Pilgrims in Quest of Truth and Perfection:

Aung San Suu Kyi and her Forefathers, Mahatma Gandhi and Aung San Richard Johnson
From the mid-seventies until early in and multi-party democracy. From August, 1988, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi lived a quiet 1988 to July, 1989, she delivered over life as mother, wife of the Oxford 1,000 political speeches even though the orientalist Michael Aris, and graduate SLORC, the military State Law and Order student writing her doctoral thesis on Restoration Council that replaced Ne Win, Burmese literature for London University. had outlawed political campaigning in In March, 1988, she returned to Rangoon Burma. In a much-reported incident in as soon as she received a call that her Danubyu in April, 1989, an army captain mother had suffered a severe stroke. At ordered his men to shoot Suu Kyi if she that time students in the city were walked past their blockade. After asking increasing their protests against the her followers to stay back, she continued government in Burma, which since Ne walking calmly forward. A major Wins military coup of 1962 has been one intervened and ordered the soldiers not of the most repressive regimes in the to fire. world. The daughter of Aung San, the In July, 1989 Suu Kyi was placed under universally acclaimed military and political house arrest by the SLORC precisely leader of the first successful struggle for because her challenge to their independence in Burma, Suu Kyi chose to authoritarian rule had become so challenge the military junta in August, effective. Denied the right to appear on 1988. Calling for a second struggle for the ballot and unable to leave her home, 1 national independence on August 26, she she was nevertheless the decisive figure drew over 500,000 to her first public in the NLDs landslide election victory on speech at the Shwedagon Pagoda in May 27, 1990. The SLORC, however, Rangoon with only two days notice that ignored the victory and continued its reign she would be speaking. In September she of terror. Suu Kyi won the Sakharov Prize co-founded a new political party, the for Freedom of Thought in July 1991 and National League for Democracy (NLD), the Nobel Peace Prize in October of that giving direction to the inchoate and at year. The SLORC released her from times violent opposition to the house arrest in July, 1995 as a result of government. Suu Kyi infused discipline international economic pressure against into the pro-democratic forces with her their government, hoping to improve their strong focus on nonviolence, human rights sagging economy. However, Suu Kyi was _____________________________________________________________________ Richard L. Johnson, Ph.D., Director of Peace & Conflict Studies at Indiana University Purdue University at Ft. Wayne, teaches courses and does research on Mahatma Gandhi and nonviolence, with a focus on alternatives to domestic violence as well as on movements in Europe and Asia

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 4

able to convince most world leaders that they should not support the Burmese economy until democracy was restored in Burma. After they realized that releasing her had not produced the results they had desired, the SLORC placed her again under house arrest late in 1996 where she remains today, the worlds most famous political prisoner.2 Many would agree with the Dalai Lama: The Burmese peoples greatest asset is the inspiring leadership of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. . . . By her own determined passive resistance she encourages the finding of a peaceful, nonviolent way for the forces of freedom, truth, and democracy to emerge from the current atmosphere of unjust repression.3 How is it that Suu Kyi could transform her life in such a short time from a focus on home and study in Oxford to a total commitment to Burmese democratic renewal? The fact that she is the daughter of Aung San was the precondition for her meteoric rise to national and international prominence. As she stated: I dont pretend that I dont owe my position in Burmese politics to my father. . . . Im doing this for my father. Im quite happy that they [the Burmese people] see me as my fathers daughter. My only concern is that I prove worthy of him.4 But she could not have continued to be the leader of this struggle simply because she is Aung Sans daughter. Time has shown that she brings enormous gifts to her work, and she has often spoken of how much she has learned from the great leaders who have come before her. The two most important seem to be her father and Mahatma Gandhi. Suu Kyi has immersed herself in the study of their lives and has assimilated essential attributes and principles of both into her own nature.

Since she was only two years old when Aung San was assassinated in 1947, Suu Kyi has no direct remembrance of him. But she has been strongly influenced by the reverence for him in her family and among the Burmese people. Each month as Suu was growing up, their mother held a memorial for their father in the house, led by Buddhist monks.5 Her booklet, Aung San of Burma,6 is an attempt to describe objectively her fathers contribution to the liberation of Burma. She learned Japanese and studied in Japan to learn more about his work there with the Japanese military in 1940-1941. Her monograph, Burma and India: Some Aspects of Intellectual Life under Colonialism, furthers our understanding of the prominent role Aung San and Mahatma Gandhi played in the anti-colonial struggles of their countries. In her essay The True Meaning of Boh Boh means army lieutenant and Bogyoke means majorgeneral, terms commonly used for Aung San she provides her most penetrating interpretation of her father. Suu Kyi began her study of Mahatma Gandhi when she was a teenager. In 1960 she went to India with her mother, Daw Khin Kyi, who had been appointed Burmese Ambassador to India. Suu Kyi learned a great deal about Indian politics and history in her high school, which she attended with prominent Indian youth, including Rajiv Gandhi the grandson of Jawaharlal Nehru, the son of Indira Gandhi who like his grandfather and mother became Prime Minister of India. It was at this time that she read works of Mahatma Gandhi and deepened her belief in nonviolence, a belief that she had developed as a child in her revulsion to her fathers assassination. Her experiential and intellectual adherence to nonviolence is firmly rooted in her

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 5

spiritual tradition, Buddhism, one of the great sources of nonviolence in the world. In an illuminating article in Freedom from Fear, Philip Kreager makes a strong case for Gandhis influence on Suu Kyi. He asserts that the principles underlying her politics are derived from her study and reflection on Gandhis philosophy and practice of non-violent civil 7 disobedience. By August of 1989, Suu Kyi was already being hailed by the London Times as Burmas Gandhi. I began my study of Suu Kyi with the assumption that she would have been influenced by Gandhi, an assumption that has been confirmed by her writings and the research on her. My decision to examine her theory and practice of politics is a part of a broader investigation of Gandhis spiritual politics and of those men and women who have dedicated themselves as well to bringing Gandhian principles into the political arena. Suu Kyi is a leading figure in the growing struggle to spiritualize the I was initially surprised, political.8 however, to see how great an impact her father had made on her. Aung San was both a military leader and a socialist who believed in a clear separation between politics and religion.9 Gandhi could state, although to all appearances my mission was political, . . .its roots are spiritual. It is commonly known . . . that . . . my politics are not divorced from morality, from spirituality, from religion.10 Aung San, on the other hand, maintained, Politics is frankly a secular science.11 Is there any common ground between these two men who seem to see the relationship between religion and politics so differently? Of the many sources I have read on Suu Kyi, several of which acknowledge the strong influence of these two forefathers, none discusses parallels between Aung San and Gandhi. And yet

Suu Kyis writings suggest that their character and principles were more congruent than is generally assumed. After describing a few major differences between these two men, I will seek to demonstrate that there are important correspondences between them and that these correspondences strongly influenced Suu Kyis political theory and practice. There are three major areas of difference between Mahatma Gandhi and Aung San: (1) political philosophy, (2) their homeland, and (3) the age into which they were born as well as the length of time they lived. (1) Political philosophies The most significant difference between Mahatma Gandhi and Aung San is their political philosophy. Gandhi believed that conscious, principled suffering in devotion to Truth and Love would melt the heart of ones opponents. He called his theory and practice of nonviolence satyagraha, which means clinging to Divine Truth. Satyagrahis, those who engage in satyagraha, cannot fail, as long as they strive toward Truth and Love, for striving itself leads them to union with God, the ultimate aim of life. A byproduct of this struggle is nonviolent social change, but Gandhi believed, based on his reading of the Bhagavad Gita, that true satyagrahis do not focus on the fruits of action, the end result, but rather on the purity of the means. Right means lead to right ends, but only God knows what the ends will be. Aung San believed that armed struggle was a justifiable tool in the Burmese cause of national liberation. As Suu Kyi stated, Aung San fought, and he fought well, first alongside the Japanese to drive the British out of Burma, and then in concert with the British to drive the Japanese out

6 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

of Burma after he realized that the Japanese were even more oppressive rulers than the British. But his aim was always Burmese independence and unity, by whatever means necessary. After World War II, he agreed reluctantly to exchange his life as general for that of a politician, but only because he believed that Burma could be liberated from renewed British rule by peaceful political means. On his way to the talks in London with Prime Minister Clement Attlee in January, 1946, Aung San was asked in India, Before you left Rangoon you indicated that if your demands were not satisfactorily met you would have to launch another struggle for independence. Are you contemplating a violent or a nonviolent struggle, or both? He replied, We have no inhibitions of any kind.12 In fact, Aung San had begun to make military preparations in case the talks in London did not lead to independence. These talks were successful, and he preferred peaceful to armed revolution, but Aung San engaged in revolutionary violence and peaceful negotiations, depending upon the circumstances. 2 - Homeland In Intellectual Life in Burma and India under Colonialism, Suu Kyi cites Phillip Woodruffs assertion that Burma was radically different from India.13 Whereas Indians tended to assimilate various aspects of their British rulers, the Burmese never became reconciled to foreign domination.14 The Indians were, therefore, far ahead of the Burmese in coming up with creative ways to blend East and West. Suu Kyi asserted, however, that the Burmese, as a result of their egalitarian Buddhist education, were less likely than the Indians to accept British hierarchical structures. The

Burmans, the people that has ruled most of Burma for a thousand years, tended to extend and consolidate their empires almost exclusively by military conquest, whereas the military tradition in India did not play as dominant a role throughout its history. Moreover, although both countries have had conflicts between those of different religious traditions, the Hindu-Muslim problem has created much greater challenges to Indian unity than have any religious conflicts in Burma, where 85 percent of the Burmese are Buddhists. The partition of India including the Hindu-Muslim riots, massive relocations, and genocide on both sides has no counterpart in Burma, although the integration of non-Burmans in independent Burma has posed serious difficulties. Since Gandhi and Aung San developed such deep connections with their respective people, especially those at the bottom, and since their countries were radically different, they had to be different from each other in various ways. Gandhi could assert that nonviolence was particularly characteristic of India, and Aung San could appeal to the martial traditions of the Burmans. 3 - The Age Finally, Gandhi was born during the Victorian age, Aung San during World War I. British colonial power and the responses to it were quite different in the last quarter of the nineteenth century from the first half of the twentieth century. Gandhi encountered a number of mostly spiritual challenges to British secular power within Britain itself and its colonies ethical/religious vegetarianism, Theosophy, Protestant nonconformism, the Indian renaissance itself , whereas Aung San grew up in the inter-war period when the two major challenges to British

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 7

imperial control were fascism and socialism, which are secular movements. Moreover, it is significant that Gandhi developed satyagraha in over fifty years of socio-political action, whereas Aung San was assassinated when he was only thirtytwo years old. As important as these differences are, there are four essential areas of congruence in their theory and practice of politics which help explain why Suu Kyi was so powerfully influenced by both Mahatma Gandhi and Aung San: (1) They shared a spiritual, non-doctrinaire Eastern philosophy of life; (2) they were men whose character and principles inspired cooperation and high ideals in their coworkers and followers; (3) they were able to synthesize ideas from East and West; and (4) they led their nations into an inclusive independence, inclusive of all the diverse people, especially the poor, within India and Burma and of all humanity. Spiritual Philosophy of Life Although Gandhi often asserted that he was an orthodox Hindu, he was in fact a Hindu reformer15 with unorthodox ways of interpreting his faith. As a young man, he was greatly influenced by Christ and Christianity, and although he never decided to leave Hinduism, his encounter with Christianity and other faiths made a lasting impact on his Hindu faith. He loved Hinduism because he believed that at its essence, it is a deeply spiritual faith that embraces every true human aspiration toward the Divine. He told his first biographer, Joseph Doke, in 1908 that Old Hinduism, the Hinduism of the earliest records, was a pure faith, free from idolatry.16 As Nehru wrote, Gandhi was essentially a man of religion, a Hindu to the innermost depths of his being, yet

his conception of religion had nothing to do with any dogma or custom or ritual.17 Suu Kyi draws our attention to the religious aspirations and spiritual principles of her father: Aung San, whom popular opinion has often cast in the role of a completely political animal, had a deep and abiding interest in religion. As a student at Yenangyaung, the sorrow of his fathers death had filled him with a desire to be a monk. Later, towards the beginning of his university career, he apparently conceived a great admiration for an Italian Buddhist monk, U Lawkanada, and asked his mothers permission to follow the (holy sayadaw venerable teacher) in his missionary work. Permission was refused, but his preoccupation with spiritual matters did not cease. Even after he had entered the world of student politics, which was to absorb him so completely, he wrote to one of his closest friends of his pilgrimage in quest of Truth and Perfection and of his conscious striving after sincerity in thought, word and deed. He also expressed his concern over the spiritual vacuum ... among our youth and the fear that unless we brace ourselves to withstand the tide ... we will soon be spiritual bankrupts par excellence.18 Suu Kyi finds her fathers abiding preoccupation with spiritual matters consonant with his devotion to political

8 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

freedom in Burma. He seems to have used political theories flexibly, searching always for ideas and practices that led to national political unity and freedom. Most researchers agree that Aung San was not overly doctrinaire in his political philosophy. As Suu Kyi wrote, he found much to attract him in the broad range of socialist theories, but his real quest was always for ideas and tactics that would bring freedom and unity to his country.19 If he had been a doctrinaire socialist, he would not have sought help in 1940 from the fascist Japanese government in the liberation of his country from British control. The description of ones life as a pilgrimage in quest of Truth and Perfection would seem to most a more apt phrase for Gandhi than for Aung San. Gandhi stated throughout his life that he sought Truth and Perfection, and three of his most important political acts were pilgrimages. In 1913, the decisive political and spiritual breakthrough in his South African satyagraha campaign came in the long march Gandhi made with thousands of mine workers, a march which Gandhi called a pilgrimage at the time; in 1930, his Salt March to the sea with other satyagrahis was probably the most successful satyagraha campaign in India; and his last great walking tour on which he visited 47 Bengali villages and covered 116 miles was a pilgrimage for peace20 between Muslims and Hindus. If it is true that both men saw life as a pilgrimage in quest of Truth and Perfection, what led them to this point of view? It may well be the correspondences between their spiritual traditions, Hinduism and Buddhism. Gandhi asserted that the fundamental principles of Hinduism and Buddhism are identical.21 He believed that Buddha introduced reform in the Hindu religion and that it

cannot, therefore, be said that Buddha founded a new or different religion. But those who came after him gave his teachings the identify of a separate religion. Many Hindus and Buddhists see their faith as a philosophy of life, practical spiritual principles for living day-to-day in the world, road markers on a pilgrimage in quest of Truth and Perfection. The more institutionalized either religion became, the less it exemplified the eternal spiritual verities that their avatars taught. Gandhi and Aung San were opposed to institutionalized religion, especially the mixing of religion as institution with politics, but not with the spiritual philosophy of life behind religious institutions. Gandhi did not believe that any religion should play a direct part in politics. He was assassinated because he adamantly opposed the idea that Hinduism be the state religion of India. Gandhi did believe that one should live the spiritual core of ones religion and that no aspect of life, including politics, could be separated from that spiritual core. He believed that the true message of all the avatars was to live as close to God as possible. He wrote, for example, Jesus preached to us not a new religion but a new way of life.22 Gandhi and Aung San were different in that Gandhi made his experiments in the spiritual field explicit in his politics. For the most part, Aung San tended not to speak of his spirituality in the political arena. The primary sources about his spirituality that Suu Kyi cited above are personal letters. However, he did make a major speech which makes explicit why he opposed the mixing of religion and politics. Suu Kyi wrote: He was to say in a speech made little more than a year before

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 9

his death that to mix religion and politics was to go against the spirit of religion itself. He appealed to the sangha (the community of Buddhist monks) to purify Buddhism and broadcast it to all the world so that all mankind might be able to listen to its timeless message of Love and Brotherhood till eternity... this is the highest politics which you can do for your country and people.23 As Aung San stated in that same speech, I can say without prejudice to other religions that it [Buddhism] is more than a religion itself. It has several indications of becoming possibly the greatest philosophy in the world, if we can help to remove the trash and travesties which antiquity must have doubtless imposed on this great religion.24 The role, then, of the monks within the sangha is not to enter politics directly, for their essential role is different from that, just as Aung San could not enter politics as a general. But Buddhism as philosophy, if it is purely lived and communicated, can provide a message that Aung San felt would be uplifting to all mankind. He did not relegate religion, then, to a tiny corner of human experience, separated off from the world as a whole. He saw Buddhism at its best as a way of life from which all could benefit, even as the highest politics that members of the sangha could practice. The problem is the trash and travesties with which Buddhism and indeed all religions have been overlaid. In this speech, Aung San makes a useful distinction between priestcraft--the bane and excrescence of every religion-and priesthood religion in the absolute ... its absolute doctrines of love, truth and righteous living ... [which] can also be

taken as social values alright, and no harm can be done to society at any time.25 Aung Sans critique of priestcraft is parallel to Gandhis of, for example, orthodox Christianity which has distorted the message of Jesus and since the time of a Roman Emperor has become an imperialist faith.26 Both, then, were opposed to the separative and doctrinaire side of orthodox religion, and both strove to live the spiritually based philosophy of their faiths. 2) Aung San and Mahatma Gandhi were men of principle whose character inspired high ideals and hard work in their coworkers and followers. Their principles formed their character and permeated their actions. Suu Kyi and nearly everyone who came in contact with these men were moved by their discipline, spirit of selfsacrifice, and fearless devotion to truth. Suu Kyi draws a direct parallel between her father and Gandhi in her most famous essay, Freedom from Fear: Always one to practise what he preached, Aung San himself constantly demonstrated courage--not just the physical sort but the kind that enabled him to speak the truth, to stand by his word, to accept criticism, to admit his faults, to correct his mistakes, to respect the opposition, to parley with the enemy and to let his people be the judge of his worthiness as a leader. It is for such moral courage that he will always be loved and respected in Burma-not merely as a warrior hero but as the inspiration and conscience of the nation. The words used by Jawaharlal Nehru to describe Mahatma Gandhi could well be applied to Aung San: The

10 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

essence of his teaching was fearlessness and truth, and action allied to these, always keeping the welfare of the masses in view. Gandhi, that great apostle of non-violence, and Aung San, the founder of a national army, were very different personalities, but as there is an inevitable sameness about the challenges to authoritarian rule anywhere at any time, so there is a similarity in the intrinsic qualities of those who rise up to meet the challenge.27 It was these intrinsic qualities with which Gandhi and Aung San met the challenges of national independence. Both lived fearlessly, and both were completely devoted to truth. Given that they were very different personalities, their interpretations of truth were not the same, and the ways they expressed their fearlessness were different. But both grew up in spiritual traditions that fostered fearlessness and truth, and both lived these principles that were so deeply rooted in their spiritual traditions. In her essay In Quest of Democracy, Suu Kyi discusses Buddhisms Ten Duties of Kings. Gandhi and Aung San embodied most of the ten qualities she enumerates: liberality, morality, self-sacrifice, integrity, kindness, austerity, non-anger, non-violence, forbearance, and nonopposition (to the will of the people).28 Both men lived according to the highest ethical standards. Moral integrity was to them an essential aspect of their devotion to truth. They sacrificed their lives for national liberation. Neither was interested in personal gain. They believed in unremitting action for their people. Suu Kyi quotes Nehrus description of

Gandhi as a man of concentrated and In a speech ceaseless activity.29 delivered in August, 1946, Aung San said, In the essence of things it is mans creative power and that alone which makes himself, his stars, his history, his Karma, etc., though no doubt he has to take necessary due account of the factors and forces around him. WORK, WORK, WORK. ACTION, ACTION, ACTION. SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RELIANCE. This is the stern, simple golden rule of timeless truth for any success that man makes.30 As impressive as their actions were, ultimately Aung San and Gandhi inspired others by who they were. Walt Whitman stated in Leaves of Grass, I and my kind do not convince by argument, we convince by our presence. Maung Maung wrote of Aung San, He would enforce his will not by words but by his presence.31 Nehru and many other Indians have written of the transformative power of Gandhis presence. Although it is dangerous to overemphasize the importance of leaders in history, it is difficult to imagine the struggle for Indian independence without Gandhi or the struggle in Burma without Aung San. John F. Cady, in his monumental A History of Modern Burma, wrote: Completely irreplaceable was the beloved Bogyoke Aung San. At thirty-two, his unquestioned integrity, singleness of purpose, and demonstrated capacity for leadership made him the unrivaled hero of Burmas independence struggle. In a situation where the idea of establishing national solidarity on the basis of the sovereign will of all the people was completely alien, Thakin Aung Sans death removed the indispensable personality.32 3) In Intellectual Life in Burma and India under Colonialism, Suu Kyi focused on those developments in both countries that synthesized ideas of East and West,

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 11

especially the central role of linking idea and action. She believed that Gandhis and Aung Sans success in their national liberation movements was in part the result of their extraordinary ability to make that link. She wrote, actions without ideational content lose their potency as soon as the situation which called for them ceases to be valid. A series of pragmatic moves unconnected by a continuity of vision cannot be expected to sustain a long-term movement.33 Indians had already begun in the nineteenth century to seek a synthesis of East and West by learning to value the rich ideas in their heritage and to couple them with the Western propensity to act. Many in Eastern traditions tend to experience their spiritual principles without seeking ways to make them a part of their society, whereas many in the West tend to act without proper ideational content. Suu Kyi recognized that Gandhi was at the forefront of the synthesis of East and West in his ability to forge links between ideas, many of which were taken from Hindu thought, and socio-political action, which he learned in the satyagraha campaigns in South Africa. According to Suu Kyi, The link between ideas and action was a theme which featured large in the life of Mahatma Gandhi.... [As a young man] Gandhi had promised his mother that he would not touch meat in England, an undertaking which caused him some hardship until he discovered a vegetarian restaurant. At the same time he discovered books on vegetarianism. These made him a vegetarian by choice, when previously he had felt bound by his vow and had looked forward

to becoming a meat eater freely and openly some day. It was an early personal experience of ideas as an aid to the better working of action. Gandhi was of a practical turn of mind that looked for ideas to suit the needs of situations. In spite of his deeply ingrained Hinduism, Gandhis intellectual flexibility made him accept those elements of western thought which fitted into the ethical and social scheme he considered desirable. Synthesis of East and West, of theory and practice, constituted the vital element in the tradition initiated by the renaissance in India. The lack of a similar tradition in Burma resulted in a gulf between the earlier educated elite and the mainstream of Burmese aspirations.34 Gandhi considered himself to be a practical idealist, a man who always sought to act on his principles. As a university student, Aung San looked to Gandhi and other men of action as models for the new Burma: We are fully prepared to follow men who are able and willing to be leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, C. R. Das, Motilal Nehru and Tilak of India; like De Valera of Ireland; or Garibaldi and Mazzini of Italy. Let anybody appear who can be like such a leader, who dares to be like such a leader. We are waiting.35 According to Suu Kyi, it fell to the young men of Aung Sans generation, especially Aung San himself, to bridge East and West by linking idea and action: Aung San, Than Tun and Thein Hpe Myint, too, searched for ideas to fit the needs of Burmese nationalism. All of them believed in forging strong links between thought and

12 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

action, particularly Aung San for whom the two followed each on the other in an uninterrupted chain of endeavor.36 4) Gandhi and Aung San lived and died for the unity and freedom of their nations. From his early years in South Africa, Gandhi longed for unity among the diverse Indian population in South Africa and in India itself. He was so successful in South Africa in working toward Muslim/Hindu unity that he believed all the more fervently that unity between these two major faiths in India would be achieved in his lifetime. But the religiopolitical developments that led to the partition of India proved to be stronger than the work of Gandhi and his coworkers to establish unity. From an early age Burmese national liberation and unity were Aung Sans consuming passion. According to Josef Silverstein, Aung San is the man ... who put his stamp on the nations thought about the character of Burmese nationalism and the idea of national unity.37 Like Gandhi, Aung San wanted all people of his country to enjoy national liberation. As a Hindu, Gandhi belonged to the dominant religious faith in India; as a Burman, Aung San belonged to the dominant ethnic group in Burma. But both used their status within these majorities to forge links to minority populations. U Nu, who became Prime Minister of Burma after Aung Sans assassination, and many others believed that Aung San was the major force in bringing about reconciliation between Burmans and the other ethnic minorities of Burma. Gandhi and Aung San had a deep commitment to the uplift of the poor from an early age. As a lawyer and political activist in South Africa, Gandhi began working with indentured Indian miners at an early age. The final march in 1913 was successful in large measure

because Gandhi and his co-workers, especially the women, mobilized these indentured mine workers to join them. Suu Kyi reports that Aung Sans compassion for the poor was evident from his childhood.38 He stated in one of his speeches, we dont care if Parties dont like us. We care only for mass unity.39 Gandhi and Aung San were nationalists who sought to bridge all religious, ethnic and economic divisions within their countries, and they were deeply engaged in international reconciliation and harmony. To the last day of his life, Gandhi worked to increase understanding between Pakistan and India. Both men saw their nationalism not as an exclusion of other nations, but rather as a complement to the healthy, non-imperialist aspirations of all, including the British. Gandhis love of the British is well known. Aung San studied English literature and politics as a university student, he admired the British, and he worked well with them even as he firmly and unambiguously demanded Burmese liberation. Gandhi and Aung San stated to the British that their nations would have much to offer each As Aung San other as free nations. stated, scientific internationalism, the internationalism of creative mutuality, is indeed in accord with the highest interests of nationalism.40 In her second struggle for national independence in Burma, Suu Kyi received powerful impulses from Mahatma Gandhi and Aung San. Although she was well aware of the differences between them, she tended to emphasizes the congruence between her most revered forefathers and to think, act, and indeed to be as much like they were as possible. In essence these three towering figures in Southeast Asian politics of the twentieth century are more similar than dissimilar.

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 13

Suu Kyi explains why there was an inevitable sameness between Gandhi and her father in the last sentence of the quote from Freedom from Fear cited above: Gandhi, that great apostle of nonviolence, and Aung San, the founder of a national army, were very different personalities, but as there is an inevitable sameness about the challenges to authoritarian rule anywhere at any time, so there is a similarity in the intrinsic qualities of those who rise to meet the challenge. Even though Ne Wins dictatorship in Burma and the continuation of that military dictatorship by the SLORC is not the rule of a foreign power, Suu Kyi has been able to convince the vast majority of the Burmese people that she is the legitimate heir to her fathers struggle for freedom in Burma and that her decision to pursue a nonviolent solution to the SLORCs violence is rooted in Burmese traditions and contemporary needs. In her quest of Truth and Perfection within her political struggle for Burmese independence, Suu Kyi embodies the intrinsic qualities she found in Gandhi and Aung San. All her life she has been a devout Buddhist, and in her work in Burma since 1988 she has sought to demonstrate that Buddhist principles can serve as the foundation of freedom, democracy, human rights, and unity among all people. Under house arrest she meditates and memorizes Buddhist sutras. Her speeches and essays include frequent references to Buddhist principles. Her In Quest of Democracy disproves the SLORCs assertions that democracy and human rights are un-Burmese.41 Buddhism has always taught that the legitimacy of government is founded on the consent of the people and Buddhism ... places the greatest value on man, who alone of all beings can achieve the supreme state of

Buddhahood. According to Josef Silverstein, Suu Kyi has been able to convince the Burmese people that Buddhist principles of human freedom can be linked to socio-political ideas of freedom which originated in Western thought.42 Suu Kyi inspires the people of Burma with her strong sense of discipline, her spirit of self-sacrifice, and her strict adherence to the principles of fearlessness and truth. Her life has been as starkly austere since 1989 as were the lives of Gandhi and Aung San. She has demonstrated her freedom from fear, the characteristic with which she is most frequently associated. Her life can be viewed as a Pilgrimage in Quest of Truth and Perfection. Truth, which is to Suu Kyi the very essence of the teachings of Buddha,43 is a central guiding principle for her. She believes that at the root of human responsibility is the concept of perfection. One of her closest friends at Oxford, Ann Pasternak Slater, wrote: Many, like myself, must first have been drawn to Suu by her beauty. Our perdurable love and admiration are for her pilgrim soul--for her courage, determination and abiding moral strength-gifts already glowing in her chrysalis period as a student and young mother. In her call for a revolution of the spirit, Suu Kyi has brought together Aung Sans passion for Burmese independence and Gandhian nonviolence: The quintessential revolution is that of the spirit, born of an intellectual conviction of the need for change in those mental attitudes and values which shape the course of a nations development. A revolution which aims merely at changing official policies and institutions with a

14 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

view to an improvement in material conditions has little chance of genuine success. Without a revolution of the spirit, the forces which produced the iniquities of the old order would continue to be operative, posing a constant threat to the process of reform and regeneration.44 It is difficult to imagine that a woman with Suu Kyis strength of spirit, clarity of mind and courage in action will not prevail over the forces of violence and repression in Burma. Time will tell. In 1990 Bertil Lindner wrote, the consensus in Burma today is that the movement toward democracy which began in 1988 is irreversible.45 Nearly a decade later, however, the military has demonstrated its ability to maintain power in the midst of serious financial difficulties and growing international pressure to release Suu Kyi again and to move toward a more democratic society. What can be done to bring about a revolution of the spirit in Burma? Trusting as she does in the power of thought, Suu Kyi asked in a recent interview that those interested in supporting her work think about the situation in Burma.46 They can certainly read works by and about Suu Kyi, especially Freedom from Fear, which over the years of her house arrest has been her primary financial means of support. In a speech that Michael Aris delivered for her at the American University in 1996, she asked that students living in freedom extend a helping hand to the Students and all those Burmese.47 committed to progress in Burma can work toward international sanctions of the

SLORC, for world-wide sanctions against apartheid contributed to political freedom for the people of South Africa. But no matter what we do outside Burma, ultimately the people of Burma will have to free themselves from fear of the government and exercise their power to resist, just as the people of South Africa freed themselves from fear of the white minority government. Following a basic Gandhian principle, Suu Kyi realizes that no one can know when and how the Burmese will attain political freedom. She admonished them on December 3, 1988 to continue the struggle without regard for the outcome. Her courage and wisdom have inspired millions of Burmese and can help millions more in Burma and the rest of the world to continue to strive toward freedom and justice for all: Even though we dont know what will happen, we need to carry on as best we can, without wavering, along the correct path. Even though we dont know what will happen, it is right that we take part in the struggle. If you ask whether we shall achieve democracy, whether there will be general elections, here is what I say: Dont think about whether or not these things will happen. Just continue to do what you believe is right. Later on the fruits of what you do will become apparent on their own. Ones responsibility is to do the right thing.48

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 15

Endnotes

1. Aung San Suu Kyi, Freedom from Fear and Other Writings, ed. Michael Aris, 2nd ed. (London: Penguin Books, 1995), p. 193. 2. Edward Klein, The Lady Triumphs, Vanity Fair, October, 1995, p. 120. 3. Preface to Burmas Revolution of the Spirit: The Struggle for Democratic Freedom and Unity, eds. Alan Clements and Leslie Kean (New York: Aperature Foundation, 1994), p. 7. 4. Cited in John Parenteau, Prisoner for Peace: Aung San Suu Kyi and Burmas Struggle for Democracy, Greensboro: Morgan Reynolds Inc., 1994), p. 102. 5. Ibid., p. 59. 6. Aung San of Burma and other writings, speeches and interviews of Suu Kyi and are included in Freedom from Fear. 7. Aung San Suu Kyi and the Peaceful Struggle for Human Rights in Burma, Freedom from Fear, p. 321, and p. 355 for The Times citation of August 8, 1989, which is in the next sentence. 8. Cf. Richard L. Johnson and Eric Ledbetter, Spiritualizing the Political: Christ and Christianity in Gandhis Satyagraha, Peace and Change, 22, n1 (January 1997), p. 23 for a discussion of Gandhis use of this expression. 9. Josef Silverstein, ed., The Political Legacy of Aung San, rev. ed. (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program: 1993), p. 6. 10. Raghavan Iyer, ed., The Essential Writings of Gandhi (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 115. 11. The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 96.

12. Maung Maung, ed., Aung San of Burma (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962), pp. 104-105. 13. Freedom from Fear, p. 86. 14. Ibid., p. 6. 15. J. T. F. Jordens, Gandhis Religion and the Hindu Heritage, in Gandhi, India and the World: An International Symposium, ed. Sibnarayan Ray (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1970), p. 53. 16. M. K. Gandhi: An Indian Patriot in South Africa (London: The London Indian Chronicle, 1910), p. 89. 17. Cited in K. L. Seshagiri Rao, Mahatma Gandhi and Comparative Religion (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1978), p. 15. 18. Freedom from Fear, p. 8. 19. Ibid., p. 11. 20. Judith Brown, Gandhi: Prisoner of Hope New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p. 377. 21. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi: Government of India, 1958-), vol. IV, p. 406. 22. The Message of Jesus Christ (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1964), p. 22. 23. Freedom from Fear, p. 8. 24.The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 97. 25.Ibid., p. 96. 26. The Message of Jesus Christ, p. 48. 27.Freedom from Fear, pp. 183-184. 28. Ibid., p. 170.

16 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

29. Ibid., p. 116. 30. The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 147. 31. Aung San of Burma, p. 62. 32. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1958, p. 559. 33. Ibid., p. 128. 34. Ibid., pp. 107-108. 35. Ibid., p. 128, cited by Suu Kyi. 36. Ibid., p. 131. 37. Burmese Politics: The Dilemma of National Unity (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1980), p. 139. 38. Freedom from Fear, p. 4. 39. The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 15. 40. Ibid., p. 6. 41. Freedom from Fear, p. 167, and p. 173 and p. 174 in the next two quotes

42. The Idea of Freedom in Burma and the Political Thought of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Pacific Affairs, n2 (Summer 1996), pp. 211-228. 43. Freedom from Fear, p. 171, and p. 185 and p. 300 in the next two quotes. 44. Ibid. p. 183. 45. Aung San Suu Kyi and Burmas Unfinished Renaissance, Working Paper 64 (Clayton, Australia: Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University, 1990), p. 27.

46. An interview with John Pilger, New Internationalist, 280, n20 (June 1, 1996), p. 22. There are a number of possible actions listed on p. 30 of this issue. 47. This speech--and a number of Suu Kyis speeches, writings and interviews--can be found on the Free Burma Coalition webpage (http//wicip.org/fbc/auspeech.htm). 48. Freedom from Fear, p. 212.

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 17

18 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

Fall, 1998

The Acorn 19

Endnotes Aung San Suu Kyi, Freedom from Fear and Other Writings, ed. Michael Aris, 2nd ed. (London: Penguin Books, 1995), p. 193. Edward Klein, The Lady Triumphs, Vanity Fair, October, 1995, p. 120. Preface to Burmas Revolution of the Spirit: The Struggle for Democratic Freedom and Unity, eds. Alan Clements and Leslie Kean (New York: Aperature Foundation, 1994), p. 7. Cited in John Parenteau, Prisoner for Peace: Aung San Suu Kyi and Burmas Struggle for Democracy, Greensboro: Morgan Reynolds Inc., 1994), p. 102.
5 4 3 2 1

12

Maung Maung, ed., Aung San of Burma (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962), pp. 104-105.

13

Freedom from Fear, p. 86.

Ibid., p. 6.

14

J. T. F. Jordens, Gandhis Religion and the Hindu Heritage, in Gandhi, India and the World: An International Symposium, ed. Sibnarayan Ray (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1970), p. 53.
16

15

M. K. Gandhi: An Indian Patriot in South Africa (London: The London Indian Chronicle, 1910), p. 89.
Cited in K. L. Seshagiri Rao, Mahatma Gandhi and Comparative Religion (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1978), p. 15.
18 17

Ibid., p. 59.

Aung San of Burma and other writings, speeches and interviews of Suu Kyi and are included in Freedom from Fear.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the Peaceful Struggle for Human Rights in Burma, Freedom from Fear, p. 321, and p. 355 for The Times citation of August 8, 1989, which is in the next sentence. Cf. Richard L. Johnson and Eric Ledbetter, Spiritualizing the Political: Christ and Christianity in Gandhis Satyagraha, Peace and Change, 22, n1 (January 1997), p. 23 for a discussion of Gandhis use of this expression. Josef Silverstein, ed., The Political Legacy of Aung San, rev. ed. (Ithaca: Southeast Asia Program: 1993), p. 6. Raghavan Iyer, ed., The Essential Writings of Gandhi (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 115.
11 10 9 8 7

Freedom from Fear, p. 8.

Ibid., p. 11.

19

20

Judith Brown, Gandhi: Prisoner of Hope (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p. 377.
21

The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi: Government of India, 1958-), vol. IV, p. 406. The Message of Jesus Christ (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1964), p. 22.
23 22

Freedom from Fear, p. 8. The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 97.

Ibid., p. 96.

24

25

26

The Message of Jesus Christ, p. 48. Freedom from Fear, pp. 183-184.
Ibid., p. 170. Ibid., p. 116.

27

The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 96.

28

29

20 The Acorn

Fall, 1998

30

The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 147. Aung San of Burma, p. 62.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1958, p. 559. Ibid., p. 128. Ibid., pp. 107-108. Ibid., p. 128, cited by Suu Kyi. Ibid., p. 131.

48

Freedom from Fear, p. 212.

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

Burmese Politics: The Dilemma of National Unity (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1980), p. 139.
38

Freedom from Fear, p. 4. The Political Legacy of Aung San, p. 15.

Ibid., p. 6.

39

40

41

Freedom from Fear, p. 167, and p. 173 and p. 174 in the next two quotes.

The Idea of Freedom in Burma and the Political Thought of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Pacific Affairs, n2 (Summer 1996), pp. 211-228.

42

Freedom from Fear, p. 171, and p. 185 and p. 300 in the next two quotes.
44

43

Ibid. p. 183.

Aung San Suu Kyi and Burmas Unfinished Renaissance, Working Paper 64 (Clayton, Australia: Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University, 1990), p. 27.
An interview with John Pilger, New Internationalist, 280, n20 (June 1, 1996), p. 22. There are a number of possible actions listed on p. 30 of this issue. This speech--and a number of Suu Kyis speeches, writings and interviews--can be found on the Free Burma Coalition webpage (http//wicip.org/fbc/auspeech.htm).
47 46

45