have dualism. Once we have dualism, we think that we are better and we want more. Me and mine. You and yours. Buddhism teaches that we are interrelated. We care for the suffering. Wewanttochangetheworldinavery meaningful way. Butfirst we must change ourselves to be peaceful and nonviolent. The Thais are now relating to the Burmese. We relate to the Cambodians. We relate to the Sri Lankans. And we not only relate to Buddhists, we work with the Moslems and Christians- we are all together. We are all fellow sufferers. All these labels: Christians, Buddhists, and Moslems are just labels. Thai, Burmese, Indians are just labels. We are all fellow sufferers and all interrelated to each other. Four or five years ago we started the International Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB). The goal is to put Buddhism into practice, by joining together. The suffering Burmese, Thai, Bangladeshi, Lao, Khmer, are all linked together. The Buddhists from North-America, Europe, and Japan are linked together. And this does not only apply to the Third World countries but we are also linked to the First World. We are all helping each other. In both Europe and in North-American, sometimes it is difficult to bring about change within your own country. Yourcountry does not have the overt and pronounced suffering that is so visible in the Third World. You do not kill your own people here. In the First World countries, however, you export 87 percent of the arms to kill us. The M-l 6 rifles that were killing my people last May, were exported from the USA. I think that if the people in the Northern Hemisphere are aware that suffering in the Southern Hemisphere is directly linked to the North, then, perhaps they will share something with us. Many have volunteered to work with the INEB in Burma, Cambodia, India, and etc. This has become very meaningful. We are working with our sisters who are prostitutes. We have over 25,000 prostitutes in Frankfurt, and an equal amount in Japan. We are working with the prostitutes and child laborers. We are working with those who have AIDS. We are also working on how to protect the environment. At the same time we are looking for alternative models of development. But whatever we do, engaging in social welfare to help that is not enough. You must continue to work until you see that the cause of suffering has now become systematic. Not to kill does not mean that you just don't kill. It also means that you must challenge your government as to why they spend so much money on arms. Not to steal, does not mean that I don't steal, you must

262

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

question the international banking system. Is the IMF and World Bank System stealing from the Third World? Is the International Economic Order helping only the rich and industrial countries. Not to commit adultery does not only mean that, it means that you do not exploit the weaker sex. Advertising exploits women and is equally wrong. Donottell lies. We must question politicians. We must question political propaganda. We must question advertisement. Do not take intoxicants. It does not only mean refusing beer and wine, it goes beyond that to include the whole drug trade and the propaganda network that surrounds it. Buddhism in the world today must go beyond nationalism. It must come back to the essence of the Buddha. And Buddhism must tackle the modern ills caused by consumerism, militarism, and the alienation of ourselves from ourselves and our community. People are now working positively and there is a sign of hope in my country. There is hope that we will win and have democracy. Siam (Thailand) has two celebrations this year. In June 1932 democracy came to our country. In May 1932, on the full moon the day that the Buddha was born, found enlightenment, and pasted away a young monk named Buddhadasa chose to become a servant and a slave of the Buddha and founded Saun Mokh (The Garden of Liberation). The elites in Thai society, however, do not see that these two events are interrelated. We model our democracy on the West only. We should realize that our Buddhist Brotherhood - the Sangha itself, is a democratic movement. The Sangha is fraternal. The Sangha is equality. The Sangha works for liberation. The Thai Buddhist tradition prior to opening the country to the West advanced democracy, fraternity, equality, and liberation. We cannot go back to the good old days, however, we must bring some things from the past to the present. We must share with those of different cultures and to see how it can be put into practice today. I am glad that our Buddhist way is now working even though we are still suffering. In Siam, we have more prostitutes than monks, we have many more malnourished children and we have less and less land for the forests. But we are concerned for the environment. We are concerned more for our women and children. In my country and in other countries, although we still suffer, we have hope. In Tibet, the Tibetans have been treated very badly by the Chinese for the last forty years. His Holiness the Dalai Lama, has been in exile for over thirty-years. Yet, he never condemned the Chinese. He asks all to practice compassion towards the Chinese. Indeed, the Chinese not only killed the Tibetans and their own people, they continue to interfere with the Thai military, Burmese politics, and the Khmer Rogue. Yet, we must not regard them as our enemy. Any so-called enemy should be taken as our friends. They make us think. They make us aware so that we should not be angry - f o r anger will never be mindful.

Lectures & Articles

263

Whatever, change is brought about, do not hate anybody. Be positive! His Holiness instructed us not to hate the Chinese, because the best people to help us is our enemy. Because they make you angry. Anger is bad for you - u n t i l you change your anger into compassion. The Chinese have been treating the Tibetans very badly, however, 1 am certain that the Tibetans will overcome this injustice. Because the Buddha said: “Truth will overcome falsehood. Right will overcome might. Generosity will overcome greed.” Therefore, I think that there is a sign that things will change. I am certain that Buddhism will be able to transform the world beyond nationalism to become something positive with love, compassion, and justice for the future.

A Keynote Address at the International Seminar on Religions and Peace, held in conjunction with the International Peace Bureau Centenary Conference, 25-30 August 1992. Arranged by the Peace Union of Finland, Pax Christi and the Department of Study of Religions at the University of Helsinki.

THAILAND AT A CROSSROAD 60 YEARS O F DEMOCRACY To be more precise 1 would prefer to use the title “Siam at a Crossroad” rather than “Thailand at a Crossroad”. Thailand and Democracy are new. In fact, “Thailand” has only been in existence since 1939 and “Democracy” came to this country in 1932. Before 1939, Thailand was known as “Siam ” . We were known to the West as ‘ ‘Siam ’’, at least since 151 1, by the Portuguese. But “ S i a m ” officially came into being in 1850s. Prior to that the country was known in by its capital “Ayudhia”. It was King Mongkut, who officially announced that the name of the country would be “ S i a m ” , upon assuming the throne. I think the first time Siam was at a crossroad, was in 1850s when Sir John Bowring came and we were forced to decide whether to open the door to the West or not. While the Burmese, Vietnamese and many other countries felt that they must keep the foreign devils out, I think King Mongkut particulary felt that we must open the door. The Thais regarded that as a great decision since we were not colonized. But for me, while we may not have been colonized politically, we were eventually colonized intellectually. And because of this, we have not yet proclaimed our freedom from western colonialism. I will come back to this point later. 1993 will be the centenary of the 1893 incident although most Thai are not even aware of it. The 1893 event is known as the “Row-Saw-RoiSip-Song”, Bangkok Era 112, when the French blockaded the Gulf of Siam with their 3 gunboats. At that time we might have lost our country. Indeed we lost more than one third of the Kingdom to the French. They even occupied two provinces in the eastern coast of Siam, Chantaburi and Trad, for almost ten years in exchange for Siamriep, Battambong and Luangprabang including Angkor. But unfortunately, theThai elites are not historically minded, in spite of the fact that they went to England, Germany and so on to study. I proposed that they have a serious symposium on this issue. But nobody is really interested. Indeed, in 1989 1 proposed that we had a symposium on the 50th anniversary of “Thailand”. But again, nobody was interested. And I had to go all the way to Monash, Australia to have a symposium; an international symposium on the crisis of Thai identity held in Australia. But perhaps I should take back my statement that the Thai are not concerned about their historical past. It is only the Thai elites. Returning again to the 60th anniversary of Thai Democracy, the Siamese came to a crossroad in 1992. 1932 was the 150th anniversary of Bangkok as a capital city and of course the 150th anniversary of the Royal House of Chakkri which fou nded Bangkok. There was a big celebration on the 6th of April, the day of the dynasty. The 21st of April, 1 782 was the day the founding stone of Bangkok, the “Lak-Muang” was laid. The day of

Lectures & Articles

265

the foundation had to be calculated astrologically. Three years afterward, they moved the capital from Thonburi, on the other side of the river to Bangkok. In 1932 King Rama VII (Prajadhipok) was considering whether he should grant a constitution to his people to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the dynasty and of the capital city. But most of his cabinet members said no. They said that Democracy was only applicable to the Anglo-Saxons. At that time, Italy was becoming more and more fascist and, of course, 1933 saw the rise of Hitler in Germany. They said that we should follow the Italians and the Germans; we should not follow the Anglo-Saxons. But the King said that Germany and Italy were great countries. They were Europeans, and they could do whatever they liked. We were a small country. We had to prove to the West that we were civilized and of course democracy was supposed to be part and parcel of such a country so we should at least have a constitution. Unfortunately, the deciding vote was cast by the American adviser, a Harvard chap called Stevens, who was advising the Royal Thai Government on foreign affairs. He said that Siam was doing very well without Democracy. “Your Majesty”, he said, “you should keep Siam this way.” So, the crossroad was not crossed. Three months after the 150th anniversary of Bangkok, on the 24th of June, there was a coup d'etat that ended the absolute monarchy. Indeed, if the military had had their way, it would have been the end of the dynasty too. But the civilians involved, (ironically, their leader was educated in France) felt that we needed the continuity of the monarchy. The King was invited to come back to be a constitutional monarch. Indeed, most of the hard core military who took part in the 1932 coup were educated in Gemany. They were not interested in Democracy as it was, but they were interested in ending the role of the princes who had up till then the control of the army and the navy. So, the change from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy was an important crossroad. But unfortunately, during the next 7 years, the country changed. Instead of becoming democratic, we became more and more militaristic. Again, the models, were Germany and Italy. By that time another model, Japan, emerged. They were the three Axis powers that Siam followed on their new path. But luckily, a man who was educated in France, Mr. Pridi Banomyong, who founded Thammasat University and organised “the Free Thai movement”, saved Siam from going too far down the wrong path. Thammasat University was founded two years after the 1932 Revolution and was originally called the University of Moral and Political Sciences. The idea was to train young people, men and women, to have moral courage and to serve the nation politically. At that time, we already had a university named after King Chulalongkorn. Chulalonkorn University was founded with the sole intention to train people to become

266

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

functionaries, bureaucrats and to serve the King. But the new Thammasat University was founded to train peple to serve the people. One result of the 1932 revolution was that it was the first time that the King was under the law. We may have imitated the West in this way, but in another way we have gone right back to our Buddhist roots. Because in Buddhism, everybody falls under the same law, even the Buddha. In this sense Buddhism is very radical. Pridi Banomyong, who saved the monarchy and founded Thammasat University, felt that the government had taken the wrong path. He wanted Siam to remain neutral. He felt that we must not support a dictatorial regime. To fight such tendencies, he even produced a play and a film. It was the first film produced by a Siamese statesman in English. Mr. Pridi hoped that it would be shown in Europe and in America. And he was perhaps a little bit conceited. He felt that his film would warn people, and that people would not enter the Second World War. This film was called The King of the White Elephant. It was a powerful film. But unfortunately, it was produced too late to stop the war and 1 don't think he could have stopped the war anyway. But the message of the film was that non-violence should be introduced and, importantly, the Kings of the past were fighting for their own glory, for their own gains and not for righteousness. I resurrected the film and reprinted the book. I even had it translated into Thai. It is widely distributed in the country to mark the 60th anniversary of Democracy. 1 prefer to use the words Siam and Siamese. I do not object to use the word “Thai”, but I object very strongly to the use of the word Thailand. Because the word Thailand was imposed on us in 1939 by a dictator. In 1939 we had dictatorship, following Hitler's model. Deutschland was understood as the land of the “Deutsch”. Hence, Thailand would be the land of the Thai. So other ethnic groups had no significance. In my country we have not only the Thai, but we also have the Chinese, the Mon, the Malay, the Burmese, the Karen, the Khmer and not to mention many other minorities. I think, it is highly unfair to those ethnic minorities to call the country “Thailand”. It is a racist, fascistic name. Not only were we forced to wear western dress, we were also prevented from chewing betel nuts. Now our youngsters chew gum like the Americans. For me this is very serious. I do not want to indulge in this topic. Instead, I refer you to my speech made at the Monash University in 1989, which is now published. The point 1 was making was that during the Second World War, when we became Thailand, we followed the axis model. But Mr. Pridi resisted and he was asked by the Japanese to resign from the cabinet. But he was so powerful that he could not be left alone. Since he was the Rector of Thammasat University, he was very popular among the young genera-

Lectures & Articles

267

tion, and consequently, he was kicked upstairs. He joined the Council of Regencies, which was created because King Rama VII abdicated two years after the change of the regime. His nephew Rama VIII succeeded him. The young King Rama VIII, Ananda-Mahidol, was educated in Switzerland since it was the safest place in Europe at that time. So Mr. Pridi joined the council of Regencies. Eventually he became the sole Regent, who organised the “Free Thai movement”, behind the scenes against the Japanese. That was why after the Second World War we were not punished. We announced the declaration of war as void, as if it had never existed. The Americans regarded the declaration of war against them was void. Indeed we even joined the United Nations before Sweden. In the eyes of the alliance, the Swedish had had too much to do with Hitler. They were not being admitted into the United Nations before the Siamese. Mr. Pridi, the father of Thai Democracy, the father of the University of Moral and Political Sciences, became a national hero after the Second World War, saving the country from being defeated along with the Germans, the Italians and the Japanese. So after the war, he became the Prime Minister. He felt the time was right to invite the King to return. By then the King had become mature and of age to reign. But the King said that he needed to finish his doctorate. He wanted to come home, but he would like to return to Switzerland again to complete his education. A compromise was reached for him to visit Siam temporarily. When the King came back, there was a wonderful jubilation. But unfortunately, one fine morning in July 1946, the young King was found dead in his royal bed chamber. He was only 21 years old. This Royal death has not been solved. It is still a mystery. Was it an accidental death? Did His Majesty commit suicide or was he murdered? Unfortunately Mr. Pridi was Prime Minister and he secretly thought that the King had committed suicide. But to save the face of the Royal family, the governmet consulted with the royal family including the King's mother and announced that it was an accidental death. Although Mr. Pridi himself was a lawyer and a lecturer of criminal law, the announcement was done without a proper investigation. Therefore, Mr. Pridi's rivals started the rumor that the King was killed by the Prime Minister. Eventually, the military who fought with the Japanese and who lost everything after the Second World War, staged a coup in 1947 on the pretext that the Prime Minister had killed the King. They played the royalist role and came back into power in 1947, chucking out Mr. Pridi, who was a great friend of the Americans and the British. Although Mr. Pridi received a gold medal from President Truman, was received in the Guild Hall and was made an honourary citizen of London and so on, he got no support, because of his policy of neutrality. Mr. Pibulsongkram, a Field Marshall and a war

268

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

criminal came back to power. He was backed by the American and the British because they were fighting in the Korean war and because they were afraid of the communists. Mr. Pibulsongkram, the former enemy was welcomed. And poor Mr. Pridi bad to spend 21 years in exile in China and 16 years in exile in France, where he had studied. He died in France nine years ago. 1947 is for me, a very important crossroad. 1947 was more or less the end of the democratic movement, although the military maintained a democratic form. They tended to be more royalistic. The present King, Rama IX, who succeeded his brother, was invited to come back from Switzerland to be the Head of the State. But the country was tightly controlled by the military, by Field Marshall Pibulsongkram and his followers who supported the Americans during the Korean war and later the Vietnam war. This is a very important crossroad for me. In 1 957, Pibulsongkram felt that we were following the Americans far too much. Before 1957, there was the Bandung Conference on NonAlliance. While we were American lackeys, we disagreed with them. We did have a secret meeting with the Chinese seeking to recognize the People's Republic of China. The Americans felt that this was too much for them. Therefore, they kicked Pibulsongkram out with the help of the young Commander in Chief of the Army, Field Marshall Sarit Thanarat. So in 1957, Sarit Thanarat came into power. The year 1957 was also the year 2500 by the Buddhist Era. For Buddhists, the year 2500 is a very important year. According to some prophecies, Buddhism is supposed to last 5000 years. Thus the year 2500 was the half-way mark of Buddhism. From there on, Buddhism is supposed to decline dramatically. And for the case of Siam, a Buddhist country, it seems to be true. Pibulsongkram was kicked out in 1957 and he later died in Japan. Mr. Sarit Thanarat came into power and we followed the Americans again. We had GIs and then we came to believe in the American theory of development. The Americans said that Buddhism was the great obstacle to development. Buddhism teaches people to be content, not to push for power and money. Buddhism should not be eliminated, but it must be rethought into a capitalist model. It was very interesting. It started in 1957. From thereon, American experts were pouring in and our youngsters were invited on scholarship to go to America. Formerly, most of our brightest people were educated in Europe, but in the late 50s and early 60s, everybody that counted was supposed to be educated in America. Now the people who run the country are all American educated. Of course there are some advantages and disadvantages in that. As you know, you can be sure that those people who run Indonesia now are the Berkeley Mafia. Certainly, if you have western education, but you do not understand the roots of your culture or you are not proud of your local wisdom, you would only imitate the West. And Bangkok is a very

Lectures & Articles

269

good example: it is the worst city in South East Asia, if not in the world, because of its pollution. When I was a young boy, Bangkok was a very lovely city known as Venice of the East, with no slums. The difference between the rich and the poor was not so great. There were few big houses, and they belonged either to the foreigners or to the princes. But now the gap between the rich and the poor is great. One fifth of Bangkok is slum. But this is not our topic today. I want to state that after 1957 we really entered the American period. We followed the American model of development. Strangely enough, the Americans are, of course, the great exponents of the American way-of-life, but they never exported Democracy, except to Germany and Japan. In general, Americans supported dictatorships and Siam was a good case in point. As long as Sarit lasted, and he lasted from 1957 to 1 963, it was a Police State. And then we were supposed to develop economically. For me this model of development helps the rich to get richer, but not happier. And it makes the poor become much poorer. Nobody is happy and at the same time we destroy the environment. When I was born 60 years ago, 70 % of our land was forest land. Now we have less then 15 % of our forest remaining. It is the official figure and it is very alarming. Before the American period, there were prostitutes, yes, but in my father's period the prostitutes were imported from China like the laborer. The Thai, as I said, believed in Buddhism. They did not believe in becoming labourers. They prefered to be farmers and gardeners. They did not even believe in serving the King. Very few people did. Until under King Chulalongkorn, in fact, we just celebrated the 100th anniversary of western administration. But I claim it to be 100th anniversary of colonial administration, because the King imitated the British in Burma and the Dutch in Indonesia. Of course he did not imitate the French in Indochina, because they were our enemies. Now Indonesia is independent, Burma is independent, for better or for worse. But the Thai administration still remains colonial, which means the Thai bureaucrats still look down upon the people. The “Kra-Suang-Mahad-Thai”, the Ministry of Interior, is known among the Thai as a mafia organisation. The power in Bangkok controls the up-country. Now every city is imitating Bangkok. Bangkok has become very ugly. Twenty years ago, Chiengmai was very beautiful. But now Chiengmai is becoming very ugly. Korat has become very ugly. U-dorn has become very ugly. By following the Americans into the Vietnam war, Siam became known as “ R & R ” , Rest & Recreation, for Gls to come and spend their money. Pattaya was once a very beautiful place, but later on Pattaya became one of the worst seaside resorts in the world. And now the same thing is happening in Phuket and other seaside resorts. For me, this kind of development is fundamentally wrong but unfortunately the Thai elites and certainly the people who run the country

270

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

do not share my view. This includes the present Prime Minister who, for the first time, is the son of a local merchant. Prime Ministers in the past were either formerGenerals, Field Marshalls, or educated in “Oxbridge”. Most of my friends became Prime Ministers. The present Prime Minister is, for the first time, not only educated in Siam but also at Thammasat University. Yet I don't know whether he realises that he now is at a crossroad. The decision now is to choose whether we want to follow the present development model or not. Of course, Japan is seen as the paradise, followed by the four tigers: Singapore, Taiwan, Hongkong and South Korea. Siam is competing with Malaysia to be the fifth one. U n f o r tunately, I feel that this model of development will not only destroy our souls but our environment as well with all the pollution. The remaining forest will not survive. Not only that, it means that we will go into Burma, Cambodiaand Vietnam to destroy their forests. However th is goes against Buddhist principles, which we claim to believe. First of all in Buddhism we are taught not to exploit oneself and not to exploit others. If you have doubts about receiving and giving, you give. To give is Dana in Pali and Sanskrit, which is the basic teaching of Buddhism, like charity in Christianity. With the present model of development, if you have doubts, you take. If you give a little bit, you want to take more. That is capitalism, consumerism. With the end of socialism in the Soviet Union, capitalism will reign supreme. According to Francis Fukuyama, in The End of History, Japan will replace the United States. A smaller state becomes rich and powerful. Of course, the Thais love it. We followed the Japanese during the Second World War and now we can follow them again. But for me this model of development will lead, if not to a third world war, then to the end of the world and the end of this planet earth. And the reason is that this development model stresses greed. The more you have, the more you take and the more you destroy the environment and your soul. I think my point is proved. The Thais, who used to be loved by their neighbours, are now hated by the Cambodians, hated by the Laotians and the Burmese. It happened when I first went into Indochina in the beginning of the 80s. I was very naughty goi ng there against the government's advice. We did not recognize the Heng Samrin regime, because Vietnam was our arch-enemy. It was like the 60s when China was our arch-enemy and nobody could visit China. But now, the Thai generals and the Chinese generals are sleeping in the same bed; and they are backing the Khmerrogue. In the beginning of the 80s, I went to Cambodia and wrote a book. That was the only thing 1 could do, write books. I said that within the three Indochina states, it was wonderful for us that Cambodia was under Vietnamese rule, because it will make the Cambodians love us. Culturally and religiously, we are very much alike. They are bound to trade with us

Lectures & Articles

271

illegally and they are bound to admire us. But 1 0 years ago I wrote that once the Vietnamese leave Cambodia, that Cambodians will begin to hate us and this has come true. We are able to exploit the Cambodians much more effectively than the Vietnamese, who, with their socialist background did not know how to corrupt that much. Now the Cambodians hate us more than they did the Vietnamese, and it's the same with the Burmese and the Laotians. This is another crossroad. The Thais have to decide and it's a very difficult decision for them. But a good thing, which has helped them was the “May events” in 1992. For that, we have to thank the generals. Because in May 1992, if you follow the Thai events, you may recall that there was a peaceful demonstation against the government and against the military. In fact, the demonstration lasted for more than 7 weeks, but it was reported to the world only for 4 days, because it was during those 4 days that the military killed people. Unfortunately without killing, nobody is interested in reporting anything. The 7 weeks demonstration meant that the whole population, not only in Bangkok, was demonstrating. In Bangkok alone there were nearly one million people demonstrating. Everybody demonstrated, the young, the old, the radicals, the conservatives, even the monks, the Christians and the Muslims. It was wonderful, because they are now realising that the enemy is us. In Latin America they named America as their enemy. We claimed never to have been colonised. But the colonial masters are those in the army, those in the civil administration who side with the army, and those working with the multinational cooperations. So that I think the May demonstrations really united the people. And of course the May demonstrations were the last straw. You see, if you follow the Thai news. IMF and the World Bank had a meeting in Bangkok in October 1991. The Thais organised the non-governmental organisations to protest against them. Not only the Thais, but the International Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) also had a meeting in Bangkok where they worked against the World Bank and IMF. So, the World Bank and IMF were the personification of the kind of development in which the rich become richer but not happier, and the poor become poorer. It means the destruction of the environment. So I think, people are now really resisting. They are not only resisting in Bangkok, they are resisting everywhere across the country. And this goes right back to the first student uprising and the end of a dictatorial regime in 1973. After Sarit Thanarat came to power in 1957, he was succeeded by one general after another. On the one hand, you have the American model of development, on the other hand, dictatorship, perhaps a mild form of Siamese dictatorship. By 1973 the young people had enough of it and they demonstrated just like they did in May 1992. It started with 11 people and involved half a million within one week. The regime toppled and the Prime Minister fled to America. The

272

WTiezi Loyalty

Demands Dissent

Deputy Prime Minister went to Taiwan. The son of the Prime Minister, who is also the son-in-law of the Deputy Prime Minister, came to Dusseldorf. Indeed, there was a very good connection between these three countries. They are the proponents of the capitalist model, and they are all backing dictatorships. The Germans did not directly back the dictatorship, but they sold all the arms to the Thais as did the Americans which were used to kick the people who demonstrated. The Germans helped the secret police tap the telephones and trained the secret police to be more effective, which is rather unfortunate. 1 973 was the first time that the people demonstrated. That is for me another crossroad. They had had enough of the American model. Unfortunately at that time, they thought that the model for us to choose was the socialist model. In 1973, Mao was still alive. There were already conflicts between China and the Soviet Union, but these conflicts had not yet spread to China and Vietnam. The young people felt that we must turn away from the Americans and follow the road to socialism. I was not very popular with the students in 1973 because I said to them that we must go back to our roots: deep down in Buddhism which is socialistic but nonviolent. But the students said to me: “Professor, we gave Buddha a chance for 2500 years, but he has not done very much for us, and we have followed the Americans for the last 30 years and it was much worse. Now we must follow Chairman Mao.” I said, “ O K , you can follow Chairman Mao in your heart. But at least verbally and culturally you must use Buddhist terminology. It will save your skin. Deep down Buddhism is very radical, but at the same time, unlike Mao, Buddhism tells you to be nonviolent and to respect others.” With Mao, they only wanted their revolution; they did not care how many people would die. Unfortunately, in 1976, the Army came back in a very big way and punished the students. Many of them fled to Germany, but even more of them went into the jungle and joined the Communist Party of Thailand, which in reality was the Chinese Communist Party. Luckily, I was invited to America to talk about the American Bicentenial. On my way home, 1 stopped in London and looked in The Timesand found my name. 1 read that there was a warrant for my arrest in absentia. While I was gone, they burnt all my books and they ransacked my bookstore. Many of my friends were tortured to death. Dr. Puey, the Rector of Thammasat University, the former Governor of the Bank of Thailand for 12 years and a very honest civil servant, was beaten at the airport as he left Bangkok. He is now in exile in London. So obviously in 1 976, it meant that we were not going to follow the socialist line. We were to follow the American capitalistic line. But at the same time, the period between 1973 and 1976 gave us a chance to be free from the Americans. We were one of the first who recognised the People's Republic of China. We also recognised Hanoi and

Lectures & Articles

273

Vietnam. But without the demonstrations, it would not have been possible. •So in a way, we were changing. But at the same time, in 1976, it was the end of the American involvement in Vietnam and it was the end of the monarchy in Laos. So the Thais became much more reactionary, because we were afraid that it would also be the end of our monarchy. And 1 think right now this is also the issue but we are not speaking about it openly. So you see, from 1976 until now, we have followed the American model of development. Also during this period, many non govermental organisation's were being set up. I was one of the founders of some of the NGOs. Most of them realized that the government's organisations did not really work for the people. For instance, the army is supposed to defend the country. But what has our army done in defending our country and against whom? The army is only good at killing our own people. Our standing army is now 100 years old. The first battle we fought was against the French in 1893. We shot the French gunboat, but we missed it. Therefore, we lost one third of our Kingdom. And I said, “if we had hit the gunboat, we would have lost the whole of our country.” The military was very angry. And 5 years ago, we fought with the Laotians. Laos is a small country in Asia, but we lost the battle. We were defeated by the Laotians. And 1 said that our army is very good at killing our people and making a lot of money through drugs and corrupt from buying arms. And the military became angrier with me. 1 said the that army is supposed to be the fence and the country is supposed to be the house. But the army is indeed the termite, which is eating away the house. The army was very very angry with me, and they did not want me to stay at home. These NGO's, or non- government organisations, have now become very active over the last 20 years. Because people feel that if you are somebody who wants to serve the people you must form your own organisation. Now we are looking for alternative forms of development. At first, we thought that we were smart; we were the elites, the intellectuals, and that we could teach the people. We believed that for 4 or 5 years. And now we've learned that we can learn from them. We learn from them and they learn from us. When I told the students in 1973 that they must learn from Buddha, they refused. But those who went to join the Communist Party of Thailand felt that they had been betrayed. Because it was not the Communist Party of Thailand, but the Chinese Communist Party. They wanted to make us Chinese. So they left the Communist Party. Many of them are now becoming capitalists. But many also want to devote their time to work for the people. And for the first time, they feel that there is something worthwhile to learn from the Buddha. Because Buddhism teaches us that we must be sensitive to other people. First of all, we must have the seeds of peace within us -again 1 am promoting my book, Seeds of Peace. If we

274

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

have no seeds of peace, we can not do anything. If you have seeds of peace, then you can learn to become humble. With seeds of peace you can develop critical self-awareness. With critical self-awareness and humility you can learn from others. “Others” are not only human beings, but include animals, trees and everything else that you can learn from, like our ancesters did. You can learn from the Burmese and from the Cambodians. We are all brothers and sisters. It is wrong to save the Siamese forest but still destroy the Burmese forest. Nature has no boundaries. If the Burmese forest is destroyed, it will affect us too. So we must respect the Burmese forest too. From 1973 to 1992 the number of people who believe in this has been growing. The reson why the May demonstrations were so successful is because many of us have learnt to organise a nonviolent solidarity. 1 was one of those who were involved in the training of nonviolence. We did a lot in the last 20 years. For example, 1 have helped young people to form some non-governmental organisations : the Coordinating Group for Religion and Society; the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development; the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute; the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. In 1992 we organised a march from the Siamese boarder to Phnom Penh which took one whole month. It was a wonderful and peaceful march. If I had been in Siam I would have joined the march. The monk who led the march was the Venerable Maha Ghosananda, the fourth Supreme Monk of Cambodia. On the 5th of November, 1 992 he received the Human Rights Award from Norway. This is the same award Aung San Suu Kyi received before she got the Noble Peace Prize. This award is a very significant one. My point is that Siam is now at a crossroad. Unless those who want to push Siam to be the fifth tiger and the top model of develoment, change their mind and follow the alternative model of development, Siam will have no future. Of course it is very difficult for the people to change. Even our present Prime Minister, a very commoner. But I believe that he with his cabinet and intellectual elites, still believe in the capitalist model of development. Many people in the west still believe in this model of development. Forme, there issomething wrong in the idea of development itself, so I am strongly against the opinions stated in the book The End of History written by Mr. Fukuyama. I am for Mr. Fukuoka. He is the only Japanese, who feels that the way to do agriculture must be a Buddhist way too. In my book, Seeds of Peace, I make a difference between Buddhism with a capital “ B ” and a small “ b ” . In Christianity, it is the same: the capital “ C ” and the small “ c ” . The essense of religion is that we want to become humble. Then you are able to listen to the trees and the earth. The book written by Mr. Fukuoka is called The OneStraw Revolution. Thisbook was translated into Thai and has become very popular now.

Lectures & Articles

275

We are all at a crossroad — not just the Siamese. The choice is how to live simplier,how to be modest and how to limit greed. The capitalist model means the more we have the better it is. Therefore we use advertisements to increase the consumerism. The more you want, although you do not really need it, the better it is for the economy. In Buddhism the three causes of suffering are greed, hatred and delusion. Greed is now personified by consumerism. Hatred is now personified by power and politics and of course, militarism. Although in Germany militarism as a low profile, 8 4 % of Germany's arms are sold to the Third World. So I think that greed and hatred are related. The worst cause of suffering is delusion. Delustion is the intellectual approach which makes you feel so grand, so great that you develope only your head but not your heart. The main point of Buddhism and other religions is how to synchronise our head with our heart, so that knowledge becomes understanding and understanding becomes compassion. Compassion means love and understanding and with it we cannot divide ourselves from others. In Germany, as you have seen, some Germans began to kill some Turks because the Turks were not accepted as one of them. Delusion can grow to become something very ugly, because of the lack of compassion. But if knowledge becomes understanding, compassion and humility, perhaps we may be able to change. In Buddhism we can find the very element of democracy. In the Trinity: the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. The Buddha is a man who changed himself entirely from a selfish being into a selfless being. The Dhamma is of course, the law, the universal law, that is right, a middle way, compassion and love. Once you identify yourself with the law, you will lose your selfishness, you will become integrated with the law. That means you will become compassionate. To reach this, you can train yourself by joining the Sangha. The Sangha is a community which anyone can join, men and women. It is a community of equality, fraternity and liberation. The word Sangha is not invented by the Buddha. He got it from former small republic's in his part of the world. He himself came from his Sangha called Sakaya-sangha. There were many other Sanghas, for example Sangha of Vajji. The idea of Sangha is that each person, has both masculine and feminine elements in oneself. With meditation and by planting seeds of peace, the masculine and the feminine can make a person full and whole. The yin and yang operate fully. So you do not need family . The family has many good attributes. But once you have your family, you will become very selfish. You will think of your family first and if you do not have a deep commitment to love, you will exploit yourself and/or your family. Husband and wife will exploit each other. That is why the ideal form of society in Buddhism is characterizes by homelessness.

Z16

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

In Thai society, although most of us are married and live with our family, we take the Sangha as a model of how to live a simple life —to be kind, to be generous and to use democratic means to solve our problems. This is what 1 call the “ B a n ” concept and it's still found in Siam today, particularly in the villages. Professor Terviel confirmed this, when he went to Siam the first time 30 years ago. Everybody in the “ B a n ” was equal. Ofcourse, there were rich and poor, but they ate equally. They slept equally and they had the same indigenious medicine. They did not have that much bigger houses and smaller houses, unlike today. This illustrates the concept of Sangha and it is now being destroyed. So those of us who want to cross the road this way round are challenging this capitalistic model of development which is bound to produce more greed and pollution. We want to have a simple life style with less consumerism and we are now following the path of alternative development. Luckily, the number of the NGOs pursuing this alternative has grown since 1973. In fact, the monks are now becoming very active. The monks, particulary in the North-East, which is the poorest region, has now become the most active. Luang-Po Nan, a monk in Surin province and an ethnic Cambodian, said that 30 years ago he was young and poor, but proud. But now the people are poor and the villagers sell their daughters to become prostitutes to earn money without dignity. They become drugs addicts and are involved in gambling. So Luang-Po Nan uses meditation practice and revives old traditions to help them. Now in his area the community movement has become very effective. The monks in the North are also becoming very active in protecting the environment. Not only monks, but young people are now working for change. We have a doctor's organisation called “Chom-rom PaetChonabot”, the Rural Doctor's Association, which is now becoming very active. Up until 10 years ago, most of our best medical teams and doctors went to America. The rest remained only in Bangkok and in big towns. But now more and more doctors are going to the rural areas. They are learning about indigenious medicine. They are learning Ayuraveda from the monks. Now, for the first time, holy water and indigenous treatments are allowed in hospitals. Even the medium doctors are allowed into the hospital. This is something very new in my country. Perhaps now we are crossing over towards something alternative. During the last few years some Burmese who fled from Burma to us, were locked up and were sent back to be killed. Many of them were some of Burma's best and brightest. Now the young Siamese help them so they will not be sent back. More and more young people in Siam are working together with the Burmeses and the Cambodians towards an alternative model of development. In Buddhism you can change things if you know how to confront suffering. The first ot the Four Noble Truths is the truth of suffering. With

Lectures & Articles

277

capitalism, development and consumerism we are trying to avoid suffering. But the more we have consumerism, the more we develop the technologies to exacerbate suffering. In Buddhism, we must confront suffering. This does not mean we accept suffering.Instead, we find the root causes of suffering which are greed, hatred and delusion. Exploitation and the whole system of exploitation are now being accepted but not confronted. That is why Bangkok has became so ugly. We accept the pollution and the colonial administration. But we must work against them and work against them nonviolently. We should not hate the exploiter but we must confront the exploiting system. We must look for an alternative model. We are now building up our strength personally. We also need good friends, who both talk with us and listen to us. Our good friends need not be Buddhists, nor Thais. They can be Christians, Muslims, Cambodians, Burmese and so on. We are now starting. However, we are still under the influence of the multinational cooperations. We still have to listen to the army, which is very powerful behind the scenes. But if we can get the NGOs and our people to become more active and if the people who are educated abroad want to join us we will be stronger and stronger in the struggle against greed, hatred and delusion. To travel that road, we must listen to the suffering of the people. Here in Frankfurt I think there are more Thai prostitutes than Thai students and they do not learn from each other. If the students now start to learn from the prostitutes, to help them and to listen to them, I think it may be a good start. It is very important to listen to and respect those who have suffered more than us. From this kind of a beginning we can come together to understand the system of exploitation and to understand the injustice of international trade, the IMF and the World Bank. I do not condemn everybody who is working with the IMF or in the World Bank. Some of them are good and we can have dialogues with them. In this way, I think we can change. You may know that towards the end of 1992 in Bangkok there was an interesting international meeting called “ P P 2 1 ” . It means “People's Participation for the21th century ” . It started in Japan in 1 990. People from the first and the third worlds are coming together, listening to each other and looking for alternatives. They want human rights, humanity and dignity for mankind and they talk about how to protect the environment. One other organisation in which I am involved directly is the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. You can read about it in my book. The Buddhists, so far, are wonderful people. But they have very small pockets. They want to meditate and sometimes they have no social concerns. We Buddhists want peace within but we must have vision for modern society too. So now engaged Buddhists around the world are starting to link with each other and work together. They are also working with Christians and Muslims. The “PP21 ” , unfortunately only cares for

278

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

human rights but not yet for spiritual depth. The Buddhist who cares for spiritual depth should learn to care for social justice, for human rights and for the environment. In Germany I have talked to the people in the Green Party and other organizations. I think these people may also want to learn from us. If they learn from us perhaps they may quarrel less and have more compassion. We must also learn from them about how to care for the environment as well as other issues. If we learn from each other, listen to each other and have the seed of peace within, perhaps our wish to change the world in the 21th century will be possible. In mycountry now wehavealotofdifficulties. But we have enough good will to work with this democratic regime although it is only a democracy in form. But we will work and slowly move towards more democracy. The Siamese demonstrations in May 1992 might not have been a great thing in the world but it has inspired the people in Burma and even the people in Tibet and China. After the 1 988 events in Burma, the people who killed people are still in power. In China, the people who killed the students in Tien-anmen Square are still in power. At least in my country, those who killed people are no longer in power. In the Thai case, perhaps this is a break-through. And if we can follow the right path it may be the first time that Thais contribute something to the region and to the world. We were lucky: in 1855 we were not colonised and after in the Second World War we were not punished. Perhaps this time we will push through! But this time it will not only result from luck. It will result from very hard work, real commitment, love and nonviolence. If we get through it will be something worthwhile. Thank you!

Sulak Sivaraksa's speech at the University Germany, on 11th December 1992.

of Frankfurt,

VH. Miscellaneous

The power of the English sovereign had for many years been steadily declining, and the limitations to which he was practically subject went far beyond the mere letter of the law... What the position of the English sovereign was in the eyes of the English Church was sufficiently shown by the long series of theologians who proclaimed in the most emphatic term that he possessed a Divine right... The language of English law was less unqualified, but still it painted his authority in very different colours from those which an historian of George I or George II would have used. The " Commentaries" of Blackstone were not published till George III had been for some time on the throne; but Bute had obtained a considerable portion of them in manuscript from the author, for the purpose of instructing the Prince in the principles of the Constitution. "The King of England" in the words of Blackstone "is not only the chief, but properly the sole magistrate of the nation... He governs the kingdom : statesmen, who administer affairs, are only his ministers". George III and the Historians Herbert Butterfield, 1988 pp.163

T H E TALE O F TWO MEN From : [email protected](Tawit Chitsomboon) Subject: The Tale of Two Men Date: 26 Apr 1993 15:44:33 G M T Organization: Institue for Computational Mechanics in Propulsion Lines: 19 Distribution: World The Tale of Two Men: Anand P. and Sulak S. The two were high-school classmates. Both went to Oxbridge for their higher education. One chose to be capitalistic, the other ascetic. One cooperated with the NPKC, the other challenged it. One became a PM, the other a wandering political refugee. Both come back to stand trials in Criminal Courts. One was supported by red-rosed Khunyings, the other by yellow-robed monks. Let's hope that both are again free so that they could continue their contrasts and similarities — What is life without such? T H E MATERIAL VS. T H E MIND Thorn in the flesh or guiding light? Thailand's one-man think tank give his views in terse excerpts from an interview with Phochana Phichitsiri.

On Western Culture I want to get people to understand both the good and bad sides of western culture. Most of us accept the bad side. Bangkok has experienced an extremely bad side: it is the world's most polluted city, almost the number one city of slums, almost the number one city of prostitution, almost the numberone city of AIDS, because the people, without stopping to think, are trying to have what westerners have. Thais desire to be rich, but being rich is both good and bad. Development must be balanced between material possessions and the mind. Since I have to criticize the negative effects of western cu Iture, some people hate me. They dislike criticism, which is necessary. Recently, the institute of the monarchy of the U K accepted criticism. Criticism here should be done moderately, not the way it is done in the UK because Thai peopl e stil1respect the king. I have tried to open Thai people's eyes but t hey won't allow their eyes to open.

282

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

On Political Systems Everyone thinks that democracy is a good system. In a democracy, the people are powerful, so the people's voice must be heard whenever they are in trouble. But democracy around the world is not like this. Even the US sticks to its form because the rich become richer and the poor become poorer. Democracy is controlled by capitalism, but it does not provide equal rights in terms of the economy, which is different from socialism, which provides equal rights in economic terms At least people get jobs, cheap housing and medical benefits. When socialism collapsed, people thought that democracy was better, but in fact that was not the case. Democracy encourages capital ism, which is dangerous. There is so much corruption in Japan and the US even though they are democratic countries. The problem is that they are a democracy only in form, not in content. So, how to get into the essence of democracy? Having an elected prime minister still does not mean democracy. How do we make people recognize the value of ethics, get rid of prostitution and child labour and preserve the forests? These are basic human rights. On Development Who benefits from development? Dams provide both advantages and disadvantages, but mostly disadvantages. For instance, a few people, not the majority, enjoy the benefits of EGAT( the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand). In education, universities do not benefit the majority of people. At least 80 per cent of the people have no opportunity to go to university. Certainly, rectors and ministers must say universities provide an advantage because they use taxes paid by everyone for the benefit of a small group of people. The knowledge universities give their students aims to develop ability but not a moral sense. Increasing the number of expressways does not mean that the traffic problem will be solved. The government should reduce the number of cars. The government does not dare tax cars entering Bangkok nor ban five-year-old cars. The government has to upgrade public transportation. This problem can be soved but they haven't done it. The government does not need to build a monument to mark the eventsoflast May. We have almost reached the first anniversary of those events. What has the government done? They are the ones who hold the country's power. I think it is better to honour those who were fighters for democracy, so that Thais do not forget Pridi Banomyong, Chalard Worachat or Chamlong Srimuang. The Thai people and their leaders have been limited by western development. They think the point of development is to be rich, to have

Miscellaneous

283

new technologies, to develop the material side. These are too dangerous. The best development is to develop human resources. First, consider ways to upgrade poor people in rural areas so that even if they are not rich they can also be proud of themsalves. Since they are poor, they have suffered because others have looked down on them. Second, find ways to provide them with the necessities of life: food, shelter, clothing and medical treatment. Everybody has the right to these, but the country's development is only to make the rich richer. We are following Japan and the US. We look down on our neighbours— Laos and Cambodia — who are indeed our relatives. If we realize they are our impoverished friends, we will love them instead of Japan. Anyway, most important is how to change our attitude, beginning with Sammaditthi, to have right thinking and not to lose awareness. Everything is related, including animals, plants and water resources. We must also love these things. Eventually, we won't face environmental problems. We have to be more concerned about trees than money. Trees take years to grow but money can be produced in just a moment.Whenever we receive the right understanding, we will be happy and can also provide others with happiness as well. Business Review May 1993 NOT BRAVE, JUST CONSTANT Founder and editor of over seven magazines, author of more than 100 publications on culture, development, religion and ethics, founder or co-founderof a number of philanthropic institutes, Sulak Sivaraksa, 60, has for over 30 years managed to inspire conflicting emotions in a wide range of people, from the Thai people themselves, who either distrust him or admire him, to the international community, who has nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize. “Would 1 put him on the same level as Mother Theresa of India?” says one Thai. “It's true he speaks straight forwardly, and he doesn't seem to be afraid of the consequences, but Mother Theresa? No.” Says another, “ H e does tend to blow his own trumpet, but if you get past that, you find that most of what he says makes sense, a great deal of sense.” Well-khown social critic Dr Prawase Wasi considers Mr Sulak's contributions most important in terms of encouraging people to love reading, writing, criticizing and questioning in the search for wisdom, “ I believe that Khun Sulak is providing hope to the country, religion and the king. He is effective in urging Thais to seek freeedom through the

284

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

understanding of their own basic culture.” Mr. Sulak, born in Bangkok to a well-to-do Thai Chinese family, completed his elementary and secondary education at Assumption College, and earned his degree in law at the Middle Temple in England, returning to Thailand in 1962, when he established Sangkhomsat Parithat (Social Science Review), which marked a giant step for the intellectuals of the time. Sangkhomsat Parithat was the first publication to attract the interest of intellectuals, who founded a club, “Parithat Sewana” in 1966. Komol Keemthong, a Chulalongkorn lecturer, was asked to head the club but he refused and went upcountry to teach instead. Ambushed and killed by communists in 1971, he was memorialized by the establishment of the Komol Keemothong Foundation, one of the many orgartizations Mr. Sulak founded to aid in human development. Other philanthropic organizations Mr.Sulak has been involved in include the Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute (peace, democracy and righteousness). Another, the Sathirakoset Nagapradipa Foundation, was formed to help support poor writers in their personal and publishing needs. In 1975, he was active in forming the Coordinating Group of Religion in Society (CGRS) to create a nonviolent alternative to the increasingly polarized extremes of the left and right. Another association, the Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development (TICD), generates programmes for religious groups to work together in community development. In 1976, when Thanin Kraivixien became prime minister, most of Mr Sulak's published material was banned, and the company publishing Siam Parithat was closed down. Mr Sulak, who was abroad at the time (unlike the 1973 Student Revolution, when he was forced to hide in safe places within the country) elected to stay in temporary exile, teaching philosophy and Southeast Asian intellectual history at London University, Cornell, Berkeley, Hawaii and Toronto. Two years later, when the country's political situation had recovered, he returned to Thailand, to write, make speeches and translate basic western philosophy. “1 want to introduce Thais to the essence and philosophy of the West, and 1 tried to point out the good and bad points of western culture,” he says. It wasoneofhispubications, Unmasking Thai Society, that caught the attention of Gen Athit Kamlang-ek, whobrought charges of lesemajeste against him. The charges were later dropped, but Mr Sulak says he had to endure harassment because of his continuous criticism of the military. “ I do not hate soldiers,” he says today. “ I do not criticize any military chief in particular, but 1 criticize today's military system, which is powerful.

Miscellaneous

285

“The military’s role is like a fence to protect the country; they should not be involved in politics. I dislike a system that creates pollution, corruption and prostitution. These are the results of a bad system.” In the end, he says, it is not necessary to be brave to say what is right or wrong about Thai society, but rather constant. “ A lot of people have come out to express their criticism, not only me,” he says, “but I am different because I have continued my criticism for many years.” Business Review May 1993

BOOK REVIEWS Siam in Crisis by Sulak Sikvaraksa. Revised 2nd edition. Bangkok: Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute and Thai Inter-religious Commission for Development (TICD), 1990. 371 pp. $20, cloth; $15, paper. Most of Sulak's books, as well as those he has sponsored or edited, begin with the suggestion of a crisis: “This kingdom was known as Siam until 1939, when it was changed to Thailand...The name, Thailand, signifies the crisis of traditional Siamese Buddhist values.” It is the gap between the preservation of traditional Siamese values and evolution or development along the lines of modern “Thailand” that constitutes Sulak's crisis. Sulak is critical of thoughtless breaks with the past symbolized by the Westernization of the country's name - and the general unquestioning acceptance of Western values in Thailand and other parts of Asia. He would prefer to go back to the use of the term Siam, even though the origins of this term are likely non-Thai (Tai). This volume is an excellent introduction to Sulak's perception of a crisis in values in Thai (Siamese) society today. In Sulak's notes to the second, revised edition, he states that “There would seem to be no more need to reprint Siam in Crisis, but quite a few guidebooks mention this book, so foreign visitors keep asking for it.” But this is not a book for the casual tourist to Thailand; it is one of the more provocative primers on Sulak's often controversial thought, and so deserves republication for that reason alone. The revised edition is, for the most part, an improved, expanded, and updated version of the earlier edition. The first major section of essays introduces us to some of Sulak's selection of major historical personalities in Siamese life. In the original volume, these personalities were presented as literary figures, ranging from Prince Naris to Anuman Rajadhon and Kukrit Pramoj. This revised edition has added seven more short biographies to what has now become a more general “personality section,” which has come to include Westerners, such as Thomas Merton, whose life ended abruptly in Bangkok in 1968, and the follower of Tibetan Buddhism, Alexandra David-Neil. The

286

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

section ends with the sketch of Shigeharu Masumoto, who founded the International House of Japan and fostered an intellectual exchange program between Japan and Southeast Asia and increased mutual friendship between Japan and the international community. The revised edition maintains two sections: 1) a background to understanding Thai politics, and 2) Western contributions to Thai studies. The former contains essays on the problems of elites versus the common people, the students' role in society, the avoidance of basic social problems, the prospects of democracy, and Siam versus the West. The latter section discusses the influence of America on books, magazines, and newspapers in Thailand, and gives a Siamese response to Western political science. The section in the earlier edition entitled “Siam in the Wider World 1966-1970,” which discussed some of Siam's neighbors, including Laos and Vietnam, has been replaced with sections on “SiamSE Asia-Japan” and “ N e w Crisis: Viewpoint from the Late 1980s.” These new sections raise issues concerning Japan in Southeast Asia and a comparison of ethnic minorities in Burma and Siam. Since the publication of the earlier Crisis and this revised edition, it is clear that a good portion of Sulak's attention has been focused on Japan. The latter section also includes a telling interview with Western Buddhist Christopher Titmuss on the “Religion of Consumerism” in modern Siam, in which Sulak expresses his Buddhist views that problems and development in society are increasingly attributable to greed (“Development is another word for greed,” p.178) to be tempered by Buddhist skillful means (upaya, p.180). In publications that have followed the original version of Siam in Crisis, such as A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society (1981) and Siamese Resurgence (1985), Sulak has been increasingly applying the Siamese Buddhist tradition to modern, national development - the changes that have occurred between the revisions of Siam in Crisis also reflect his Buddhist interests ( “ M y job is to tell people the ways to overcome their suffering,” p.181). The section on “Aspects of Thai Buddhism” has, therefore, grown over the last decade, and a new final appendix, “ O n the Author and his Views,” which includes more snippets about Sulak than by him (similar to the appendix \n Siamese Resurgence), also reflects Sulak's efforts along these lines. An important interview with Buddhadasa Bhikkhu appears in both editions (reprinted from an earlier publication, Visakha Puja 2510/1967). An essay on the waning of the study of the Buddhist Pali language written by Phra Devamedhi, perceived as another facet of the crisis in tradition and values, was removed in the revised edition. Perhaps an enhanced or updated version of the original article would have been better than dropping the point on the decline in Pali studies altogether. In the new appendix, credit is given to Sulak for stubbornly maintaining his stance despite resistance from others and the

Miscellaneous

287

prevailing materialistic trends in development (the case of his being charged with lesemajeste in 1984 comes up often, for example, see “Notes from the Author on the Second Edition,” and pp.184, 322). Sulak's inclusion of the recent, candid thoughts (diary notes?) of a volunteer worker temporarily residing at his house in Bangkok, “Living at Sulak's,” reveals his determination, honesty, and straightforward approach to leadership. Even though it has been about a decade since the first version of Siam in Crisis was printed, in the introduction to this revised edition Sulak says, “ M y view on my country and the region has not changed significantly. In fact the crisis in ethical and cultural values seems to be worsening.” It is Sulak's optimism in the face of precious few triumphs in changing the course of development that comes through loud and clear. As with Sulak's other volumes, there is much to inspire and much to take exception with - and Sulak knows the value of both of these. It is the difficulty of treading a middle path between inspired, meaningful development and dealing with self-doubt and the greed and doubts of others that is clearly communicated. In reading this book, the reader is introduced to a number of prominent Siamese and international figures who have assisted Siam, several important issues facing the evolution of Siam, and the provocative thought of a modern thinker struggling to make valuable traditions relevant to the present moment. Grant A. Olson Northern Illinois University from Crossroad 1 990 Seeds of Peace Vol.7 No.1 January-April 2534(1991) SEEDS OF PEACE : A BUDDHIST VISION FOR RENEWING SOCIETY By Sulak Sivaraksa Parallax; 129 pages; $12 Seeds of Peace takes its title from the Buddhist concept of mind —specifically a spectrum of seeds, or potential ities, that lie at the root level of consciousness. Aggressive actions ‘water’ aggressive seeds, compassionate actions water compassionate seeds. At the same time, the actions themselves become seeds. In this book of calm, powerful essays, Sulak Sivaraksa argues for watering seeds of peace. The consequences of this stance have thrust him into direct conflict with the political and military leaders of his homeland, Thailand. At the time of publication, Sivaraksa remains in exile in the United States, threatened with arrest and worse in his native country. Although he never strays in these essays from the rational tone and careful speech of a deeply realized Buddhist meditator, Sivaraksa's words

288

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

pack a wallop. He seems unafaid of naming names, or of criticizing powerful interests. Sivaraksa's exile places him alongside two other great Buddhists whose courage of convictions and forthright speech forced them from the comforts of monastery and homeland: the Dalai Lama of Tibet and Thich Nhat Hanh of Vietnam, both of whom contribute introductory essays to this volume. The essays in Seeds of Peace fall into two sections, “The Politics of Greed” and “Personal and Societal Transformation.” In the first section, Sivaraksa delineates the problems facing Siam. (He refers to his country by this name, saying that the name change in 1939 was carried out by a corrupt dictator, and that “removing from the nation the name it has carried all of its life is the first step in the dehumanization of its citizens, especially when the original name was replaced by a hybrid, Anglicized word. The new name implies chauvinism and irredentism, and I refuse to use it.”) These essays are sharply critical of the materialist strategies that have invaded Siam, eroding the reflective, settled, village way of life there. Sivaraksa lays the blame at the feet of industrialized nations, and in one particulary pointed essay, he details the history of Japan's corrupting influence on his country. The picture he paints of the Thai plight is grim: ‘ ‘ Plagued by mounting debts, the peasants of Southeast Asia are gradually losing their land, and millions are flocking to the cities to search for a better life. Bangkok, for instance, witnessed a 60 percent population increase, to five million people during a period of only three years in the early 1980s. Rampant unemployment forces many to resort to crime. Young girls work as servants, factory workers, or are forced into prostitution. Children work illegally in small shops under the hardhest conditions. Some are even sold abroad. Men do heavy labor for pathetically low wages.” If the book has a weakness, it is that the transformations Sivaraksa outlines in the second half might seem cliched, or generalized to the point of ineffectiveness. Sivaraksa emphasizes love, altruism, development of inner strength, a working relationship with moral precepts and a nonsexist, nonviolent, egalitarian, democratic society. Two points must be made. First, this is the traditional Buddhist prescription for curing cultural ills: Sivaraksa’s restatement of it varies only by being specific to the modern Thai situation. According to the teachings, progress towards individual integrity is a requisite first step toward effective social action. Second, Sivaraksa does not advocate his ideals as a naive political or religious theorist, but as an experienced grass-roots organizer. His words bear the weight of years of struggle; perhaps no Buddhist has worked harder or longer at networking, outreach and the gritty tasks of

Miscellaneous

289

organizing. In addition, he has taught extensively in the United States, with visiting professorships at UC Berkeley, Cornell, Swarthmore and the University of Hawaii. Drawing on this background, Sivaraksa fashions a message that is pure without being self-righteous, and simple without sacrificing sophistication. by Tensho David Schneider (Tensho David Schneider is a contributing editor to Tricycle: The Buddhist Review) from San Francisco Examiner - Chronical 12 Apr. 1992 SEEDS OF PEACE : A BUDDHIST VISION FOR RENEWING SOCIETY By Sulak Sivaraksa, Parallax Press, Berkeley. USS 12. Sulak Sivaraksa, founder of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, was unable to attend his organisation's 1 6-23 February conference in Bangkok. Sulak fled Thailand last September to escape arrest for charges of lese majeste and defaming the Thai army Commander-inChief. He remains in exile. The charges resulted from a speech he made at Thammasat University that opened; “Why did the August 1991 coup in the Soviet Union fail in less than 60 hours while the February 1991 Thai coup shows no sign of ending?” Thailand's most outspoken social critic and activist has a history of running into trouble for taking his country's rulers to task. And if the severity of the present government's reaction is any indication, “engaged Buddhist” activists such as Sulak embody a fresh and potent force for political change in Thailand. The speech that led to Sulak's exile, and a dozen other speeches and essays from the last 25 years collected here, read more like sermons than scholarship. Many of Sulak's arguments rest on historical generalisations about the benign quality of life under Buddhist rule before colonialism and the subsequent contamination of Asian culture by “Western material values.” While some readers may dismiss Sulak on these grounds, it soon becomes clear that his purpose is not academic but moral excellence. Like a rousing sermon, Sulak's words prod the reader to reconsider conventional development strategies in light of a higher good. “Our notion of development... must address the question, what is a human being, and what should a human being be ? ” He distrusts development models based solely on economic growth and denounces the religion of consumerism that leaves urban Asians over-worked and unfulfilled. Out of his account of the grip of social and environmental consequence that await heedless modernisation emerge a uniquely Buddhist critique of modern

290

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Asian consumer societies. Sulak's analysis grows from the Buddhist belief that the root cause of suffering is desire. Development strategies based exclusively on capitalist economic theory, he argues, serve to stimulate demand - that is, human material desire. As capitalist societies develop, consumer culture and advertising inflame human desires to an insatiable level. Such desires, in turn, foster human suffering in a spiral of hatred and aggression and exploitation as people try in vain to fulfil these desires. Buddhists believe that this spiral can be uprooted by striving to overcome desire. Sulak rebukes development strategies that aim at the populous countries of Asia and encourage consumption patterns in imitation of industrially advanced nations before they develop their own indigenous industrial capacity. Put another way, Buddhism views culture, nation, society and economy as products of the human mind, which thus becomes the primary object of development. Sulak wants development strategies formed to incorporate strategies for human spiritual development. Two realisations are necessary to accomplish this: “ A n inner realisation concerning greed, hatred and delusion, and an outer realisation concerning the impact these tendencies have on society and the planet.” Distinct from leftist radicals, Sulak's engaged Buddhist does not blame a class enemy, but rather places responsibility on the individual. “Radical transformation” is neither elusive nor esoteric, but rather the process of “becoming less and less selfish. And in this regard, Sulak is truly radical for he suggests that proper development strategies will encourage renunciation. Consumers will be more temperate in their desires...destructive systems of development and capitalism would fail.” When describing how Buddhist practice can lead to personal transformation Sulak's writing lacks the clarity and originality of more gifted gurus. But he is uniquely inspirational when showing how Buddha might transform the life of a nation. Jordan Aren Far Eastern Economic Review 28 May 1992 RADICAL CONSERVATISM : BUDDHISM IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD : Articles in Honor of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa's 84th Birthday Anniversary, edited by Sulak Sivaraksa et al. Bangkok: Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development, and the International Networkof Engaged Buddhists, 1990. xvi + 558pp.,750 Baht, paper; 1200 Baht, cloth in Thailand; $38 paper (postage included); $60, cloth elsewhere. Distributed by Suksit Siam in Bangkok, Parallax Press in Berkeley. For a quarter century , Sulak Sivaraksa has played an important role

Lectures & Articles

291

facilitating Thai intellectual discourse as a mentor, patron, and friend of some of his country's leading social commentators. In Radical Conservatism, he and his co-editors honor Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's 84th birthday by applying his talent to compiling a diverse collection of writings on topics and issues related to themes and interest that the venerable Thai monk has brought to the forefront over his nearly sixty years as a monk, writer, and teacher. Over the years Buddhadasa Bhikkhu has attained widespread honor at home and abroad for writings employing traditional themes and symbols to articulate a more internalized style of Buddhist practice. In classic reformist style, he asks his audience to adhere to the scriptural core of the Buddhist tradition, while reshaping the public's understanding of the content and central message of that tradition. Prolific, creative, controversial, and unique, his formulations have influenced a wide range of Buddhist practitioners. This volume, aimed as it is at an international academic audience, is a prime opportunity to increase scholarly understanding of those themes, their articulation with traditions outside Thailand, and with the work of contemporary religious thinkers elsewhere. Although several essays contribute in this regard, the volume as a whole falls short of its potential. Part of the problem may be a diffuse editorial focus suggested by the title. The book is simultaneously a festschrift, a sampling of “Buddhism in the Contemporary World,” and a collection of representations of what “radically conservative” (read “contemporary reformist”) Buddhism might be. While one admires the organizational prowess that brought together this rich and eclectic collection of sermons, articles, speeches, and musings, the sheer variety of the contents suggests that the editors did so by casting an unusually wide net. The wide range of contributions reflects high esteem for Buddhadasa and for the volume's editor, but this writer wishes the editors had assembled a more focused set of articles and demanded more consistent quality from their authors. They also passed up the opportunity to place Buddhadasa's work in context by highlighting the commonalties and differences among the authors, making explicit connections between the articles and Buddhadasa's work, or even identifying the authors and their qualifications. This festschrift seems even looser in concept and uneven in content than is common for the genre. As a result most of the articles are best read for their contributions to particular fields rather than for their relationships to each other, to Buddhadasa's contributions, or to the editors' briefly stated goals. Several pieces do have scholarly value. Three of them focus specifically on Buddhadasa's work and contributions. Louis Gabaude analyzes the approaches and limitations of Buddhadasa's work in a social and intellectual context; Donald Swearer unpacks some of Buddhadasa's

292

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

rhetorical paradoxes; and Grant A. Olson compares him with the younger scholar-monk Phra Debvedi (formerly Phra Rajavaramuni). Other pieces worth noting include Allan Bessey's assessment of the changing place of nuns and female meditation instructors in Thai Buddhism; Peter GyalluyPap and Michel Tranet's survey of Cambodian Buddhism's recovery after Pol Pot; John Crook's treatment of the social and intellectual paradoxes facing a Buddhist ethnic minority in Ladakh, India; M. Yusoff Ismail's notes on Thai temples in Kelantan, Malaysia; Bhikkhu Piyasilo's survey and justification of newly emerging genres of Buddhist song and chant; and Chaiwat Satha-Anand's reading of the problem of “self” in a Muslim text. There are also several solid pieces by noted monks. Phra Sumedho, a disciple of the prominent forest monk Phra Acharn Cha, contributes a meditation applying the ten classic virtues and duties of a “wise ruler” to the conduct of contemporary lay life. Phra Rewata Dhamma applies a carefully argued hermeneutic deriving a strong environmentalist stance for the Buddhist texts. Phra Debvedi contributes a lengthy article on institutions for inculcating Buddhism through the centuries; he seems especially useful in dealing with the textual materials from the early period. Other pieces may be of interest for reasons other than scholarship. Thich Nhat Hahn's article on “New Views on Buddhism and Psychotherapy,” while a confusing introduction to his work and thought, gives a glimpse of this respected leader's style of dispensing advice. Articles by socially concerned Buddhists, such as Prawase Wasi, Chatsumarn Kabilisingh, and S. Sivaraksa, together with the one by Phra Rewata Dhamma already mentioned, represent some of the latest thinkingon their respective subjects. Several essays disappoint, and the ones now listed are only examples. David Loy, for example, undermines a potentially promising philosophic-psycholanalytic argument that we repress “the intuition that the ego-self does not exist” (p.22) by wandering among seemingly inconsistent definitions of self and not-self drawn from historically diverse systems of Buddhist thought. Glenn. D. Paige offers commentary (p.139ff) based on an international conference on Buddhism and Leadership for World Peace, that is neither identifiably a summary, nor a manifesto, nor an original contribution, while at the same time appearing to be all of these at once. Wide-raging commentary by some authors (for example, Kotler and Crawford) on contemporary developments in international Buddhism leaves me wondering how representative the leaders and ideas cited truly are. Phra Debvedi's detailed attention to the historical differences among Buddhist traditions sits oddly alongside some contributors' tendency to assume a diffuse and undifferentiated voice for

Lectures & Articles

293

Buddhism as a whole. The copy editing is technically adequate, with only an occasionally misprinted name (such as Bessey vs. Besey) or date. Authors are identified only by their addresses, though, and Gabaude's extensive bibliography of works by and about Buddhadasa could have included romanization alongside the Thai characters. More important, I was puzzled by several aspects of the book's financing: The John F. Kennedy Foundation helped subsidize the book, and local production costs should be low; yet even the paperback costs a tenth of a Thai assistant professor’s monthly salary, surely limiting its accessibility. Author royalties and any profits go to further the work and aims of the same group that organized and published the book. This stands in contrast to similar festschrifts on religion that, in Thailand, are commonly distributed at or below the often-subsidized cost of production. Edwin Zehner Wheaton College Crossroads Northern Illinois University Vol.7 No.l 1992 FIVE CYCLES OF FRIENDSHIP WITH SULAK SIVARAKSA by Friends of Sulak Sivaraksa to honour his sixtieth birthday anniversary Suksit Siam, Bangkok 27 March 1993/2536 First Published 1993, 132 pages It is not often that tributes are paid to a person while he is alive. Sulak Sivaraksa asked his friends to write their memoirs of him on his 60th birthday and came up with tributes which have been published into a book. Five Cycles of Friendship is the title of the book, which was published to mark Sulak's fifth cycle anniversary. It features letters and writings from Sulak's friends and acquaintances worldwide, many of them well known personalities in their respective countries. They include His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Robert Aitken Roshi from USA, Yoneo Ishii from Japan, F. Sionil Jose from the Philippines, and Devi Prasad from India, to name five of the more than 103 whose letters give readers a deeper insight into Sulak Sivaraksa the social critic, teacher and scholar. Writing about the publication, Sulak says: “ I asked the writer not to praise me but to recollect his or her past experiences in being my friend and to offer me criticisms. However, in this volume, there may be more positive points about me than negative ones, which is understandable. If I was not being prosecuted with lese majeste, these writers might not have been as generous towards me. Yet all my friends have been very kind and patient with m e - including those who did not write or whose writing never reached me.”

294

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

The letter from Nancy Chng, a former Singapore Straits Times correspondent in Bangkok who now lives in Jakarta, Indonesia, well demonstrates what Sulak wanted: “ Over the years, you've never ceased to amaze me in particular, how shamelessly you ‘exploit’ your friends and how willing they let you get away with it! It's a rare talent and you've developed it into an art. “It's a special quality you have, with your acerbic wit, to be able to dump a bucket on your friends and make them keep coming back for more! (I'm thinking in particular of the Japanese friends.) But you have this ability to attract special people around you (I count myself as one!) and you have contributed much in inspiring some of the young people in your beloved country to work for a better world and to live more meaningful lives. “For me personally, you have helped pave an insight into Thai society (Siamese society, if you insist), through individuals such as Dr. Puey Ungphakorn, Saneh Chamarik and yourself, and through many others - students, religious figures and such like. You introduced me to the teachings of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu and 1 was fortunate subsequently to have visited Suan Mokh. 1 believe that spiritually, I'm a richer person for having known you, and I offer my overdue thanks...” The book is not on sale. However, contributors of over 100 baht towards Acharn Sulak's court proceeding will be given a copy. Contact Mr. Thamrong at Kled Thai, 117 Fuang Nakorn Road, Bangkok 10200 for details. Bangkok Post 3 1 March 1993 BUDDHIST PERCEPTION FOR DESIRABLE SOCIETIES IN THE FUTURE, edited by Sulak Sivaraksa et al, published by Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development, Sathirakoses-Nagapradipa Foundation, Bangkok April 2536/1993, 288 pages, 300 Bht. Despite having an unwieldy and poorly translated title, Buddhist Perception for Desirable Societies in the Future is an excellent collection of essays. Many difficulties prevented these papers, collected from the United Nations University's project for Religion and Desirable Societies, from being published until this late date. The project was to take the form of an international workshop to be held in Bangkok in 1 984. However, lese majeste charges against the coordinator of the project, Sulak Sivaraksa, delayed the workshop until 1985. Then during the collection of papers from the workshop, the originator of the project, the Second Rector of the United Nations University, Soedjatmoko, passed away. Finally, financial constraints delayed the final publication of the papers until this time. The wait has been well worth it, however, as these essays present one of the better collections on the growing field of engaged Buddhism/spirituality .

Miscellaneous

295

The papers cover a wide range of topics from the textual foundations of the use of Buddhist ideas and scriptures in statecraft and revolution, the development of non-violence, science, technology, women and to the whole range of dimensions concerning Buddhist ideas for a desirable society. Additionally, there is an “ Introduction ” on the proceedings of the 1985 workshop and a number of “Appendices” from various Buddhist leaders such as Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, Thich Nhat Hanh and the Dalai Lama. In covering such a wide range of areas, the essays do not lead to any unified vision for a desirable Buddhist society, but they do hit on a number of very important topics. The variety is also bound to offer at least a few essays to interest and satisfy the hungry reader. 1 was particularly taken in by the essays of David Arnott of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship (UK), James Hughes formerly with the Sarvodaya movement in Sri Lanka, Donald Swearer of Swarthmore College (USA), Louis Gomez of the University of Michigan (USA) and Hema Goonatilake of Sri Lanka. Briefly, David Arnott offers us a very in depth view of the individual in relation to society using a wide of great quotes to support this views. He puts forth the idea of an open individual in contact with society in a mutally transforming way. Perhaps, the most enjoyable and rewarding part of the essay were his large quantity of excellent quotes such as, “Without compassion, wisdom is cold; without wisdom, compassion is blind”. James Hughes offers us a scriptural view of the begining of the world in Buddhist terms and the function of the ideal political state. For me, the most interesting point of his essay is his interpretation of the Buddha's participatory democratic roots from his own Sakya tribe and his role as a radical, “revolutionary humanist”. Hughes also elaborates on the kind of democratic structures envisioned to replace ones of exploitation, i.e. coercion to cooperation, division of labor to equal sharingof community labor, etc. As did David Arnott, he summarizes with the importance of individual cultivation integrated with work for society. Donald Swearer in his essay offers a fascinating historical view of Buddhist millenialism from its basis in the suttas to its manifestation in the Buddhist kingdoms of South East Asia. From this essay, I was able to see much of this past century's turmoil in Burma from a new perspective.The destruction of the Burmese monarchy by the British in 1885 removed the cornerstone of the Burmese people's political, social and cosmological worldview. This event seems to have created a greater crisis of Burmese identity which remains unresolved. Louis Gomez seeks to find the definitive interpretation of nonviolence in Buddhism through a detailed look at the scriptures and subsequent development of non-violence in Buddhism, especially in early India. Ultimately, he discovers no definitive interpretation on the original nature or motivation of non-violence in Buddhism. On the contrary, he

296

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

argues that the establishment of a firm, rational law on non-violence violates the Buddhist idea that one comes to differing and deeper understandings of morality as one progresses on the path. Ultimately, he offers a passage from the Mahayana Avatamsaka Sutra as his guideline for non-violent living, ‘ ‘The bodhisattva will not give up one single being for the sake of all beings, nor will he give up all beings for the sake of one living being.” Finally, Hema Goonatilake struck me with her analysis on a number of different areas pertaining to women. She covers the general position of women in Buddhism, the role of the family and duty to one's parents, male-female relationships, the beginning of the Bhikkhuni order, consequent protests and confrontations against male supremacy in the order, scriptural legitimacy of equality, sexual behaviour, and the contemporary situation for women. For me , the most fascinating point was the most hypocritical one in which the Kindred Sayings of the Buddha state the equality of men and women on the path while present doctrine talks of women needing to be born first as men before attaining Nibanna. The role of women in Buddhism today would seem to note the preponderance of the latter interpretation. Of the “Appendices”, I found the interview of the Dalai Lama by Sulak Sivaraksa to be the most compelling. This interview previously appeared i n Seeds of Peace magazine (Vol.7 No.3), but it is nice to see it again and it is appropriate to the subject matter of the book. With a number of direct and vital questions for today concerning the adaptation of the Sangha to modern conditions and the means for creating an interBuddhist dialogue, Sulak provides an arena fora very informative discussion with the Dalai Lama. He also elicits viewpoints from the Dalai Lama on the connections between non-violence, modern weapons procurement, greed and modern consumer culture. About the only drawback to this collection of papers is a cosmetic one. Although it took almost 8 years for the papers to be published, it seems additional time was not saved for a proper proofreading of the book. In some essays this has little impact, while in others some points get lost and cross references left out. For a book of such high quality, content wise, it is certainly a disappointment that it was so sloppily finished, including the unwieldy title which was poorly translated from Thai. Ultimately, however, this point should not detract from the book nor diminish the efforts of the scholars who contributed papers. Buddhist Perception for Desirable Societies in the Future is an excellent contribution to those working towards a Buddhism which has concrete, significance for our modern times and for those individuals seeking to integrate the spiritual, social, and political as well as the individual and the group. Jonathan Watts Seeds of Peace Vol.9 No.3 September 1993

Miscellaneous

297

INNER PEACE,WORLD PEACE: ESSAYS ON BUDDHISM AND NONVIOLENCE,edited by Kenneth Kraft, SUNY Press, 1992. $14.95 For those interested in developing a deeper grounding for a socially engaged Buddhism or for engaged spirituality in general, Ken Kraft's edited volume of essays provides a very welcome resource. Kraft, a student and scholar of Zen who is presently a BPF board member, has collected eight important essays, some of them focused on the meaning of nonviolence in Buddhist traditions, and some focused more on contemporary issues of Buddhist activism. Much of the value of the book for me, in fact, was in how it helps to clarify questions about the connection between Buddhist tradition and contemporary Buddhist activist approaches. To what extent can Buddhist nonviolence as a way of living provide a basis for contemporary social transformation? To what extent is Buddhist reaching and practice, despite the emphasis on no-self and interdependence, primarily centered on individual transformation? While the reader is left in the end without a full resolution of these issues, the various essays provide much help, both in identifying core Buddhist principles and in suggesting new directions. Several of the authors, including well-known Buddhist scholars Luis Gomez, Christopher Chapple, Donald Swearer and Robert Thurman, reconstruct traditional Buddhist approaches to nonviolence, Their accounts bring out the variety of historical understandings of and rationales for nonviolence in Buddhism. For instance, the Dhammapadas tells us: “All beings fear violence, all fear death. Considering them like oneself, one will not do violence to others or cause them any harm,” In other texts, nonviolence is explained as the best path to ‘self’ -development and enlightenment. Yet some Mahayana traditions and texts leave open the possibility of a bodhisattva of high level bearing arms and killing in some extraordinary situations. The historical record of Buddhist societies regarding nonviolence also varies. On the one hand, there are the quite remarkable achievements of the Buddhist ruler Ashoka of the third century B.C.E. Ashoka implemented laws restricting the consumption of meat, established numerous hospitals, including hospitals for nonhuman animals, and limited greatly all hunting and killing. One the other hand, rulers of Buddhist countries have at times (including the present) been violent, both in defense and in aggression. The other authors (Ken Kraft, Cynthia Eller, Gene Sharp, and Sulak Sivaraksa) are most concerned with contemporary Buddhist nonviolent activism. Kraft gives a broad and insightful overview of the main contours and figures of socially engaged Buddhism; his sympathetic but critical perspectives and questions concerning the role of BPF and the values and

298

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

limits of Thich Nhat Hanh's teachings made me realize how little discussion of this kind there really is in our communities, and yet how important it is. Eller's essay contrasting and connecting Buddhist and Christian social ethics was particularly intriguing. Her claim is that the link between the personal and social occurs differently in the two traditions. In Buddhism, ‘self’-development is more basic; in helping the self, one helps the other. In Christianity, however, helping the other is more basic, yet to do so is to help the self. I found the essay by Thai activist Sulak Sivaraksa, a participant in last years's BPF Summer Institute and a nominee for the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize, most stimulating. Especially helpful is his development of the global implications of the basic Buddhist ethical precepts, linking killing and violence not just with individual greed and aggression, but also with particular political and economic systems that support inequality, excessive individual ism, waste and overconsumption, and control by the wealthy “First World.” He places a special responsibility for responding to world suffering and violence on the citizens of the richest nations: ‘ ‘The way out of our predicament is for all of us to recognize that the problems on earth are our personal problems and our own personal responsibility...Unless the citizens of the richest nations seriously change their lifestyles, and do it soon, there is little hope.” I felt well nourished by these essays; there is much important information relevant to engaged Buddhism that is not easily accessible elsewhere. Of course, there are many areas and issues that were not treated or just barely touched on. Particularly interesting for me would have been some current first-person accounts of the experience of attempting to live and act nonviolently. I also would have liked to have read more engaged Buddhist strategies in relation to contemporary violence, perhaps on the Gulf War, or the war in Y ugoslavia, or the explosion in Los Angeles. There still remains much more to be said and done (and, in a Buddhist sense, much more to be not said and not done). Donald Rothberg Turning Wheel, Journal of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, USA. Summer 1993

OBITUARIES SOEDJATMOKO - AN APPRECIATION Soedjatmoko was t he first and only Asian to be elected an Honorary Member of the Siam Society. His passing away at the age of 67 on 21 December 1 989 was not only a loss for us in Asia, but throughout the world of learning was the first Asian to be appointed Rector of the United Nations University despite the fact that he never finished his formal undergraduate studies in his own country. Soedjatmoko was born in Sumatra in 1922. His father was very religious but not in the formal sense. In fact, he was a mystic whose son had the benefit of an ecumenical religious upbringing. Although he remained a Muslim, he was interested in Buddhism and Christianity. Indeed, he even invited the present Pope to address the United Nations University when he was the Rector and he inaugurated a project on the relevance of religion in the creation of desirable societies in the future. He appointed me to be the coordinator of the Buddhist segment of this imaginative project. In his youth, he studied medical sciences but he relinquished his university studies to join the clandestine movement against the Japanese occupation during the Second World War. This group became the nucleus of the forces demanding full independence for Indonesia. Among the younger generation, Soedjatmoko became a favored intellectual close to Sukarno. In 1950, he represented the Father of Indonesia at the United Nations in a New York debate against the Dutch in the fight for the destiny of his own country. Again in 1955, he played a crucial role in the Bandung Conference on non-alliance in Asia at which H.R.H. Prince Wan represented the Thai government. When Sukarno became better known for his dictatorship at the expense of democracy and for his corruption at the expense of socialism, Soedjatmoko left a bright career in the government at the early age of 30. Unlike his peers who actively opposed the Father of the Nation, such as Mochtar Lubis, he was never put in jail. When President Suharto toppled Sukarno in 1965, Soedjatmoko was asked to rejoin the government and was sent to negotiate with the United States to improve diplomatic relations and to obtain economic aid. Soedjatmoko was the Indonesian Ambassador in Washington, D.C. from 1969-1971. He did so much for his country diplomatically, economically, and culturally. He was popular at the White House as well as on Capitol Hill, and in business as well as academic circles. He received quite a number of honorary degrees, e.g. from Yale to the University of Hawaii (just one year before he died). Cornell published his work on

300

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Southeast Asian historians and U.C. Berkeley published his collected articles on religion, edited by R . Bellah. 1 first met Soedjatmoko at Princeton University when he was Indonesian Ambassador. We both attended a symposium on the Vietnam War organized by the International Association for Cultural Freedom, and we quickly became friends. He was asked by the Edward Hazen Foundation in New Haven, Connecticut to formulate a new education policy to influence U.S. philanthropic organizations as well as the American Government so that cultural relations would not be only one-way traffic from North to South or West to East. He proposed that the Hazen Foundation set up various autonomous committees in different parts of the world, with nominal financial backing so that each region would define cultural relations for the future-within our own region and vis-a-vis other regions, beyond the context of only the North-South dilemma. I was then asked to be the first chairman of the South-East Asian group. 1 was later succeeded by a Singaporean and a Filippino, but remained a member of the group until the very end in 1979. After his return to Indonesia, Soedjatmoko regularly attended the group's meetings which took place in every Southeast Asian country. Despite his great service abroad, at home no position of distinction was offered to him. Soedjatmoko remained popular in the U.S.A. He became the first Asian trustee of the Ford Foundation. It is interesting to note that when he was asked to join the Foundation, he said, “ I t was a great honour for me, but as you know, I am no longer in America. Besides, I may be offered a cabinet post or be put in jail in Indonesia any time.” The reply was, “ W e will, of course, give you first-class airfares to attend our Board meetings. If you become a cabinet minister, then you will have to resign from our Foundation, but if you are in jail, we will still regard you as our trustee.” Later, Soedjatmoko joined the Executive Board of the Aspen Institute and other prestigious philanthropic organizations in North America. In Europe, he was elected a member of the Club of Rome. In Asia, he received the Magsaysay award from the Philippines. Although busy with many intellectual pursuits, Soedjatmoko always had the time to listen to members of the younger generation. He inspired young idealists. Indeed, he was Chairman of the Pacific Youth Forum of which I was Executive Secretary for many years. He also took his family to visit many Thai temples so that his daughters could have the opportunity to learn Buddhism and Siamese culture at first hand. Soedjatmoko was known to most leading intellectuals in the world. He was often invited to make keynote addresses at important gatherings. In January, 1989, he was elected an Honorary President of the World

Miscellaneous

301

Conference on Religion and Peace at its meeting in Australia. His last, alas unfinished, task was to be at a seminar in Jokjakarta, where he was scheduled to give a lecture on the survival of humankind in the twenty-first century. Unfortunately, on 21 December 1989, he had a sudden stroke at the meeting and was rushed to the hospital. On arrival, the doctor pronounced him dead. Although he did not write much, he read a great deal and followed the shifts in development paradigms with great interest. His thought was deep and penetrating. H e was very much concerned with the welfare of humankind and the environment in which we exist. As both a mystic and an intellectual, he was sensitive to the spiritual growth of man. He was survived by a charming wife and three lovely daughters. He will certainly be long remembered by those who knew him. And even those of the generation to come, if they care for the survival of humanity and social justice and a harmonious natural environment, i.e. human development at its best, will no doubt have much to learn from Soedjatmoko. Sulak Sivaraksa from JSS vol 78 Pt.l 1990 Seeds of Peace Vol.7 No.l January-April 2534(1991) C A R L MAGNUS THORNES : AN APPRECIATION 1 first knew Carl Magnus Thornes through Karma, his excellent Scandinavian journal on Buddhism. Later we wrote to each other, after he found out that I was involved in the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. He very much liked the idea that Buddhists should not only concern themselves with personal spiritual growth, but should at the same time care for social justice, human rights and ecological balance. In November 1989, I was invited by the Life & Peace Institute in Sweden to take part in a seminar entitled “The Role of Religions in Situations of Armed Conflict. ” Carl Magnus then asked me to fly from Stockholm to Oslo, at his own expense, to talk on socially engaged Buddhism in South and Southeast Asia to Norwegian Buddhists and others in the University as well as in the mass media. He looked after me very well and introduced me to his family. I really felt that his friendship was warm and intimate. In March 1990, in Siam, we had our second annual meeting of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Carl Magnus came and took an active part in our activities and was elected a member of the executive board. In Bangkok, he was presented to HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirinthorn.our King's daughter, and met a number of Siamese artists and poets. In the South, he met the Ven. Bhikkhu Buddhadasa, perhaps the most well known Theravada scholar. He was impressed by the octogenarian monk in much the same way as he had been influenced by the friendliness and humility of another

302

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Buddhist spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. Later in 1 990, 1 had the chance to visit Scandinavia once more, but Carl Magnus was too ill to see me. Indeed, he was not at all well when he came to our country, yet he managed everything bravely and calmly. I was surprised when he wrote to me that he had had cancer for 3 years and did not expect to live much longer. He asked if it would be possible for me to attend his memorial service. He told me not to come if it would not be appropriate or convenient for me to do so, but that he would be very happy if I thought 1 could be at his Buddhist funeral. His family would pay for all my expenses. 1 replied immediately that wherever 1 would be in any part of the world, I would do anything to fulfil his wish. I wished that 1 could do more, especially to prolong his life, as his contribution to Buddhism and to humanity would have been much greater had he lived longer. I even advised him on Tibetan medicine, but he had already reconciled himself to face death meaningfully. Carl Magnus was almost as old as my son. The loss ofhim must have been as great to his parents as if I were to lose my only son. Since I did not know him long, we must have been related in our past lives in order to have felt so close to each other. It is so sad that Carl Magnus died at so young an age. Yet, the Buddha reminds as that a good man who does not live long is much worthier than a wicked person, however long he lives. When his father telephoned me from Norway to say that Carl Magnus had passed away, I was stunned and passed on the sad news to members of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists, who were meeting for the last day in Bangkok Many knew him personally, though some only through his work. They all sat in silence and spread their loving kindness to his spirit. However sad and sorry 1 feel, 1 teach myself to bear his death mindfully. In our culture, death is only a transition : like a worm changing into a beautiful butterfly. In the Dhammapadas are the following two Pali verses: Cirappavasini purisam dura to setthini agatani Natimitta suhajja ca abhinandanti sagatani Tath'eva katapunnam pi asma loka parani gatani Punnani patiganhanti Piyani natirri va agatani Here is the translation: “A man long absent and returned safe from afar, his kinsmen, friends, and well-wishers welcome his arrival. Likewise, his good deeds will receive the well-doer who has gone from this world to the next, as kinsmen will receive a dear one on his return.” The commentary tells the story behind these two verses. A devout and

Miscellaneous

303

wealthy person performed many good deeds, and a place in a celestial plane was ready to receive him even before his death. The Buddha uttered these verses, commenting on his good deeds and his future state. I feel that this story fits Carl Magnus well, and do not think it is presumptuous to quote one more saying of the Buddha to end my short appreciation of Carl Magnus Thornes. “ W h e n a good man is reborn into a fam ily, it is for the good, the welfare and the happiness of many - his parents, his wife and children, his servants and workers, his friends and companions and also for the good, the welfare and the happiness of recluses and Brahmins.” Although we all miss him, we know that he is a good man. His life was a happy one, and full of worthy activities. He is certain to be well-born. May he ultimately reach the state of eternal bliss of Nirvana - Nibbanam Paccayo Hoti. Sulak Sivaraksa from a speech at Vestrz krematorium Oslo 6 March 1991 Seeds of Peace Vol.7 N0.2 May-August 2534(1991) REV. JOHN CURNOW : IN MEMORY I first met John Curnow in the early 1970s, and we were in Ceylon together in 1973 with Professor Mushakoji of Japan, Bishop Labayan of the Philippines and Bishop Wikramasingha as well as Ven.Ratanasara and Prof. Hewage of the host country. As a result of that meeting near Kandy, we decided to found a new ecumenical organization for individuals and groups belonging to principal religions in Asia: Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Protestants and Catholics united in a common moral concern for human development, namely ACFOD or Asian Cultural Forum On Development. We viewed development as a process in which traditional values were adapted or transformed to meet the needs of modernized societies. We saw development as a normative concept, whose norms and values were in the interest of people, agreed to through free and informed participation . ACFOD recognized that the most fundamental problems of development were moral in nature, viz unjust international order and international economic structures that systematically worsen the poverty of Asian peoples. Consequently, ACFOD accepted as its foremost task and responsibility the promotion and strengthening of efforts to stimulate among the vast Asian population an awareness of their condition and the strength to strive towards meaningful participation in and direction of their own process of change. In 1974, 1 was asked to be ACFOD's first honorary coordinator and in 1975 the organization was formally established with a full time coordinator.

304

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

John served on the ACFOD's Coordinating Team(ACT) from the very begining. After the bloudy coup of October 1 976, 1 was forced into exile outside Asia, hence was not eligible to be an ACT member and soon afterward John retired from the ACT. In 1979 1 was asked to beCoordinatorof ACFOD, and I asked John to stand and be elected as an ACT member agian. Eventually he became our chairman. I worked closely with him and trusted him, despite our differences in religious and ethnic backgrounds. He was superb in handling difficult meetings. His friendship, dry humour, and sound judgement are those that I valued most. John was concerned with the issues of social justice, and usually sided with the underprivileged, especially among the indigenous of the region. His Marxist analysis of the social structure often put him into hot water with the reactionary elements in his church. Although he was critical of the establishment, he remained loyal to his Roman Catholic faith throughout. 1 was privileged to attend Mass which he celebrated quite a few times. When I was in trouble in 1984, John did everything he could to help me and he kindly wrote a Foreword to my Siamese Resurgence which was published during that period. John Curnow from New Zealand, Vikas Bhai from India and 1 were concerned that ACFOD must not be just another regional organization for development. Despite its rhetoric, it could easily have religious and moral values as lip service only— as most governments do. In 1986, we therefore formed a program called “Liberation, Religion and Culture”(LRC) within ACFOD in order to enrich its members and any other groups in the region that were concerned to counter the present crisis from a religio-cultural persective. In 1988, we organized aseminaron Liberation, Religion and Culture: Asian Pacific Perspectives. John took a very active role in this and as a result a book with that title was published a year later. Unfortunately by then , Vikas Bhai had passed away and I left ACFOD for good. Now with the death of John Curnow, my link with the program and the regional organization the three of us founded together is no longer possible. The evaluation team on ACFOD told me privately that the Forum does not really care for the common moral concern of human development and ignores the rich religious backgrounds of the region. Indeed the majority of the new ACT do not have even an historical perspective of the organization. Before his death, John told me, he enjoyed reading Seeds of Peace with its concern for religious engagement to overcome suffering. He said he did not even read Asian Action which we founded as an organ of ACFOD. May he rest in peace. Sulak Sivaraksa Seeds of Peace Vol.7 No.3 Sep-Dec 2534(1991)

Miscellaneous

305

MARTIN ENNALS—AN APPRECIATION On October 28, 1991, 1 went to the office of International Alert in London to attend a meeting on Burma. Hoping to meet Martin Ennals there, I found out that sadly he had passed away on October 5 of lung cancer in Saskatchewan, Canada, where he was the first professor of human rights at that University. A few years ago, Martin came to my house in Bangkok unannounced and luckily 1 was home. He solicited my help for reconciliation between Sri Lankans. That was the first time I met him but 1 had known his name long before as the one who made Amnesty International famous as a major international monitor for human rights during his tenure as Secretary General from 1968-80. Indeed, Martin has also been very generous to me personally when I was arrested in 1984. And now that I am in England as Amnesty's guest, it is indeed an irony to be here and to miss Martin, one of their founding fathers. In 1977, Martin accepted the Nobel Peace prize on Amnesty's behalf and when he left the organization, he founded I.A.— International Alert, which tries to offer solutions to countries and peoples torn apart by international conflicts and to alert international awareness of dangerous zones. 1 have found Martin warm and friendly and very unconventional. He was essentially a rather modest person. He was a man of principle which made it virtually impossible for him to compromise on issues where, in all truth, there was only one right way forward. His whole career was illustrative of his innovative competence and his remarkable instinctiveness as to what human rights essentially are and what should be done to promote them. Luckily, he was born in England where he himself was not persecuted. Thus he did every thing he could for those who have been denied fundamental human rights in every part of the world. I will speak about Buddhism and Human Rights at an international symposium on the subject in Frankfurt, Germany in November, and no doubt we shall all dedicate our efforts to cherish Martin's pioneering work in this field. A memorial service will be held for him in London on December — the Thai Constitutional Day. Let us hope that our constitution will be resurrected for freedom, democracy, social justice, and human rights as all other civilized nations on earth. If it could be so, Martin Ennals would really be proud of us as well. Sulak Sivaraksa Seeds of Peace Vol.8 Nol Jan-Apr 2535(1992)

306

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

A LIBRARY FOR LADAKH Throughout 1992, UNESCO and the Thai Government will commemorate the birth centennial of His Royal Highness the late Prince Mahidol of Songkhla, father of H.M. the King, who contributed so much for the welfare of his people, especially in the field of public health. At the request of the Mahabodhi Society in Bangalore, India, H.R.H. P r i n c e s s G a l a y n i Vadhana has donated one million baht for the building of a Buddhist library in Ladakh. Ladakh istheonly place in India where Buddhism has been continuously practiced through the centuries in the land of its Founder, despite Muslim conquest and various catastrophes. Situated on the western end of the Himalayas, Ladakh has snowcapped peaks and the largest glaciers outside the polar region. Thinly spread through the region are nearly 200,000 Ladakhis, 80% of them illiterate. The growing scourge of illiteracy is a direct consequence of Ladkh's isolation, and is threatening to destroy this rich and beautiful culture. TheThai-American Project has been working with the Mahabodhi Society to build a school in the town of Leh, in Ladakh. The Mahabodhi Residential School is scheduled to open in July 1993. His Majesty has graciously allowed that the library be named after his late august father. Since His Majesty was born in the United States, the late King Ananda was born in Germany, and Her Royal Highness was born in England, the Thai citizens of these three countries, together with their foreign friends, as well as friends in other countries, would like to make contributions to this worthy cause. Let us hope that the library will be a fitting monument for His late Royal Highness and will be very helpful to all in Ladakh, whether residents or foreign visitors, who seek the truth. Besides the library, there will be schools for boys and girls as well as a meditation center for those who seek peace within. If donors in the U.S. wish to have tax exemption for theircontributions to this project, they should make their check payable to the ThaiAmerican Project, 1440 Harvard Road, Santa Monica, CA 90404 or to the Buddhist Studies Program at University of Hawaii in Honolulu. The money will be passed on to H.R.H Princess Galayani in Bangkok with names of donors and the amount they donate. Friends of Thailand News Vancouver. Vol. 4 No. 4-5, May 1992

Miscellaneous

307

Zangla Nunnery, Cultural and Welfare Society, Zangla - Zanskar. Ladakh, India. 28/7/92 Dear Mr. Sivaraksa, On July , 28th , we received from Anela Tenzin Choedon, as a representative of Ven. Kama LeksheyTsomo, the sum of Rs 60,000 (Sixty Thousand Rupees). We understand that this money is to be used solely for the education of the nuns. We hope that you will agree that if we spend the money on food for all of us, it is truly an educational purpose. Generally, each of us lives in our own house and we are responsible for our own meals. This requires a lot of work and money and does not leave us free to study intensively. In the summer we have to go out to work in field, in order to get a little pocket money. So every year we only have eight months left for study . During that time we should like to spend all our time on meditation and study. Having our meals assured and having them together will make it possible for us to do so. We are most grateful for your generous gift. Because of your kindness this will be the first year that we will be able to study without having to worry where our next meal will come from. Please believe that we will remember you in our prayers every day. Sincerely yours, Chang Chup Choeling Germany 3 July 1992 Dear Mr.Prime Minister : First of all, I would like to express my sincere congratulations on your assuming the position of prime minister once again. This time it is both honorable and legitimate. I hope that both you and your cabinet will be able to run the country with more freedom than the first time, unafraid of stepping on the toes of the military leaders, even though the military isstill a state within the state. It is a pity that' the first Anand administration only maintained the status quo of the unjust social structure, despite the good intention of many ministers who worked to their full capicity. It would be a great contribution if the second Anand administration, having received royal sanction to be close with the privy council, especially the chairman and statesman, is able to reduce the role of the military in the economy and politics. If the Anand government can listen to the people and to representatives of non-

308

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

government organizations about how to encourage the people to get rid of bad representatives, support good representatives, and search for qualified senators, one characteristic of which is military neutrality, this administration will be able to fulfil the wishes of all concerned parties. But, if your administration merely tries to improve the image of the country economically, without tackling the spreading greed that is destroying the natural resources both in this country and neighboring countries, then social justice can never be established. There will be no improvement in the next parliament, and no chance for a third Anand administration. 1 hope you will heed these serious words. As for my own matter, on the 21st of June, the birthday of Prince Damrong, I was informed that you had told a deputy prime minister that 1 should return to Siam and criticize the government from within the country rather than criticizing from abroad, since respected persons abroad have I istened to me and believe that my opi nions are right. It seems that many ministers in your cabinet agree with your sentiments. There have been letters from the chairman of the House of Representatives and from Dr.Prawes Wasi asking you to drop my case, for the longer my case is prolonged, the worse the image of the government will be. You are well aware that statesmen, representatives, senators, professors and intellectuals from nearly all civilized countries have sent facsimiles, telegrams, and letters to you, to the subsequent prime minister and to the King requesting that the charges against me of lese majeste and defamation of the former army commander be dropped. The day after your audience with the King, which resulted in the dissolution of the House of Representatives, we heard from the secretary of the prime minister that you had changed your mind about my case, saying that the charges against me were in the hands of the Office of the Supreme Public Prosecutor; the prime minister could no longer intervene. Your statement is clearly different from your former one. This means that unless there is intervention from above, the prime minister does not have the will to solve political problems. If you were afraid of the military, you would not have brought up this case in the first place, but unless you have the courage to intervene in the bureaucracy, you allow it to continue its corrupt and careless management. A clear example of this was when the former minister of justice created a scandal among the judges. Many well-intentioned people would like to have seen the courage of the first Anand administration in curbing the conflict before it grew to such proportions. However, at that time, the prime minister appeared to have done nothing. Even though that minister was not included in the present cabinet, the justice system and process have not improved. It is unfortunate that the judical system continues to be hampered by this prolonged disease. To be the head of a government, it is not enough to be honest, upright,

Miscellaneous

309

and loved, when the society's fundamental principles are as shaky as they are now. The prime minister needs to be courageous and determined rather that compromising. If necessary, after careful analysis, he may need to contradict the legislative body, the judicial body, and even the royal palace. Constant compromise is the way of bureaucrats and ordinary people who lack statesmenship. When you were permanant undersecretary of the Foreign Ministry, your courage was clear to all, but since you became Prime Minister, both in your first and second administration, I have not seen evidence of the “guts” you had before. The charges against me may seem to be a small matter within the present political context, but it is generally recognized that my speech on the 22nd of August was the starting point for exposing the viciousness of the NPKC and Suchinda Kraprayoon, the consequence of which was the second Anand government. However, it is sad that so many lives were lost, people wounded, and property destroyed. On the King's most recent birthday, 1 was informed that the royal secretary read my speech and commented that it was protecting the monarchy from the corrupt influence of the NPKC, but an officer in the royal secretariat felt that 1 was too arrogant, always instructing the King without regard for hierarchy. Moreover, he accused me of not being grateful for the King's intervention eight years ago when he kindly requested the court to drop my case. Accordingly, this time 1 should be punished by the court, and only request the King's pardon following the court's final decision. I'm sorry to say that this official attitude does the monarchy more harm than good. Maintainingthe present lese majeste law will give anoportunity to ambitious military and rightist politicians to make use of the King and the monarchy as a political tool to destroy their opposition. Moreover, in most lese majeste cases, the accused have been unfairly punished by the court. Here are some examples. A few years ago, a columnist for the Daily News who always ended his daily news columns with proverbs, one day quoted a saying from Erasmus in Thai. Translated into English it read, “In the country of the blind a one-eyed man is King.” Just this, and he was incarcerated for four years. Mr.ThongbaiThongpao was the lawyer in this case and he can give more details. The case was conducted in camera so the public was not informed at all. Another case involves an old lady in the south who respectfully tried to hang up a picture of the King. When the police asked her what she was doing, she answered in the southern dialect while pointing to the King's picture, “I'm hitting a nail into it.” She was also sentenced to 7 years imprisonment for using the word it for the King's picture. The details of all these cases can be found in the government office.

310

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

Amnesty International also has the complete details. If the government issues an amnesty for all these cases, both those being punished and those awaiting a decision, it will strengthen the monarchy a great deal. But does anyone care about these little people? When the judicial system emphasizes form rather than content, uncritically takes the judgement of the Supreme Court as the final word, and aims more at preserving its own sacred status than bringing about justice with compassion, do you think anyone charged with lese majeste can be absolved (under such a shaky system of justice)? If the duty of the head of government is not to deal with the suffering of the people, changing unjust laws and revamping the system of justice, but only to follow form and corrupt bureaucratic procedures, then Mr.Somboon Rahong could have been the prime minister, or Mr. Suchinda Kraprayoon could have continued in that position. Fortunately, the people could no longer accept these corrupt ways; hence, the May uprising. Must the second Anand administration conform to the first? Regarding my own case, do you want to make the citizens take to the streets again? Do you know how much time, money, will power, and energy it will cost to wait for a royal pardon? And once it is given, will it have had any effect on the loyalty of the accused? One may ask Mr.Weera Musikapong how he feels. Anyone without prejudice knows that both the charges against me eight years ago and the current ones were manipulated. In the previous case, General Arthit Kamlungakeusedmeasameans to damage General Prem Tinasulanon's position. When General Prem recovered his physical and political health, he managed to have my case withdrawn, with the permission of the King, even though my case was already in court. General Prem did not do this out of fondness for me ; rather, it was a good political move for himself and contributed to his political advantage. Moreover, it was a gracious move to promote the monarchy. As a result, the monarchy and General Prem received praise from civilized countries all over the world. General Suchinda Kraprayoon informed me that he was the one who actively helped to end my case eight years ago. Air Marshall Kaset Rojnanil also said he had prepared to change the license plates on the air force car to help me evade arrest. This plan, however, was halted by a close officer of General Arthit's. Clearly, these two men, both high-ranking military officers, realized that the lese majeste charge had been used by the most powerful man in the army, and the police and public prosecutors to force people to the line. I am afraid that the present case will be the same. Now, General Suchinda has used his former boss's methods against me again, and that royal official has said that since I was pardoned once, I should not be pardoned again.

Miscellaneous

311

Since it is obvious that both cases were politically motivated, why must I suffer like Mr.Weera Musikapong? Does no one recognize the value of people like me? Are w e only looking at the form instead of interpreting the content of what I said? Allow m e to boast a little more. Without a letter from Mr. Khem Yenying (also known as Dr.Puey Ungphakorn) in 1972 which gently criticized the village headman Thamnu Kietkong ( also known as Field Marshall Thanom Kittikachorn) who staged the coup on the 17th of November 1971, there would not have been an uprising on the 14th of October 1 973. At least, it would not have occured so quickly. I do not wish to compare my speech of August 22nd, 1991, with the deep and gentle letter from Dr. Puey , but let me brag that the resulting uprising in May was similar, leading to the second Anand administration, though you may have been reluctant to assume this same position again, as was Prof. Sanya Dhammasakti after the October 1973 uprising. However, none of the prime ministers since October 1973 has been grateful to Dr. Puey or to the martyrs of both the October 14th uprising and the October 6th suppression. No monuments were built in their memory and no one paid any attention to the heroes who survived. How can anyone see the value of a lesser person like me, who is not a hero of any kind? Nevertheless, it has been sixty years si nee we changed to a democrat ic system. Many people have died for this cause through those years. But does anyone remember the contributions of Pridi Banomyong? Monuments have been built to honor dictators such as Sarit Thanarat and Pao Sriyanond, the former of which was even inagurated by His Majesty. Doesn't all this mean that the military is still a state within the state, while the civilians and ordinary people have no significance whatsoever? As long as we don’t recognize good and value people instead of dictators with power, how can we pave the way for a peaceful and just democracy? And if the prime minister dares not contradict the opinions of some royal officials o r military leaders, it means we are moving backwards to absolute monarchy and dictatorship, at least in content, despite the more democratic form. 1 always say that we need to preserve the royal institution, but under the constitution. The king must be an ordinary human being like a dhammaraja, a righteous king, or sammutideva, a d iety , not 1i ke a devaraja, a divine king. The king need not be a genius, or great artist. His words, his judgement, and his speech need not be excellent and held sacred for all time. Anyone who wants to maintain the monarchy as a sacred institution above criticism and advice and to keep the Office of the Crown's Property outside governmental jurisdiction is paving the way for the very demise the institution. Moreover, by allowing the monarchy to interfere in po.

312

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

through the use of laws like lese majeste, we are destabilizing this institution itself. It is very dangerous for the institution if the Office of the Crown's Property is only interested in economics and getting richer without sympathy for the poor who have lived on the Crown's land for generations. Even if those who rent the Crown’s land are vicious and corrupt like some of those who rent the monastery's lands, the Office needs to have a policy of compassion and generosity to be worthy of respect. Otherwise, the monarchy will gradually become morally degraded. This point should be taken into deep and careful consideration, and the results presented to the King. If we cannot talk openly about this matter of life and death, 1 worry about the royal institute. More important is the problem of succession that 1 have mentioned in my speech. If we do not dare to prepare for this skillfully, I worry about the future of the monarchy. And if someone concerned about the institution like me is not allowed to return to Siam, I will have to stay abroad forever. But do not forget that what I have said abroad has been listened to, and agreed with, by many people. Besides speaking the truth, 1 also persuaded people to honor the 1 OOth anniversary of the King's father by building a Buddhist library dedicated to him in Ladakh, the only surviving Buddhist community in India. When people see that a person like me cannot return home they will think that Thai society is full of hypocrisy and mediocrity, especially when bowing and crouching low are considered to be real expressions of one's loyalty. Within the royal family itself, only the powerful are respected; those who have made lasting contributions but have now passed away are ignored. When those who speak the truth are not protected, it means there is no freedom to speak and write in the society. On the other hand, those who order the death of hundreds of people are granted amnesty, along with a large sum of money to go abroad ( according to my information), but instead are allowed remain in the country. In contrast, 1 have to remain abroad and struggle to make ends meet. At least Dr.Pridi And Dr.Puey could live on their pensions, though they were not quite adequate. In addition, I would like to inform you that the royal institution will wither away unless it adapts itself to the reality of the world because to survive without adapting contradicts the Buddhist principle of impermanence. The Russian and Prussian monarchies are obvious examples. Without radical change, the Japanese imperial monarchy would have vanished at the end of the Second World War. Do we not want to learn from history? In our own society, during the reign of King Rama VI, the King asked his brother, Prince Chakrabongse of Phisanaloke, who had studied in Russia, what brought an end to the Romanov dynasty. His answer was that it was the fault of the Czar himself for not listening to the criticism of the progressives; instead, he had

Miscellaneous

313

listened only to the pleasing flattery of the conservatives. The King's brother explained that the conservatives needed the King, so it was in their interest to agree with the monarch, while the progressives sometimes opposed the royal institution and challenged the king. If he had listened to them, took seriously their criticism, and adapted himself and his status, then the institution could have survived the changing times. I would like to ask who among the Thai conservatives dare to inform the King about how one or two members of the royal family create problems for government officials, business people and the general public. The European monarchies have survived because they listen to the criticism of the people, and the kings live righteously, with great tolerance. As King Rama V once instructed his first crown prince, “To be a king is to be poor, to be tolerant of criticism, not to be inflexible towards people with differing opinions, and to aim at benefitting the majority of the people. To be rich, one should become a millionaire. To live easily, one should become a monk.” I have written this from memory, but I believe that the contents are not inaccurate. If I have annoyed you by what I have written because it seems patronizing, 1 apologize. If you learn anything from what I have written and as a result try to do something, it is to your benefit. Even though 1 strongly criticize the government and other institutions, it is only done verbally. I have never killed anyone, never deceived anyone, and have always given loving-kindness to all sentient beings, especially to those who regard themselves as my enemies. If I have no chance to return to Siam as a citizen free of political charges, 1 will continue to criticize the Thai government and other institutions where 1 am. Though I have to fight to survive, there are people everywhere who are happy to receive me, as opposed to one who is thecause of my charges whom no country will accept. Although I have to live in exile far away from my homeland, my children and wife, my relatives and friends, I do not suffer as much as those within the country who lack social justice and basic human rights. If you wish to deal seriously with these important issues, you must be more broadminded and more courageous. When anyone objects to droping my case, and you back down, does this not mean that you have no guts? Eight years ago the case had already reached the court, and it was dropped. This time, isn't it possible to talk to the supreme public prosecutor? Ask him directly whether the charges are substantial. Can't you do this? If you are courageous, you will issue an amnesty for all those who have been oppressed by the NPKC since the coup in 1991. If you do, not only I , but Phra Prajak and others who have been mistreated will receive their fundamental human rights. The upcoming celebration of the Queen's 60th birthday would be a grand chance for national reconciliation.

314

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

If this cannot be accomplished, this will be my last letter to Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun. With personal regards, S.Sivaraksa Seeds of Peace Vol.9 No.l Jan.-Apr. 2536 (1993)

BUDDHISM, NATIONALISM AND ETHNIC CONFLICT: AN INTERVIEW WITH THE THAI BUDDHIST SOCIAL THINKER AND ACTIVIST SULAK S1VARAKSA Sulak Sivaraksa is a well known Thai social thinker and activist. A nominee for the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize. Sulak is being tried by the Thai supreme court on a charge of defaming the King of Thailand. The charge of lese majeste, if proved carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years in prison. Currently, Sulak is Visiting Professor at Ryukoku University, Kyoto. In Japan, he is engaged in dialogues with Buddhists, non-Buddhists, atheists and socialists on problems of Asian societies. The present interviewer, who identifies himself as an atheist and socialist, has also participated in some of these discussions. The purpose of this interview, however, is to present Sulak's views on issues that are likely to interest readers of Tamil Times. Sulak has recently published a book entitled Seeds of Peace - A Buddhist Vision for Renewing Society. He has also been engaged, along with several others, in a dialogue with Buddhist monks and lay Buddhists from Sri Lanka on the ethnic conflict with the aim of promoting justice and peace in Lanka. He is due to return to Thailand shortly to face trial. This interview took place in Kyoto on 20 July 1993. You are an advocate of a Buddhist approach to social change. The title of your recent book is Seeds of Peace-A Buddhist Vision For Renewing Society. Can you state your world view in a few words? I have discussed at some length the Buddhist vision in the book mentioned by you. The beauty of the Buddhist view is that you do not have to believe in a god. First of all, you have to be a peaceful, humble and simple person who is in harmony with other beings including non-human beings such as animals and plants and the natural world in general. I respect other religions and believe in learning from them too. But I think they spend a lot of time and effort to prove the existence of a god. The basic question is one of finding ways to help those who suffer. In a sense everyone in this world suffers in one way or the other. Helping others is a good way to build friendship. I believe that friendship is possible even between persons who hold different views and spiritual values. I know that

Miscellaneous

315

there are problems when disagreements take irreconcilable forms. I have been beaten up a few times by people who thought that I was their enemy because I disagreed with them. One has to be patient at such times and prepared not to let anger and hatred take the upper hand. How does Buddhism define an alternative path for social development? Before answering that question, let me say something about the dominant approaches of our times, capitalism, and socialism as we have known it. Both these approaches have used socialengineering strategies in their own ways. 1 think social engineering has failed to create the conditions for human development. Capitalism does not merely make use of human greed but glorifies this human weakness as a great virtue. It celeberates self-interested behaviour. Capitalism encourages accumulation of wealth but does not easily allow even a basically fair distribution of it. It subordinates human development to the accumulation motive by putting the economic objective above all else. I have discussed the new religion of consumerism and how it ruins the Thai society in my last book. The eqalitarian ideology of socialism is wonderful but in reality it has led to state capitalism and authoritarianism. Capitalism permits some individual freedom while denying a fair distribution of wealth. The socialism we have seen ensured a fairer distribution but denied basic freedoms. I do recognise the merits of Marxist class analysis and the contribution of Marxism to the debates on social development. Now turning to Buddhism, the most crucial difference it has with capitalism is that it does not seek to make a virtue of self-interest, greed and self-aggrandisement. In fact, Buddhism condemns greed, which can easily lead to aggression and hatred, and shows how to be content by changing yourself and striving with your fellow human beings to improve everyone's wellbeing. Unfortunately, Buddhists have failed to deal with problems in that spirit. We have failed to deal with the injusticesof feudalism and capitalism and with the impacts of Hinduism and Confucianism on Buddhist philosophy. We have to understand socio-cultural realities in our societies and their tensions and evolve appropriate approaches so that no section feels discriminated against. As a Buddhist, I am an advocate of what has come to be known as the middle path when it comes to development. We cannot turn the clock backwards. We must adopt from the modern systems whatever is good for the people's human development and build a righteous society. This is no easy task and 1 know it involves compromises for the sake of peace and harmony. I would refer those interested to know more to my book. If I may turn to a more specific issue, Thai and Sri Lankan Buddhist clerical establishments have had a very long and cordial relationship. You

316

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

have been involved for some time in peace promotion in Sri Lanka. Do you think that Buddhist peace activists like you in Thailand could play a role in bringing about a resolution of the Lankan conflict? Let me first tell you something about Thai-Tamil relation of which many people do not seem to be aware in Thailand or in India and Sri Lanka. Before the establishment of close links between Lankan and Thai Buddhists, we had a long period of interaction with South Indian culture. Tamil Nadu already had a rich culture many centuries ago and there was constant intercourse between Thai and Tamil culture. The version of Ramayana we have in Thailand came from Tamil Nadu. The Brahmanistic mantras chanted at ceremonies in the Thai court are Tamil in origin although many people still think that aresanskritic. In fact, some scholars have deciphered the words and shown them to be Tamil. And Buddhism came not only from North India but from the South as well. Tamil Nadu had one of the most active centres of Buddhism in Kanchi. Sorry to interrupt you at this point. I have been told that in your language the word Tamil means something very bad. Is this true? Yes. Thamin, that is how Tamil is pronounced in Thai, means something dreadful, bloody, violent etc. There is history behind this. I think the word in its current usage came into the Thai language from Sri Lanka through Mahavamsa and the Sinhala Buddhist monks who used it pejoratively. In May last year, a peaceful mass demonstration was broken up by the police and several people got killed. A major newspaper headlined its story about this incident as “Pruspa Thamin” which means “May Thamil”, i.e. May Violence. I wrote a long article protesting against the misuse of a word which actually describes the ethnic identity and language of more than 50 million people. There was a positive response to my article from a popular columnist in the same paper who stressed that we should not use the word Thamin in the sense we have been using it all this time as it could hurt the feelings of the Tamil people. I hope this message will reach everyone in Thailand. Now to return to your question about our role in promoting justice and peace in Lanka. There are people like me in Thailand who are very concerned about the situation in Sri Lanka and willing to do whatever we can to bring about a just resolution of the conflict and an end to the war. My nationality and religion could be both a help and a hindrance in this regard. The close ties between the Sri Lankan and Thai Sanghas provide us with a good communication channel. On the other hand the nationalist elements in the Sinhala Buddhist Sangha may expect us to support their position or, at least, not to oppose them. The first message I have for the Sinhala Buddhists is that they should abide by the Buddhist percept of nonviolence. You can not be Buddhist and an advocate or a supporter of violence at the same time. Almost ten years ago, I was asked by three

Miscellaneous

317

international peace bodies: War Resister International, Peace Brigades International and International Fellowship for Reconciliation, to participate in a peace initiative in Sri Lanka. I agreed to this and visited Sri Lanka in 1984 and several times after that. I met with Buddhist leaders including the Mahanayake to whom I said that the Sangha had got too close to politics at the expense Buddhism in Sri Lanka. I also politely asked the Mahanayake to explain why there were no Tamil Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka. I did not get a satisfactory answer. As a result of my visits and with the cooperation of the Peace Research Institute, Oslo, (PR1O) we managed to invite 35 Buddhist monks from Sri Lanka to Bangkok for a dialogue and reflection on the ethnic problem. Tord Horvik of PRIO, himself a Buddhist, was very helpful to me. I noticed that the Sinhala Buddhist monks suffered from a mental block when it came to the Tamil question. We talked a lot and at one stage 1 proposed that a meeting with Tamil militants may help and that it could be held in Madras or Bangkok. The monks were not ready for such dialogue yet. They appeared to be worried that such a meeting might adversely affect their credibility among the Sinhala people. We also discussed other matters of mutual interest including alternative development. I showed the monks some parts of Bangkok to help them see the negative aspects of so-called development. They also saw some of the positive side. I raised another important question too. It concerned the virtual disappearance of Pintapata (the practice of begging by Buddhist monks) among the Sri Lanka Buddhist clergy. An upshot of our efforts was that we gained a few individuals who became dedicated to the peace process at the risk of being attacked by chauvinists as traitors to the Sinhala Buddhist cause. Now some monks and lay persons are working with Tamils. Some oft hem have been exposed to training in Norway and the Philippines sponsored by HURIDOCS and PRIO. I will continue my effort but I know it is not an easy task to find a solution and end the war. Can a Buddhist be a nationalist too? Not the way many Buddhists in Sri Lanka are nationalists; they are Sinhalese before they are Buddhists. Buddha was born in India, but his teachings spread far and wide across countries and states. A true Buddhist cannot be a nationalist although he or she may support those national movements that can serve as vehicles of the universal humanist values for which Buddhism stands. For a Buddhist, there is no Holy war or Just War. But in the real world Buddhists have been involved in state-making and have often compromised their principles for the sake of patronage from states that oppressed the people. State patronage tends to divert the sangha from the truly Buddhist course and co-opts it into supporting and justifying violations of people's rights. Once you compromise with the state you

318

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

enjoy a lot of privileges including material benefits, but that is not authentic Buddhism. Buddhism has not been able to contribute in a significant way toward solving the basic problems of the people for 2500 years. Its universal values have been distorted by the very establishments which were supposed to practise them. Buddhists monks openly defend violence and display extreme forms of chauvinism and hatred toward non-Buddhists. Buddhism has failed for 2500 years, what make you have faith in the Buddhist vision ? In 1973, there was a big student uprising in Bangkok which led to a political change at the top as the dictators of Thailand fled the country. 1 was engaged in a dialogue with the students at that time. 1 told them the political change was only superficial and that we all should work for basic change by following the Buddhist path. The student leaders told me that we had given 2500 years to Buddha and the time had come to give Mao his due place. Mao and not Buddha, they insisted, had the answer to Thailand's problem. I told them that Mao and Buddha had similar aims but Mao believed in violence whereas Buddha believed in non-violence. Buddhism asks you to challenge your own inner self first before trying to challenge others but Maoism asks you to challenge others but not the self. They did not agree with me. For about three years, a “hundred flowers bloomed” but then the dictators returned with a vengeance in 1976. At this point, hundreds of students left Bangkok for the jungles to join the Thai Communist Party with the aim of making the revolution. They returned after some time quite disillusioned. These youths were basically Thai nationalists who found the Thai Communist Party to be more Chinese than Thai. Some of them have developed beyond the limits of their old beliefs and begun to be interested in the Buddhist approach.

Interviewed by N .Sharunugaratnam Norwegian Centre for International Agricultural Development, Agricultural University of Norway, Box 2, 1432 AS, Norway, published in Tamil Times, London.

VUI.Charges

"Since His Majesty ascended the throne, it has been the Royal purpose to cherish the State and augment the happiness of the princes, ministers and nobles, clergy and the people all over the Kingdom. Whatever is oppressive and burdensome it has been the Royal purpose to remove. HLs Majesty has noticed that the great countries and powers in Asia, that is China, Cochin China, Japan and India, and the regions where oppression existed, compelling the inferiors to prostrate and worship their masters, similar to the custom in Siam, have at present ceased these customs and instituted new ones. They have done so to make mainifest that there shall be no more oppression. The countries that have abolished these rigorous exactions have manifestly greatly increased their prosperity. ...The custom of prostration and human worship in Siam is manifestly an oppressive exaction which an inferior must perform to a superior. The acts of showing honour by such prostration and worship His Majesty perceives are of no benefit whatever to the country... His Majesty propose to substitute in place of crouching and crawling, standing and walking; and instead of prostration on all-fours and bowing with palm-joined hands to the ground, a graceful bow of the head... Henceforth the princes and nobles according to their rank, when in solemn audience before the Throne, or whenever His Majesty may be present, will please observe this Royal Edict." King Chulalongkorn's proclamation on his second coronation 1873 form The Physician at the Court of Siam by Malcolm Smith London Country Life, 1946

CHARGE SHEET AGAINST SULAK SIVARAKSA ISSUED IN BANGKOK ON 8 MARCH 1993 (DRAFT, UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION, NB many of lhe quotations from Sulak's speech are abbreviated, and thereby lose some of their coherence) BLACK CASE No. 1901/36 CRIMINAL COURT. 8, March 1993 Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor, Criminal Litigation Office of the Attorney General (Formerly “Public Prosecution Department”) Accused: Sulak Sivaraksa CHARGES: Oral Defamation of the King and others ADDRESS; ETC.

1) When this offence occurred, Thailand was under a democratic government, which is still the case. The present King, His Majesty King Bhumiphol, is the 9th in succession of the Chakri dynasty. He is the leader of the country. His position is sacrosanct and no one is permitted to defame him. According to Declaration No. 2 of the National Peace Keeping Council, 23 February 1991, General Suchinda Kraprayoon, then Commander-in-Chief of the army, was appointed Vice-Chairman of the NPKC. Newspapers and the general public call the National Peace Keeping Council “NPKC”, and General Suchinda Kraprayoon, “Big Suu”. The Accused has committed the following crimes: A. On 22 August 1991, in the small auditorium of Thammasat University, the Accused gave a public speech entitled “Democracy and the coup d'etat In this speech, which lasted from afternoon until evening, the Accused defamed the 9th King through an amplifier in front of students, lecturers and the general public. Many parts of the speech defamed the 9th King. The Accused defamed the King in front of students, lecturers and the general public by saying: “When Professor Pridi Banomyong established the University of Moral and Political Sciences (Thammasat University) in order to cultivate democracy, democracy didn't mean that the prime minister had to be elected, which is understood as full democracy [lit. ‘full-leaf’], otherwise it is known as half-democracy [lit. half-leaf]. Democracy means respect-

322

When Loyalty

Demands Dissent

ing every person and each other. Everyone is equal and should not have to crawl for diplomas from the King, or pay homage to car tyres, like Chulalongkorn University students and graduates. How can human beings manage to live in dignity when they have to pay homage to car tyres?” The Accused knows very well that in the graduation ceremony of Chulalongkorn University, when the King presents the diplomas, the students simply walk up and pay homage with a bow or a curtsy; they do not crawl. But the Accused implies that students have to crawl like animals in order to receive diplomas from His Majesty the King. This defames the King within the royal graduation ceremony. The Accused also knows very well that when the King enters the university in his car, the students pay homage to him, not to his car tyres. By his sarcastic use of words, the Accused intends to defame the King “ 1 would like to refer to the King. Listen carefully, 1 might be arrested again. This coup d'etat by the NPKC is the greatest lese majeste. Why do 1 say this? 1 want to issue a warning. Before the King had been on the throne for a year, democracy was abolished. He came to the throne in 1946, and in 1947 his power was taken away. He was young, still a minor, and living abroad. But when he was returning for his coronation, Field Marshal Paw abolished parliament and appointed the membersof the Upper House, dissolved the constitution and restored the 1932 constitution. While the King was at sea off the island of Kao Sichang - people might have forgotten this event, which was a kind of slap in the face for the King by the military, - he transferred from the Danish ship he was travelling in to a ship of the Thai Navy. He was then arrested and kept prisoner. If the King had remained on the Danish ship they would not have had the courage to take such an action. The King might have turned back if he had known what was going to happen. Many people may not be aware of this fact. The military always bullies the King”. The Accused wanted the audience to think that the military captured the King, kept him prisoner, and gave him a kind of slap in the face. This is not true. The truth is that the King came back to Thailand for his coronation ceremony. No-one captured him during this period. The Accused's speech is a false statement which deceived the audience and demeans the respected and admired King of the Thai people. This is likely to destroy the dignity and reputation of His Majesty the 9th King, and bring insults and hatred upon him. The details of the full text of his speech will be provided to the court on the day of the trial. B. On the same occasion as stated in A, above, in the small auditorium of Thammasat University, the Accused gave a public speech entitled “Democracy and the coup d'etat” . In this speech, made through

Charges

323

an amplifier, the Accused insulted Commander-in-Chief Suchinda Kraprayoon, Vice-Chairman of the NPKC, in front of students, lecturers and the general public. Many parts of the speech defamed General Suchinda Kraprayoon. The Accused maligned General Suchinda Kraprayoon in front of students, lecturers, the general public and many people, saying: “Listen, if we compare the five Declarations of the NPKC with the Declarations of the 1947 coup, only one differs: in 1947 the government of Thaval Thamrongnavasawas was accused of corruption and cheating. At that time Field Marshal Phin, otherwise known as ‘Big Pha’, felt that the Buick cars imported for Ministers were [*] a weight on his chest[’], which made him weep. But when he had taken power, Field Marshal Phin became so corrupted himself that he made the Chunhawan family wealthy. This is the first Declaration, accusing the former government of corruption, and justifying the coup. But just as he became corrupted, so did the NPKC. 1 will give more details later.... “... Since we have already spoken about the past, I must move on to current issues, and so 1 would like to consider the five Declarations of the NPKC one by one : “...The first Declaration accuses the former government of corruption. This seems fair. How could a person like Khun Montree offer 33 million baht for a Kathina ceremony? Or someone like Khun Banhan Silapaacha become wealthy enough to buy up almost all the land in Suphanburi province? His corruption was exposed in Khun Anand Senakhan's book. But although thousand copies of Anand's book were sold in the province, Khun Banhan still managed to get himself elected. The evil policy of the former government cannot be denied. Khun Pramual Sapavasu, Minister of Finance, was also very corrupt. It is common knowledge that the banks which supported his political party made large profits. The accusation seems fair, but I would like to say that this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Is NPKC itself completely honest and free of guilt? Or is it even worse, and more corrupt? I would like to deliver a warning on these issues. The NPKC is certainly clever enough not to advertise 33 million baht, but NPKC has made concealed and overt bribes amounting to more than 33 million baht. How much profit did they make on their arms deals with China? How much profit did they make on each arms purchase? Just before the coup both Big Suu and Big Jod flew to Burma. What interest did they receive from Burma? Or did they go to Burma to learn from Saw Maung how to carry out the coup ? The NPKC has always been involved in bribes. They even fix their own salaries. How many thousands did they earn a month? What did they do to deserve it? “ I n terms of honesty the present cabinet (2) seems irreproachable, with no fishy or corrupt characters, which pleased the NPKC, since in the

324

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

past profits had to be divided with politicians, the Chat Thai party, Prachakorn party, SAP party. Now profits don't need to be divided. Everything goes to the NPKC. NPKC has the field of corruption to itself. It is really satisfied. The 6th King was ousted. So was the 7th. And the 9th King has faced the issue of democracy. But the NPKC certainly committed lese majeste. Lese majeste, please note. The NPKC had an audience with His Majesty the King the day they took power, which distressed the King very deeply. The Thai people were never aware of this. These people [the NPKC] were just play-acting. If they had really been loyal, they would have done something to maintain the dignity of the monarchy and the nation.... “Burmese monks, the Burmese laity and Buddhists hate the military; they hate the NPKC [of Burma], But SLORC and NPKC are the same: they trade with each other in timber, arms and fish. Khun Chavalit Yongchaiyut sent [Burmese] students back to be killed by Saw Maung in order to receive logging concessions. Just before the coup Big Suu went to Burma to trade, without any thought of dignity. The Thai military also suggested [that SLORC make] the offer of honors [to monks] in our country to show their support for religion, or to make use of religion to bring the Thais closer to the Burmese.” These words allegedly insulted, defamed and brought hatred on General Suchinda Kraprayoon, then Commander-in-Chief of the army , and Vice-Chairman of the NPKC. The offences as charged under the sub-heading A and B have been committed in the Sub-District of the Grand Palace, Pranakorn District, Bangkok. 2) Subsequently, on 14 December 1992, the Accused reported to the inquiry official and was examined. Stage of inquiry : the Accused denied the charges. During the investigation the Accused was freed on bail. The Accused was sent to the Court. General Suchinda Kraprayoon, former Commander-in-Chief of the army and Vice-Chairman of the NPKC made complaint to the inquiry official, within the time frame of prescription. Request at the end of the criminal case: I consider the Acts of the Accused, according to the aforementioned

Charges

325

charges to be violationsof the following laws and articles: Criminal Code, Articles 112, 326, 328; Order of the NPKC No. 41 dated 21st October 25 1 9, Nos. 1 , 7, 8; and the Criminal Code, revised and enlarged edition No. 11 BE 2535, dated 24 February 2535, Article 4. The Court is requested to consider giving judgement and sentencing the Accused according to the Law. THE LAW LESE MAJESTE Article 112. Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, lheQueen, the Heir apparent or the Regent shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years. A person undergoing training and instruction in the profession mentioned in the first paragraph who discloses any private secret which became known or communicated to him in such training and instruction, in a manner likely to cause injury to any person, shall be liable to the same punishment. DEFAMATION Aricle 326. Whoever, by communication made to a third person, imputes anything in a manner likely to injure the reputation of any other person or to expose such person to public hatred or contempt, is said to commit defamation, and shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht, or both.

Article 328. If the defamation be committed by means of publication of a document, drawing, painting, motion picture, or letters made visible by any means, record or recorder, or by broadcasting or propagation by any means, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding two years and fine not exceeding two hundred thousand baht, or both. Article 329. Whoever, in good faith, expresses any opinion or statement: (1) by way of self justification or defence, or for the protection of any due interest; (2) in his official capacity in the course of his duty; (3) by way of fair comment on any person or thing subjected to public criticism; or (4) by way of fair report on the open proceedings of any Court or meeting, shall not be guilty of defamation.

326

WTien Loyalty Demands Dissent

Article 330. In the defamation case, if the person prosecuted for defamation can prove that the imputation made by him is true, he shall not be punishable. Provided, however, that he shall not be allowed to prove if such imputation concerns personal matters, and such proof will not be beneficial to the public. Article 331 . A party in a case or his lawyer who expresses opinion or statement in the proceedings of a Court in favour of his case shall not be guilty of defamation. Article 332. In the defamation case in which judgment is passed that the accused is guilty, the Court may give order : (1) to seize or destroy the defamatory matter or part thereof; (2) to publish the whole or part of the judgment in one or more newspapers once or several times at the expense of the accused. Article 333.

The offences in this Chapter are compoundable offences. If the injured party in the defamation case dies before making a complaint, the father, mother, spouse or child of the deceased may make a complaint on his or her behalf, and it shall be deemed that the person making the complaint is the injured party.

OPENING STATEMENT TO THE CRIMINAL COURT Item 1 I deny that I am guilty of committing lese majeste and defaming General Suchinda Khraprayoon as charged by the prosecution. Item 2 1 ask that I be allowed to fight the charges against me in a court of law. Item 2.1 At the time this incident occurred, Thailand's system of government was no longer aconstitutional monarchy as the prosecution contends. Rather, it had fallen under the control of a self-appointed clique known as “The National Peace-Keeping Council”(NPKC). This military clique had illegally come to power on the 23rd of February 1991 by using the military to arrest former Prime Minister, General Chatichai Choonhaven, as he was leaving to visit King Bhumiphol at the Phunping Palace in Chiang Mai. This was supposedly done in the name of safeguarding the country's independence and stability. However in doing so, the NPKC severely compromised the independence and power of our country's legislative and administrative bodies as well as violated the Constitution, the highest law in the land. Under a self-declared order, the NPKC then granted itself the power to govern the country without the King's approval, a move which clearly violates the principles of our Constitutional Monarchy and the very laws they were sworn to loyally protect. In the course of repeatedly violating the people's civil rights and liberties, the NPKC severely harmed the country's political, economic, and cultural development as well as its international standing. And the growing opposition and criticism to the NPKC's dictatorial rule and General Suchinda Khraprayoon's rise to power sadly culminated in the May events when many people were killed and injured. Even more sadly, the very people asked to investigate the violent suppression had repeatedly collaborated with the NPKC in the past and, not surprisingly, they issued an amnesty for those involved in the killings absolving them of all blame. As a well-qualified and knowledgeable social critic and writer, who loves and supports the Constitutional Monarchy, it was my right and duty as aThai citizen to air my ideas and opinions in a series of public talks and lectures concerning the country's growing problems. In doing so, I could not neglect to point out my opposition to the NPKC, which was headed by General Suchinda Khraprayoon, because of its role in under-

328

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

miningoursystem of government and way of life. Following my criticisms of their dictatorial rule, I outlined my viewson how we could safeguard our country's institutions to best insure the continued existence of the Constitutional Monarchy. Item 2.2 On August 22, 1991, 1 received ajoint invitation from the Student's Union of Thailand, the Student's Organization of Thammasat University, and the Campaign for Democracy to critically evaluate the accomplishments of the NPKC's first six months in power and the dangers their continued rule entailed for the country. The lecture, which took place in the Auditorium for Art and Culture at Thammasat University, was titled *‘The Regression of Democracy Following the February Coup.” In the course of the lecture, 1 attempted to awaken the students' and peoples' consciousness and resistance to the dictatorial rule of the NPKC clique. In particular, 1 asserted that the NPKC's continued manipulation of the country's institutions and deceitful conduct was severely damaging to ourcountry politically and economically, as well as harming our reputation internationally. This is but one example of my just critique of the NPKC, which critically compared their actions with those of similar cliques in the past. In the course of my lecture, I frequently made use of a number of idioms and turns of speech in order to help express my views and, at the same time, maintain the interest of the audience. For those members of the audience who listened with an open and impartial mind, it was quite clear that at no point during my lecture did I take an opportunity to defame anyone or commit lese majeste as charged. Item 2.3 Thechargesbroughtagainst me by General Suchinda Khraprayoon directly stem from my willingness to fearlessly express my opinions and views concerning the power and influence of the NPKC clique. My lecture was a reminder, making it clear that 1 would take every opportunity to criticize the NPKC and General Suchinda Khraprayoon until it helped bring about their inevitable collapse. As a result of my repeated criticisms of General Suchinda Khraprayoon and the NPKC, I became his political enemy and was accused of committing lese majeste. In doing so, General Suchinda Khraprayoon deliberately took advantage of the King's prestige in an attempt to silence his opponent. Besides the accusation of lese majeste, General Suchinda Khraprayoon continued to threaten me in a variety of ways until I was forced to flee the growing danger by secretly escaping abroad though 1 had done nothing wrong. 1 have returned in order to face

Charges

329

the charges laid against me by General Suchinda Khraprayoon now that his power has decreased. Item 2.4 The charges and evidence against me come entirely from the Office of Investigations which remains firmly under the control of General Suchinda Khraprayoon and is subject to his interference. As a result, 1 was not able to reopen the investigation into my case nor present my own witnesses and evidence at a preliminary hearing despite several attempts at doing so. By refusing to re-examine the circumstances behind the charges against me, the Office of Investigations and the Public Prosecutor demonstrated their distaste for the law code as well as accepted procedure for criminal investigations. Item 2.5 The prosecution claims that I ridiculed, insulted, and despised the King, citing my speech as evidence. However, I refuse to accept that those words are mine since they have clearly been quoted out of context. Some sentences have been distorted, others cut or added to and then reordered to accuse me of defamation and lese majeste. Thus, I utterly deny that 1 am guilty as charged by the prosecution. Item 2.6 According to the prosecution, I gave a public lecture entitled“Democracy and the Coup” in which 1 intentionally defamed General Suchinda Khraprayoon in front of the students, professors, and members of the general public attending the talk. The prosecution also claims that General Suchinda Khraprayoon, who was Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and headed the NPKC at the time, lost face and became hated as a result of my comments. I deny that this is the truth. Despite the prosecution's accusations, 1 made it clear from the very beginning that I had no intention of defaming General Suchinda Khraprayoon. Instead, my lecture wasan exercise in the truth regardingthe NPKC, their illegal coup, and their subversion of the Constitutional Monarchy. While the NPKC cited widespread public opposition to graft, corruption, and other irregularities prevalent amongst the nation's politicians as the primary reason for seizing power, I questioned the validity of such a claim given the personal benefits the military and the politicians who supported the coup subsequently enjoyed. In order to point out the dangers of their deception to the audience, I compared the NPKC with other cliques which had acted in a similar fashion in the past. 1 examined how the coup and military rule has effected the country, whether we could

330

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

trust and rely on the NPKC, and whether we should continue to allow them to govern the country or not. Thus I gave my speech intending to help defend and safeguard the people's rights and freedoms as well as the country’s other two institutions, religion and the Monarchy, during a time when the NPKC was solidifying its hold on power with the cooperation of many dishonest and corrupt politicians and civil servants. The growing public opposition to the NPKC culminated in the violent suppression in May. Butby topplingGeneral Suchinda Khraprayoon from his seat as Prime Minister, people clearly demonstrated their power and restored the Monarchy as the highest leader in the land. However, many of the NPKC's orders still remain in effect and the controversy over those “unusually rich” politicians, who had their assets seized by NPKC, is yet to be resolved. As such, my words did not defame General Suchinda Khraprayoon in any way. And for these reasons, I request that the court kindly consider dropping the case against me. Sulak Sivaraksa Lawyers representing Sulak Sivaraksa Mr. Thongbai Thongpao Mr. Sampas Pungpradisth Mr. Vasant Panij Mr. Somchai Hom la-or

IX. Appendices

Duties of a universal king or a great ruler: 1) supremacy of the law of truth and righteousness and provision of the right watch, ward and protection; 2) to let no wrong doing prevail in the kingdom; 3) to let wealth be given or distributed to the poor; 4) to go from time to time to see and ask for advice the men of religious life who maintain high moral standard; to have virtuous counsellors and seek after great virtue. D.III 6 1

1. THE ARREST AND TRIAL O F SULAK S1VARAKSA 1984

During the last several years the military and the right wing in Thailand have been jockeying to gain full political power. In March 1983 the military attempted to amend the constitution to allow senior military officials to concurrently hold high political office. Widespread protests by students, intellectuals, and human rights groups eventually led to the defeat of the amendment. However, it seemed clear that the military was not about to relax its drive for greater power. One method it has used in the power struggle has been to force public attention on “communists” or other dissidents and to seek official and public support by using them as scapegoats. This method draws attention to the national symbolism of the military and attempts to diminish support for other factions in the government. In July of 1984 the special police of the Internal Security Operations Command arrested nineteen communist suspects, a university lecturer, and a newspaper editor on charges of assisting the communists. On July 17 the director-general of the police department announced that more arrests would be made. On the same day, over a thousand copies of a book by Sulak Sivaraksa were confiscated by the police. The book, Lokkrab Sangkam Thai {Unmasking Thai Society), was alleged to undermine public order and morale. At the time of the confiscation, Sulak was in Japan participating in a Pacific Youth Forum sponsored jointly by ACFOD and the United Nations University. He returned home as planned on July 26. On July 31 he went to the ACFOD office as usual, then had his hair cut before going to Thammasat University to give a public lecture entitled “Youth and Buddhism”. When he arrived at the Political Science Auditorium, he was told that the special branch police were waiting for him at his home and had shown a warrant for his arrest to his son. He gave the lecture as planned but cut short the question period, telling the audience he was about to be arrested. He pleaded that there be no student demonstrations on his behalf. He felt that some of those aspiring to power or in power would exploit and cause

334

When Loyalty Demands

Dissent

conflict between the right wing and “left-wing” students. Some of his friends who had close contact with the military warned him not to go home and give in to arrest. They heard rumors that there would be a coup late that evening and that the charges against him would be changed to being a communist suspect. It was thought that this charge would incite the students' anger. It was on such advice that Sulak hid for five days. On Sunday, August 5, he consulted his lawyer as to whether—and if so, when— he should give himself up. During his discussion with his lawyer he was arrested. Although it is still not known who initiated the arrest, the supposition is that military authorities and a right-wing group called the Village Scouts were immediately reponsible. About a thousand Village Scouts massed at the Governmental House on July 28 to submit a letter to the deputy director-general of the police alleging that Sulak had made derogatory statements about the monarch in his recent book. At first, bail was refused by the police, but on August 10 the chief justice of the criminal court granted him bail and he returned home. Bail was extended several times into September and October. On September 26 the public prosecutor submitted his case to the military court, and hearings were scheduled for early in November. On November 8 Sulak heard unofficially that his case would be withdrawn from the court, although the political situation was tense and uncertain. From November 26 to 30 he participated in a World Council of Churches conference in Singapore on development and justice. On the twenty-seventh he was called to return home immediately to appear in court, but he refused.“They kept me waiting for so long. Now they might as well wait for me a little,” he wrote. After completing his participation in the conference on December 29, he flew back to Bangkok and went to court on the thirtieth. The presiding judge informed him that the public prosecutors had asked the court to have the case withdrawn. Never before in Thai history had a case based on lesemajeste been withdrawn from court. His lawyer, Mr. Thongbai Thongpao, went straight from the courtroom to an ASEAN conference on human rights then taking place at Thammasat University and announced the outcome. There was great jubilation, and Mr. Thongbai was elected president of the Regional Council on Human Rights in Asia. Undoubtedly one reason for the withdrawal of the case was widespread international protest by letters and cables and inquiries by foreign governments as to the disposition of the case. Petitions by international groups of Thai scholars, United Nations University, and many of Sulak's friends in universities and nongovernmental organizations had some impact. Sulak still has to be careful, for dissidents like him have suffered bodily harm. During this period of personal and legal turmoil, Sulak said he reflected on the words of M. M. Thomas, a well-known Indian Christian:

Appendices

335

Nationalism— with its emphasis on national security, unity and stability, tends to become an ethos for preserving the structure against change, and to justify the suppression of democratic rights and mass action for change... The struggle for social justice is the transformation of existing structures of state, economic order and society, so that the poor and oppressed may become full participants in the total life of society. (* Sulak Sivaraksa, Letter, December 1,1984.) From Revolution From Below : Buddhist and Christian Movements for Justice in Asia, Robert Bobilin University Press of America 1988 pp.142-144 2. SOME RELAVANT NGOs

Komol Keemthong Foundation The KKF is a non-profit Thai organization. It was established in 1971 and named after an idealistic young man who was mistakenly killed by the members of the underground movement in Southern Thailand. The major aim of the Foundation is to promote, through its different activities, active social engagement among young Thais. In addition, it aims to create, through organized public forum and publications, social awareness on social injustice and ecological destruction as well as to inspire the young Thais to develop strong moral courage. The KKF is very small but it is the first development -oriented NGO in Thai society. Despite its small size and its operating funds, the Foundation has, in the past 20 years, contributed much to the emergence and development of such NGO's in Thai society and to the promotion of active social engagement among the younger Thais. The “old-boys” from the KKF are actively involved in various social actions. Many of them created development-oriented organizations and undertake many different meaningful activities forexample the Foundaton forChildren and Thai Traditional Medicine Self-Reliance Project. Its annual public lecture which has been held continuously for 2 decades as well as its publications attract great interest from a great number of people — old and young, urban and rural. These activities greatly inspire young Thais to actively engage

336

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

in social work and ask for alternative development models. Without its initial contribution, changes in Thai society in the past 20 years would havebeen very different. No matter how people view such changes, it is undeniable that the KKF has been important instrument behind them. Despite the emergence of development - oriented NGO's in Thai society, KKF is still active.

Thai Inter-Religious Commission for Development(TICD) Background People of different faiths cooperated before the setting up of the Thai Inter-religious Commission for Development(TICD). But the coordination was not systematic since development agencies tend to be uncooperative and self-centered, instead of sharing their experiences. On Febuary 8,1 980, there was a meeting among agencies dealing with religion and/or development, as well as interested individuals. The meeting unanimously agreed to set up the Inter-religious Commission for Development, which will coordinate activities concerning religion and development. Objectives 1.To coordinate work among individuals, groups and various agencies dealing with religion and development in the course of working together. 2. To share experiences and knowledge of spiritual development as well as exploring ways and means of working together. 3. To offer training and secure resources in terms of man-power and materials to support and enhance the agencies that need help. Purposes 1 . Seeing for many reasons that the present development model which adopted the materialistic attitudes from the West, is harming the future of human beings and the world as a whole, we try to opt for other alternatives, especially those depending on our religious principles. Apart from its principles and other valuable aspects, its adherents (specifically Buddhists monks and nuns), are seen as having great potential to help propagate right ideas and bring about changes in Siam. 2. Developing sources of knowledge, and understanding, is also requied through inter faith dialouges. 3. Since TICD is a coordinating organisation, we try to encourage other agencies to be concerned with incorporating Buddhism into their development work, rather than implementing it ourselves.Cooporation with other organisations is also sought as much as possible in organising any project.

Appendices

337

4. TICD will adress those issues, overlooked by other organisations and/or new trends. For example, three years ago we started several programmes including seminars and training workshops aimed at promoting the role of Buddhist monks in protecting the environment and advocating social justice . The results of the program were published to attract a wider audience which eventually helped the monks themselves form a group called sekhiyaddhamma . 5. Alternative means are sought to accomodate and develop our ability to reach out to Buddhists and like minded Christians and Muslims. The Religious and Cultural Data Center In order to develop a systematic way to cope with information concerning religion and culture, the Religious and Cultural Data Center for Education and Development was set up as a part of TICD's programm. The center works closely with other organisations and responds to the information needs of other programme. Its main objectives are as follows: 1 . To collect relevant documents and/or data and do field research related to religio-cultural issues in both Thai and English. 2. To analyse the available studies. 3. To dissiminate information to concerned organizations or individuals both governmental and non-governmental. For more information contact the office at: Thai inter-religlous Commission for Development(TlCD) 124 Soi Wat Thangnopakun, Somdej Chaophya Rd., Bangkok 10600 Tel.437-9445 Fax 437-9450 Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute The Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute was established in 1988 as anon-profit Thai organization to promote the pursuit of peace (Santi), public participation (Pracha) and righteousness (Dhamma) in Thai society. The Institute is legally under the structure of SathirakosesNagapradipa Foundation. The Institute undertakes the activities that directly and indirectly help deepen and widen knowledge and thought on peace/non-violence, democracy and truth as well as help search for alternative development models. Even if the Institute is small in size and scale its activities, the impact of the activities on the minds of Thai people has been widely felt. The political and social phenomena in the recent past attest to such a claim. It is not an exaggeration to say that without courage and initiatives from the Director of SPDI, the military junta could have gained political ligitimacy and would have been ruling Thai society till now. The courageous speech of the Directorof SPDI at Thammasat University, which took

338

When Loyalty Demands Dissent

place six months after of the coup, profoundly affected the thought of a great number of Thais. It also served to remind the public that peaceful and non-violent resistence to the military junta would lead to a more democratic political system. The demonstration against General Suchindagovernment in April 1992, which led to the fall of the military junta in late May 1992, clearly showed that the principles of nonviolence and truth were effectively applied by the people. In addition, many of those who took the lead in organizingpeaceful and non-violent demonstration against the junta were connected with SPDI's. Without having a strong conviction in peace/non-violence, democracy and righteousness, they would not have risked their lives in such a course of action. Furthermore, the activitiesofthe Institute, suchasthetraining programme for new and prospective NGO workers (as well as the Community Organized Research for Alternative Development [CORDA] programme) helpus to facilitate greaterawarenessconcerning the root-cause of social injustice in Thai society. Demonstrations by rural people, supported by NGO's, against the construction of dams, the use of coal for power-generation, the construction of highways passing through templesand Muslim cemetaries, etc. all attest to the fact that the principles of peace, democracy and truth have been widely internalized by the people. SPDI is determined to continue its work in these areas till the principles of peace/non-violence, public participation, and righteousness are fully realized in Thai society. Wongsanit Ashram: The Ashram for Life and Society For a group of Buddhist activists in Siam, the establishment of the Wongsanit Ashram — the Ashram for Life and Society — marked the beginning of the realization of a dream they had shared for 20 years. Their dream was to create a place where people can live, learn and work cooperatively in their search for peace and wisdom that will lead to personal growth and a better society; where natural farming, self sufficiency and the preservation of nature go hand in hand; and where activists can come to renew their energy and ideas and deepen their understanding of life and society through several different media — yoga, meditation, silent retreats with nature, a well stocked library, lively discussion and analysis, and / or through working on the farm. In the past nine years, hundreds of trees have been planted, and some of the plant, animal and bird life has returned to the 1 3 -acre grounds of the ashram, thus creating a mini-oasis which is only a 2 hourdrive — traffic permitting — from Bangkok. At the same time, the ashram has developed into a community of

Appendices

339

people who live a balanced, simple life. Food and accommodation are simple and practical for the rural lifesyle of the community. Appropriate technology is used wherever possible, especially in farming and construction. Recently, computer, fax and other office equipment have provided a link between the ashram and the outside world, in order to cater to the ashram's growing program of training and education. The key feature of life at the ashram is the attempt to create a balance between physical and intellectual work, spiritual, practice and community and individual recreation. Important decisions that affect the community are always discussed by the community collectively. In addition, the ashram is presently experimenting with ways to balance private and collective ownership. Use of the ashram by local and international NGOs is increasing as awareness grows of the ashram’s programs of seminars and trainings on a variety of topics that directly link with the movement for a more just, peaceful and environmentally friendly world. The ashram serves society in the following ways: 1 . Arranging, organizing and / or facilitating seminars, discussions, workshops and summer schools on topics related to social justice, green alternatives, engaged spirituality and providing accommodation and space for activist groups and NGOs to organize and hold their own seminars and activities. 2. Organizing retreats, meditative forest walks for activists and other people concerned about society, the environment and spirituality. 3. Coordinating a Buddhist Education Network for rural youth leaders, to develop their skills, visions and spirituality in order to enhance their leadership in running rural community life. 4. Supporting activists who want to take leave from their service to society to renew their energy, reflect on the direction of their work and plan for their future activities. 5. Supporting talented artists who want to create art that is spiritual, social and ecological, not simply commercial, in nature. 6. Publishing books and magazines that promote the above principles and ideals. If you want to know more about the Ashram, or wish to support its programs, please contact us at: Wongsanit Ashram, P.O. Box 1, Ongkharak, Nakhon Nayok 26120, Thailand. Phone/Fax: in Thailand - (037) 391494 From overseas - 66-37-391494

3. ANNOUNCEMENTS

CO-CHAIRMEN Tom Lantos ( C A ) John Edward Porter (IL)

Congressional Human Hights Caucus

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

M . S . Mouse nf Kcprcsentatiues Washington, B.C. 20513

Neil L Abercrombie I H I ) Gary .Ackerman ( NY)

BURMA & THAILAND: Nearly One Million

Les Aspm(WI) Helen Delich Bentley ( M D )

Egregious Refugees

H u m a n Rights Violations & Displaced People

Ben Garrido Biaz (GU)

STAFF B R I E F I N G Friday, A p r i l 3 , 1992 1:00 - 3:00, 2203 R H O B

Thomas J. Bliley. Jr. ( V A ) William S. Broomfield ( M l ) Dan Burton ( I N ) John Conyers. Jr. ( M l )

Dear Colleague:

C. Chrtsiopher Cox ( C A ) Robert K. Dornan ( C A ) Mersyn M. Dymally (CA)

roundtable

We would like to invite you and your staff to participate in a briefing and discussion concerning human rights violations in Burma (Myanmar) and Thailand.

Mickey Edwards ( O K ) Dante B Fasceli ( FL) Hamilton Fish. Jr. (NY) Thomas M. Foglietta (PA) Thomas S. Foley ( WA) Richard A. Gephardt ( M O ) Benjamin A. Gilman (NY) Newt Gmgnch (GA) Paul B Henry ( M l ) Frank Honor ( N Y ) John R . KasKh (OH) Joseph P Kennedy 11( M A ) Barbara B Kennedy (CT) William Lehman ( F L )

Repons from human rights organizations and press agencies indicate that nearly one million Burmese citizens have fled their homes and thousands have died as a result of a devastating offensive by the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), the military dictatorship which has ruled Burma since 1962. Many witnesses repon that whole villages have been razed, the latest attack being on the city of Manerplaw. According to the ILS. Committee for Refugees, between half a million and a million Burmese citizens have been forcibly displaced within the country and nearly a quarter million refugees have fled Burma: over 150,000 to Bangladesh. 75.000 to Thailand. 10,000 to China and over 2,000 to India. Many Burmese citizens face an uncertain future, living in hiding along the Thai/Burmese border as official refugees in United Nations refugee camps or as illegal residents in other countries.

Sander M. Levin (MI) Mel Levine ( C A ) John Lewis ( G A ) Raymond J- McGrath (NY) Michael R. McNulty (NY) Ronald K. Machtley ( R I ) Thomas J. Manton (NY) Matthew G Martinez (CA) John Miller ( W A ) Susan Mdinan

(NY)

James P Moran. Jr. (VA) Constance A. Morelia (MD) Wayne Owens (ITT) Nancy Pelosi ( C A )

Leading

the discussion

will

be the following

individuals:

Dr. Sulak Sivaraksa - International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Dr. Sulak i s an internationally respected advocate for human rights, peace activism and environmental protection who has published several books and founded several organizations concerning religion, politics, development and human rights. He will speak on human rights conditions i n Thailand and the effect on Burma's refugees. Ms. Michelle Bohana - Institute for Asian Democracy She will present a slide show from her recent fact-finding trip to Thailand, Burma and Cambodia which was sponsored by the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Michelle Bohana was in Manerplaw. Burma, when the SLORC offensive began. She was recently featured on CNN as one of the last people to get out of Manerplaw since the heightened military offensive.

Dana Rohrabacher (CA) Charlie Rose (NC) Manin Ola* Sabo (MN) George E. Sangmeister (IL)

Ms. Therese Caouette - Asia Watch. For many years Thcresc Caouette worked with a consortium of non-governmental organizations assisting Burmese and Cambodian refugees in Thail and. She will discuss some urgent issues facing rcfugxs i n Thailand.

James H Scheuer ( N Y ) Gerry Sikorski ( M N )

For more information,

please contact Alex Arriaga

or Rachal Lostumbo

at x6-4040.

Dick Swett (NH)

Cordially,

Guy Vander Jagt (Ml) Frank R. Wolf(VA) OFFICE Ford Building. Room H2-59O Washington. D C. 20515 (202) 226-MM0

Tom Lantos Co-Chairman

phn Edward Porter io-Ch airman

Appendices

tStsQtd Qoaeaaaf

341

m eaz)ea>& @sncto&3 gcaf

SDdan

g Oam® tfg ©®3©cdjt dO®c gtssn d©S. do dads cps>® QcasoS gge>sJ Cato fcxszs g ts zasS ©233©B. g® tfdcooa ©SaecoJ caoBOara tpdSco B gjS gzsd ©cos C3323&d3 C3®®23O)«6 e Saad Oj®jS©D. ©SascoJ Qcl ©anatojSg ©oi® Qafa® ©edcojd g ©®

S®S©zsS Said

6g©B.

d©Oof ©® G3E53 S3W>ftSl6* -fell I Ml IBS) Wi BWSW I (BBWfH roSftfc °«sa-friiii4-w»6i WEffMSM SM - ; S3M«+ 1l&$ O o

° (i®W3) . xtofc«aaD8?«*-r 38tJ$(C£ZJ £lS*Lzfct> 0T. ttMUKOlSMI osss T’asofc. J±$05. e§e* OE-ftUZJSbTUfc o. □>□ 3E* *

ag

s

5t**&«73

'\i8?mchmwt. 3 e 8 Bicesfi

nfc

a

91* 8 3 2 2 8 0 * v-tt- b A*T 0Mt3tT. □>□>** 0*£&y s zrt>s$£rasmsE»

*7 0 SAT 5A«S3;5 0b>M#B±«. *vttb**T«irwWti* 5 >ZJ >20B0lZJg-r§ c»fctrofcfe!tt«j

* 0 X =y