Introduction

Myanmar (Burma) is made up of 135 national ethnic groups with eight major national ethnic groups: Kachin, Kayin, Kayah, Chin, Mon, Bamar, Rakhine, and Shan. According to The New Light of Myanmar (Feb. 12, 1993:) Bamar, the largest national ethnic group, constitutes 70% of the population; Karen 9%; Shan 8%; Rakhine 5 %; Mon 2.5%; Chin 2.5%; and Kachin 2%.2 In terms of religious adherents, Myanmar Facts & Features (2000) estimated the percentage of Buddhists to be 89%, Christians 6%, Muslims 2.5%, Hindus 0.5%, and animists and others 2%.3 This diversity of cultures, languages, and religions is Myanmar’s distinctive character and blessing. In this paper, I will use Bamar to refer to the majority people. The terms Burma and Myanmar will be used interchangeably to refer to the name of the country.

Unfortunately, there is a tendency among the Buddhists to regard the Christian church only as the church in Myanmar but not as the church of Myanmar. Simon Pau Khan En said that Christianity was and still is an alien religion to people of Myanmar due to three significant factors: (a) identification of Christian mission with colonialism by Burmese people; (b) negative attitude of missionaries towards the religion and culture of the people; and (c) conversion en masse of tribal groups to Christianity. The fundamental challenge of Christian mission for the churches in Myanmar today is to discover how to inculturate the Christian gospel to remove this alienation of Christianity in the country.4 This alienation leads to misunderstanding, and even socio-political and religious oppression of the ethnic Christian minority.

To remove this estrangement, Christians in Myanmar need to look back at their history and transform their spirituality to meet the needs of the people. As a well-known Burmese proverb says, “Pokku hkin hma taya myin” (a person sees the truth only after personal intimacy). To have intimacy with Buddhists, Christians need to find common ground where both faiths can come together in cooperation. Edmund Za Bik was right when he described the condition of religions in Myanmar. He said, “We have come to the stage in which the situation is ‘Do or Die’. If we want to survive, we have to overcome suspicion and build trust by actively promoting Inter-faith Dialogue”.5

This paper deals with a Christian spirituality of involvement aimed at removing alienation and building trust. By spirituality here I mean what a Christian ought to do under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is a kind of life ideal, guiding value, source of meaning, and deep vision that will ultimately affect the life decisions and commitment of people. First, I will outline the history of the church in Myanmar to highlight the reasons for the estrangement of Christianity. Then I will propose some possible ways of overcoming oppression through a spirituality of involvement.

The Church in Myanmar under Successive Governments

A Christian community has existed in Myanmar since the early sixteenth century. Over the years since then, the churches have endured hardships of many kinds under diverse political systems including monarchy, colonial rule, parliamentary democracy, a socialist government, and now military rule.6 What follows is a brief survey of the history of the church in Myanmar in order to investigate reasons for the violence perpetrated against the ethnic minority Christians.

(a) The Church under Burmese Monarchy
During the period of the monarchy, there was religious freedom and consequently there were good relationships between kings and missionaries. In an article, “The Early Catholic Missionaries in Burma” in The Guardian (1962:37), Vivian Ba wrote about the Christian missionaries who got permission from the Burmese kings to propagate the gospel freely and build churches and schools. During the first Anglo-Burmese war, Father d’ Amato, who was imprisoned by a Burmese official, was immediately released by the order of the Burmese king who said, “This holy man is like a god, why should we harm him.” Furthermore, the kings of Burma always asked for help from the Catholic missionaries in important discussions with the British, in settling disputes, and in developing relations with the outside world. After the Roman Catholic mission, came the Protestant mission, which had great success through the ministry of the American Baptist missionaries, beginning with the Judsons from 1813 to 1850.7 Unfortunately, the Protestant missionaries did not gain the full support of the Burmese monarchs and were seen to side with the British colonialists.

(b) The Church in the British Colonial Period
After the third Anglo-Burmese war, the whole of Burma came under British rule. During this period, the gospel came into Burma along with swords. Protestant churches such as Baptist, Anglican, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches were established.8 Though the British government practiced the principle of religious neutrality, Buddhists maintain that the decline of Buddhism during the colonial period was the result of alien rule under which Buddhism received no political patronage. Since then, Christianity was seen as religion of the invaders and the proclamation of the gospel came to be considered as a political tool for the expansion of western culture and colonial power.

(c) The Church under Parliamentary Democracy (1948-1962)
With the end of colonialism, Buddhists argued that just as in the days of the Burmese kings, there was the need now for the independent government to assume the special role of “promoter of faith”.9 In the year of Myanmar’s Independence, 1948, U Nu, a devout Buddhist, became the Prime Minister. On September 26, 1959, a General Parliamentary election registered a landslide victory of U Nu’s party (AFPFL), which promised to make Buddhism the state religion. Despite some opposition, U Nu fulfilled his promise, and in 1961 the Constitution was amended making Buddhism the state religion. In his book, The Christian Faith and Non-Christian Religions, A. C. Bouquet wrote, “Political emancipation, national enthusiasm led people to look with renewed pride upon their own heritages, whether of art or religion. All this had led to the resurgence of Buddhism”.10 In a country like Burma this observation is true. Burma’s art, architecture, music, literature and social life are all bound up with Buddhism. Buddhism came to be considered a national heritage and the nationalist Bamar are proud of it. The revival movement was undoubtedly motivated by nationalism.11

Christian ethnic minorities demonstrated in opposition to the policy of Buddhism as a State Religion proposed by U Nu, and submitted a five-point argument against it:12
1. It was against modern democratic principle.
2. It would create two classes of citizenship.
3. It was contrary to General Aung San’s conviction. 13
4. It was being forcibly imposed on the ethnic minorities.
5. It would disrupt national unity.

Although U Nu’s government promised to guarantee religious freedom later, successive governments rigorously defended and supported Buddhism and even imposed it on the ethnic minorities in various ways.

(d) The Church under the Revolutionary Council (1962-1974) and Socialist Government (1974 – 1988)
On March 2, 1962, General Ne Win and his Revolutionary Council seized power. Under Ne Win’s regime, church and state were kept separate. Ne Win decreed U Nu’s declaration of Buddhism as the state religion to be null and void. Between 1963 and 1965, all banks, industries, and the Christian institutions like schools, hospitals and colleges were nationalized. Not only foreign missionaries, but also all foreigners were expelled in March 1966. Ne Win virtually cut off the country from the rest of the world and Burma entered into a period of isolation as Ne Win’s regime pursued “the Burmese Way to Socialism”. Instead of developing the economic-political situation of Myanmar during his 26 years of dictatorship, Ne Win led the country to become one of the poorest countries in the world. Languages of the minority groups were initially allowed to be taught for five years in primary schools. By the end of Ne Win’s rule these ethnic languages were banned. This weakened the ethnic churches as it deprived the younger generation of the ability to read scriptures that had been translated into their mother tongue.

(e) The church under the State Peace and Development Council (1988- )
After the SPDC came to power in 1988, racial and religious discrimination abounded. The use of porters and forced laborers and instances of unlawful imprisonment and torture increased. Some issues of religion and education will be discussed briefly.

1. Religion
“A monk cannot tell authorities about people’s problems. If he does, the authorities will consider that monk to be their enemy,” said a monk from Mandalay. Successive military regimes have also secretly placed intelligence agents in monasteries, so if any monks are discussing politics or meeting with political activists, their activities will be reported. The ‘planted monks’ can also urge other monks to stay out of politics. In some cases, military authorities have tried to obtain representation on monastery committees, so that they could keep an eye on the activities at the monasteries.14

Although Christians in cities and towns in central Myanmar have not faced physical persecution, they have been harassed in various ways. Endless delays in approving building permits for new religious structures are common, and there have been cases of newly built churches being pulled down.15 While pagodas are constantly being upgraded, permits to repair churches are not issued. One of the worst kinds of oppression that Christians are suffering from is to be treated as second-class citizens. In order to reach the higher ranks of government service, a Christian has to choose whether to convert to Buddhism and get promotion or to remain a Christian and lose any chance of promotion. Many Christian government servants leave their jobs early, as there is no bright hope for their future. The country is left in the hands of high-ranking officials who are all Bamar Buddhists.

Christian communities in remote areas, especially where armed anti-government forces operate, have faced much harsher pressure. In particular, Christians in Karen and Karenni states on the eastern border and in Chin State and Sagaing Division on the western border have seen their churches burned down, their pastors arrested and soldiers disrupting services, taking the villagers as porters.16 In the remote Naga and Chin hills some parents in the late 1990s allowed their children to accompany authorities to what they were told were lowland secular schools, only to find out later that their children had been sent to Buddhist monasteries and made into novice monks. Furthermore, there are cases of military people offering rice and money to any poor hill people who converted to Buddhism. Many families converted to Buddhism as a result.17

2. Education: Quantity without Quality
A Burmese educator once said, “Education gives you confidence in yourself and strength to make decisions. The more people are uneducated, the more you can keep them down.”18 In the late 1940s and 1950s, Myanmar boasted as having the highest literacy rates in Asia and an expanding educational system. Yet the military regime has placed a low priority on education. Schools do not have enough textbooks and so many students are forced to buy books on the black market at a much higher price. After only two months of class lectures in a whole year, students have to sit for their examination. Some university students were disappointed because some questions were from the curriculum that had not yet been taught. Since teachers are paid less than a subsistence salary, they open tuition classes, where more content is taught, and from which they make some money to live on. As a result, students from poor families who cannot afford these extra tuition classes have a poor foundation in education. Meanwhile the children of government leaders are sent abroad to study.

A Christian Response to Oppression in a Buddhist Context

(1) Toward Incarnation in Buddhist Culture
In Adoniram Judson’s third meeting with the Burmese monarch, King Bagyidaw asked him, “Do you, followers of Jesus dress like other Burmans?” What the Bamar monarchs were most suspicious of was not necessarily the matter of conversion to Christianity but rather the problem of converts losing their cultural identity and associating with western culture and imperialism. Today Buddhists remain suspicious of a western gospel and Christians who do not fit in their society. The challenge remains to make the gospel and the church relevant in the Burmese Buddhist context. Samuel Ngun Ling is right when he says that one way to make a Buddhist feel at home with the gospel is to express it in Bamar thought-forms and ways of life. In order to do this, the Christian expressing the gospel must be a Christ-like person who can love people equally with whatever faiths they confess.19

Andrew F. Walls (1982:97f) uncovered the flexible nature of God when he wrote about the unchanging incarnational nature of the gospel:

When God become (hu)man, Christ took flesh in a particular family, a member of a particular nation, with the tradition of customs associated with that nation. All that was not evil He sanctified. Wherever He is taken by men in any time and place He takes that nationality, that society, that ‘culture’, and sanctifies all that is capable of sanctification by his presence…. No group of Christians has therefore any right to impose in the name of Christ upon another group of Christians a set of assumptions about life determined by another time and place.20

In doing contextualization, Hua Yung warns of two things to avoid in order to maintain one’s Christian identity. First, one needs to avoid uncritical contextualization and at the same time to affirm that which transcends the context. Second, one needs to guard against ‘the danger of absolutism of contextualism’ .21 Incarnation in Buddhist culture means “preservation of cultural identity by a person of Christian faith”,22 if we may borrow the words of Stephen B. Bevans.

(2) Toward Commitment and Service
A society is sick when injustice is done to the poor and the disinherited. A community suffers when there is political or economic oppression depriving the powerless of freedom and well being. A human community loses its human face when women, men and children are discriminated against on account of gender, race, and sex. When the world becomes a place for only the ‘survival of the fittest’, nothing is left for the majority of the weak.23

In Myanmar churches, there is an over-emphasis on prayer, fasting, and personal salvation in the next life. Even though there is a crisis in Myanmar with people suffering from HIV/AIDS, poverty, war, and conflict, most Christians are more concerned about building bigger church buildings, and converting the so-called “heathens”, i.e. non-Christians. There is little social concern and even less social action. This has served to emphasize the church’s isolation and irrelevance in its Buddhist context.

Hla Bu, a post-independence Christian professor of philosophy, stated that in the traditional faith of Buddhism, building pagodas, monasteries, and giving alms are regarded as the best way to acquire merit. However, the modern Buddhist advocates giving donations to found and maintain schools, hospitals, orphanages, old people’s homes, and various social welfare institutions. Another change is that Buddhist politicians accept the Welfare State as the goal of their political effort.24 This shift in Buddhism toward social concern provides both a challenge and an opportunity for Christians in Myanmar to engage with the Buddhists around these social concerns. Christian spirituality must be worked out through engaging with the society around it. One way to do this is through social development in areas such as education. Such involvement will provide opportunities to develop intimacy and understanding with Buddhists, hopefully resulting in trust in Christians and legitimacy for the church.

History teaches us lessons in this regard. When Christian mission came to Burma not only in the form of evangelization but also in social and educational works, it attracted Buddhist social elites, including King Mindon who let his nine sons and his ministers study with the missionaries.25 Hla Bu reminds us that on the whole Buddhist leaders were critical of Christians as being uncooperative in national concerns. He suggested that Christians should cooperate with the Burmese Buddhist people and government to be patriotic citizens. In all types of social service it is important to help people see that the Christian genuine concern for people is the source of his/her inspiration and drive.26 The Christian presence in Myanmar is meaningful only inasmuch as it meets the needs of the people. According to Bonhoeffer, “the church is the church indeed only when it exists for others.” Christians are called to be involved in the realization of the reign of justice and peace in Myanmar.

To conclude let me share the words of Philip Potter, General Secretary of WCC who preached a very provoking message at the Nairobi assembly:

We have to learn afresh together to speak boldly in Christ’s name both to those in power and to the people, to oppose terror, cruelty and race discrimination, to stand by the outcast, the prisoner and the refugee. We have to make of the church in every place a voice for those who have no voice, and a home where every (one) will be at home. We have to ask God to teach us together to say “No” and to say “Yes” in truth. “No” to all that flouts the love of Christ, to every system, every programme and every person that treats any (one) as though (they) were an irresponsible thing or a means of profit, to the defenders of injustice in the name of order, to those who sow the seeds of war or rouge war as inevitable; “Yes” to all that conforms to the love of Christ, to all who seek for justice, to the peacemakers, to all who hope, fight and suffer for the cause of (people), to all who even without knowing it look for new heavens and a new earth where in dwelleth righteousness.”27

A spirituality of involvement in the struggle of people demands pain from the heart rather than from the head. According to Kitamori in his pain of God, pain like God’s pain that loves the unlovable and sacrifices his only beloved son for the world, can heal the wounded world. That kind of love for people flows originally from our relationship with God. Thus, in order to make the church witness in Myanmar successful, it must be fully baptized in the poverty, struggles and culture of the Myanmar peoples. Such compassionate involvement will eradicate not only alienation but also poverty and all social evils that separate people and make enemies out of brothers and sisters. In doing so, the truth of Christ’s will becomes real and meaningful to us as we seek to understand Christ’s presence with people who struggle for liberation in Myanmar.

NOTES:

1 San No Thuan teaches theology at Myanmar Institute of Theology in Yangon, Myanmar.
2 Samuel Ngun Ling, “Voices of Minority Ethmic Christians in Myanmar,” in CTC Bulletin, vol. xviii, no. 2 – vol. xix, No. 2 (December 2002 – August 2003).
3 Ibid.
4 Simon Pau Khan En, “The Quest for Authentic Myanmar Contextual Theology” in MIT Rays Journal of Theology, v. 2 (2001), 40.

Tua pan piang khempeuh tuni in ‘laigui zom’ i ci a, minam khat ihi hi. I kibatna om hi peuhmah a, tua kibatna omte i khahsuahloh ding thupi mahmah ding hi. Minam ciamtehna khat, minam puan khat, minam dial khat, minam pau khat, minam ngeina biakpiakzia khat, minam ngeina kitenzia khat, minam ngeina kivui dan khat, minam ngeina kipahtawidan khat, minam sung mimal khempeuh thupisak (value system) a kibang khat, etc. cihbangin i neih kisam ding hi. Tua bang anei ngeisa ihih ding uphuai hi. Tua neih ngeisa pen kepbit zong kul ding hi. Kepbit a hih kei leh a thak piang dinga, minam thak piang ding cihna hipah hi.

Minam khat hite in minam puan a silh uh ciang kibang hi. Minam Lam a lah uh ciangin kibang hi. Minam pau a gen uh ciangin kibang hi. Minam nopni dahni zat dan a gen uh ciang kibang hi (Customary Law kibang). Ei zong a kibang nei thei leng, zang thei leng hoih ding hi a.

Minam khat sungah innkuan bangin genteh pak leng, nu ding kisam a, pa ding kisam hi. Nasem ding khangno kisam a, minam mel kilahna ding nungak melhoih kisam hi. Lametna hong neisak ding naupangno kisam a, thudot kamdot ding pitek putek kisam hi. WC bawhlung mah bangin i khialh khak leh a dik a maan a kipankiksak ding referee i kisam hi. Minam sung bitna dingin galveng kisam a, midang tawh kilawmtatna a bawl ding gamkek diplomats kisam hi. Sia in pha ta leh a puah a huai dingin minam Nu kisam a, genhak in hilh hak tase leh a kem a khoi ding Pa kisam hi. A hoihlohna khat om leh a kiphawksak ding ‘phun hat’ pawlkhat kisam a; phun hat te a nial ding ‘phun hat zawsem’ pawlkhat zong kisam hi. Sia leh pha leh a phat nuam veve angsungthei honkhat kisam a, hoih in khangto ta leh a hoihsem a khangtosem nuam a huaiham honkhat zong kisam hi. Phunlo paulo a a sem ngiatngiat a kisap mah bangin sem in sem takei leh kampi bek tawh a awngawng, ama sepsa bang keek a a gen thei honkhat zong kisam zel hi. Ama sepsa nangawn ah pahtawina a lamen lo a kisap mah bangin, mite sepsa khempeuh ah a minpha a ngah nuam honkhat zong kisam hi. Pahtawina kipia kei leh a thadual pah mi a kisap mah bangin pahtawi takei leng a khawl tuanlo maban a zom den mi zong kisam hi. Mi khut ah gul man nuam hon khat a kisap mah bangin ama sepsa na ngawn ah ‘ka sepsa hi’ a ci nuamlo zong honkhat kisam hi. Kipawl in semkhawm siam a kisap mah bangin mite tawh a kipawl thei vetlo zong hon khat kisam hi. Thu ngaihsun siam a kisap mah bangin a ngaihsut masaksak a awtpihpih pawl zong kisam veve hi. A pil a kisap mah bangin a kipilsak zong honkhat kisam a; a hau a kisap mah bangin a kihausak zong kisam zel hi. A zuau ngeilo hon khat a kisap mah bangin a mutmut thei pawlkhat zong kisam a; a khem ngeilo mi a kisap mah bangin mikhem tawh nekzong thei honkhat zong kisam veve thong hi. Phat kei leng a khasia pah pawl a kisap mah bangin phatphat taleng ‘phat tak hi keng’ a ci pawl zong kisam zel. Heh leh a hehna cillum tawh a valh pawl a kisap mah bangin heh leh vompi halungvei bang pawl zong kisam zel. Mite in pil teh cita leh amah leh amah pil a kisa nailo honkhat kisam a, mite in hai teh cita leh pil ing a ci nuam mi zong honkhat kisam hi. Pil mahmah taleh a pilna a kizang theilo mi kisam a, hai mahmah taleh a haina minam bukimsakna ding kisam om hi. Hau mahmah minam a khual vetlo kisam a, zawng mahmah taleh minam ading a piakhia den zo mi zong kisam hi. Minam minam cihcih kul kei a ci pawl zong kisam a, minam it ding minam kep ding cih a gengen pawl zong kisam hi… and so on…

Guai, minam khat i cih pen a bukim na ding a baih hetlo hithong. Zomi te’n hih teng khempeuh leh i gen khak loh teng zong i nei hiam? Minam lian khat i hih leh bel neih dinga kilawm, minam lian a kicite in a neihte uh ahi hi. Gen khit zawh pak ding hilo lai.

Hau Za Cin
Phuitong Liim
www.hauzacin. blogspot. com

Tulaitak pen Zomi te leitungbupah ih tai ngeingei laitak ahi hi. “Minbang pianna Pupa Zogam” nusia in “Minthang Malaysia” ah “galtai” min pua in a tai zo teng ih tai ngeingai hi. Atai zo lo teng bekmah ih gamah om lai dan hi. Fashion pi khat hong suak a, gamdang tailo te mibanzolo bang khat suak hi. Nidangin gamdang pai ding hong kikhak ahihmanin kuamah ih pai zo kei hi. Gamdangpai khat peuh om leh nasia ih sa mah mah hi. Tu leuleu ciangin ut peuh in ih pai ta hi. Hih thusunna pen critical pian mahmah ahihmanin, limtak nangaihsutsak ciat ta un. Zomi te’ kalsuan zia movement pen socio-religio- political perspective lam pangpan etna hi a, sia hi pha hi ci in deihkaihna bias bangmah kihel lo hi. Ngaihsut kak ding deihna bulpi ahi hi.

II. Kawlgam Zomi te’ Role En Pak Le’ng

Zomi te  tangthu 800AD pawl en kik le’ng, nidang in tu a ih Zogam cihna ah teng masa hi lo h’anga, zanggam mah pan galtai to khin ih hi hi.

1500 masiah Kalay, Kabawl Valley ah sawt pi ih om khit ciang, khamtung Ciimnuai ah ih pu te na tai uh a, tua pan in mun tuam tuam ah kikhen kik in, minam, beh, le phung tuamtuam ih suak hi.

1890s British te hong tun’, sangmang te hong pai khit ciangin mibangin ih civilized to pan a, Pasian biakna Christian ngeina sungah ih nei thei hi. Ngeina lui sunga animism upna te nusia in ngeina thak sungah Tapidaw akici Kawl kammal zanghin Christian ih suak to to hi.

1940s Japan gal hong tun’takciangin Zomi te ki khantohna hong kilamdang hi. Khamtung Zogam ah motorcar khawng hong tung to hi. Pasal te’n sam met in, numei te’n nik tual teng ta hi. Lai le pilna manphatna thei in sang inn ih hanciam mah mah hi.

Suaktakna ngah hun ciang Kawlgam tawh ih kipawl a, U Nu Parliament hun sung 1950s pen “leitung hoih lai hun” ci in ih ciamtek hi. Nutakna nuam ih sa mahmah a, khua bang mah ih phawk kei hi.

1960s Bo Ne Win Revolution hun sungah zongh Zomi te khua ih phawk nai kei a “Bo Gyoh Ni Vuan, zingvaihawmna, Doh Bama Pi, Kil bang khang hen, kil bang khang hen aw!” ci in ningzu aisa tawh thupha ih pia ngekngek hi. 1967 kum in Kawlgam bup an tang neek ding hong kicin’ nawn loh tak tek, hunhaksa hong tun’lam ih phawk kha pan hi.

1970s BSPP hun U Ne Win party khat bek ukna nuai  ah, Zomi te’n Chin State cih gamke pi khat athu in ih ngah a, Ne Win vaihawmna nuaiah bangmah tang ngam lo in ih om ciat hi. Socialism hoih maw hoih lo cih thei peuhmah loin Zomi te’n an kham lo ih hihman in Kawlzangah akhua akhua in lal ngeingai hi h’ang. RTB le RTC ih cih motor pi te tawh zanggam pan antang hong puak to zel hang zongh, kicing zo tuan lo hi.

1980s hun sung, Socialist Economic hun sung Zomi te sumbawl ding mit kihong in, Bombay le Zangkong visa kullo in “na-le-hmuh” tawh ih kawm ziahziah thei a, Zomi sumhau tampi ih om hi. Hih hunsung ah biakna lam kha khanlawhna nasia takin ih nei hi.

1990s SLORC hun sung ciangin, sumbawlna hong hoih nawn lo leuleu in, gamdang zin hun hong tung ta hi. Passport kipia a, gamdang kong ki hong ahihmanin, Zomi te gamdang ih pai ziahziah ta hi. Nasem sumthalawh ding le Lai Siangtho sangkah dingin ih tampai pen hi.

2000s SPDC hun sung pen UNHCR te’ hong hanciampihna tawh REFUGEE hun hong tung leuleu ta hi. Malay kumpi te phalna le deihsakna om peuhmah lo pi in, “Minthang Malay” ci in Zomi te’n inntual in ih zangh zihziah bek ta hi. “Kawl kumpi gilo ihneih khak, Zomi te’ thupha” ih ci nuam ding hiam? A tai zo tengin “galtai” ih suak zo bek a, atai zo lo te ih gamah a ki nusia suak hi.

III. 2010s: Zomi Diaspora maw; Kawlgam Kitelkik Hun?

Tu laitak Kawlgam kitelna thu tawh ih buai mah mah laitak ahi hi. Gamsung kitelna ding vaitawh kisai, gampua pan ih buaipih ciat mah mah hi. Gam thumna tung khin te le tungnai lo Malay ah thaam lai tengin, Kawlgam democracy ngah takpi le ih ciah kik nawn diam? Nuntakna haksat manin India lamah ana lal to khin uh ih sanggam Zomi tampi na om a, tua te pen tulaitak Kawlgam Zomi te thu ih gen ciang, amau kihel lotawh kibang zel hi. Tu laitak Malay le leitungbup ah Zomi te galtaina ah amau kihel lo uh hi. Nung in Carey Tuangpu in alai at na khat ah Meitei gal hong pian pen Zomi te’ thupha hi, India lam te le Kawlgam lamte kilomkhat thei nading hi ci in gelh hi. Zomi te in ih gam le lei ih it takpi hiam? Ahihkei le, leitung khankhat sung nuntak nading gamnuam khat ah peem lel ning ih ci hiam?

Zomi Diaspora?

Nung in Dr. JM. Paupu in a research bawlna ah hi banga Zomi te leitungbupah ih kithehthang pen, twenty-first century Zomi evangelical diaspora akici thei diam? ci in dotna hong nei a, ke’n zongh dawnna pawlkhat ka pia hi. “Zomi in diaspora for World Evangelism” thulu bang in tu ni Zomi te kalsuan takpi hi le’ng lungdamhuai mahmah ding hi. Tu ni in Zomi te leitungbup Evangelism ding ih ngaihsun hiam? Ahihkei le gilpi khapkhat ading nuntakna nuam zawdeuh mun zong ih hi zaw hiam?

First century Judeo-Christian te leitung mun tuamtuam ah akitheh thang na pen, CHRISTIAN UPNA KISUKSIAT hang hi a, gilkial man leh an khamlohman hi lo hi. Twenty-first century Zomi te tu ni in, leitungbup ih tun’na pen CHRISTIAN UPNA KISUKSIAT PAULAM a, atatakin gilkial, ankhamloh man ahi zaw hi. Zomis are today seeking a better life by applying asylum for refugee status.

Akua akua ci loin UNHCR te’n CHIN minam ahihnak le Kawl kumpi’n biakna tawh bawlsia hi cih thu sang thei ahihman in, Zomi khempeuh PASIAN MIN le CHRISTIAN BIAKNA MIN suangin REFUGEE GAMBEEL ngah ding ih hanciam mahmah laitak hun ahi hi. Zomi te pen tang om minam hi loin , kipawl om minamte ahihman un atun’tun’na mun uah, biakna bawlin kipawlna nei uh hi. Tua kipawlna biakna te ah Zokam pau Zomi te bek kipawl ahih zel ciangin Pasian thugen pen minamdang te ading hi thei lo zel hi. Minamdang te kiangah Pasian thu gen ding ih kithawi ta hiam? Ahihkei leh, midang te’ hong muhna ah “Zomi te’n Pasian thusungah nungta thei tatak nai lo uh hi, amau le amau peuh ki suamsuam lai mawk uh hi” ci in, midang te’ Pasian thu genpihding kisam lai te peuh ih hi lai zaw kei hiam?

IV. Thukhupna: Mai lam Zomi te’ Identity

Kawlgam sungah Zomi te’ identity kician pen, CHIN-CHRISTIAN hi. Leitung mun tuamtuam a om Zomi te’ identity pen bang ahi ding hiam? Ih peemna gamah ih second generation te in tenna gam te’ kampau hong siam mahmah ta ding uh a, tu ni a nungta lai teng ih om nawnloh hun, third generation, fourth generation ciangin “Ka pu/pi pen Bumese te ahih kei le Asian te hi cih ciang khawng hong hi ding hi. Ih Zopau apau lai zongh in US a te bang, American awsuah khat tawh pau ta ding uh hi. Europe a te’n European awsuak khat tawh Zopau hong pau malmal kha ngel ding hi. Tu ni in Tedim khuasung khangno te pau pen nidang a Tedim pau tawh awsuah kikhai mahmah khin a, nidang ciang Tedim kam ih cih Tedim khuapi sung pau pen aw tuampi khat hong hi ta ding  hi. Tua hun ciangin, leitung mun tuamtuam a om Zomi khangthak te le Zogam, Kawlgam, Vaigam a om Zomi akici te Zokam tawh akihopih thei lai diam? Tua hun ciangin Zomi te’ identity pen CHIN-CHRISTIAN mah ahilai diam?

Gamdang a, migam nuam mahmah vantunggam abang gam ah akhangkhia Zomi khat in tanglai pupa gam ahi Zogam Chin State ah ciahkik ding amangmat lai ding hiam? Tua hun ciang, tu hun Chin State pen Zomi te’ teen na Chin State mah ahilai na diam? Tu ciangciang Zogam pan a khangkhia kawlgam ah ulian suak te kuamah Zogam aciah kik om nawn mel lo hi. Gamdang, na khempeuh abaihsa kicinna ah suakin akhang khia khat in bang mah kicin lohna Zogam ah aciah nuam nawn diam?

Cik ciang koiah ih ciah kik nawn diam?

Philip Cope Suan Pau   ARMS: All Racial Mission & Theological Studies Yangon, Myanmar

C. Lalremruata
Director
Zo Indigenous Foum.

The Zou / Zo are a Tibeto-Mongoloid group of people, a sub-family of the Chin-Kuki-Mizo race. Our ancestral homeland of the Zo people was around the South-Eastern Tibet and Western China. They speak a common language belonging to Assam-Burma branch of Tibeto-Burman family having affinity with Filipino, Brunei, Malaysia, Thai, etc. both in the language and culture. They form a group of Tibeto-Burman peoples inhabiting the Chin Hills in Mynamar and Manipur in India. They are also recorded as Yo and Jou by many colonial civil servants.

The most accurate historical records of the Zos/Zous were written by Rev. Fr. Vincentious Sangermano, a Roman Catholic missionary who came to Burma in 1783 A.D. He wrote a book entitled “A Description of the Burmese Empire”, which was published in 1835 A.D in Rome in the Latin language. Later on it was translated into English by William Tandy D.D. “To the east of the Chien Mountains is a pretty nation called ‘Jou’. They are supposed to have been Chein, who in the progress of time have become Burmanized, speaking their language, although very corruptly, and adopting all their customs.”

Betram S. Carey CIE, Assistant Commissioner, Burma, and Political Officer, Chin Hills and H. N. Tuck, Extra Assistant Commissioner, Burma and Assistant Political Officer, Chin Hills wrote ‘The Chin Hills’. In that book, Volume I, page 140, they wrote about the Zos as follows: “The Yos (Zos) tribe three generations back occupied the tract now occupied by the Kanhow clan of Soktes, and many of the Kanhow villages are inhabited still by Yos, whose tribal name has given way to that of Kanhow. As has been shown in the previous chapter, Kantum, the Sokte, conquered all the inhabitants right up to the borders of Manipur, and Kanhow, his son, founded Tiddim village and ruled the newly acquired conquests of his father. The conquered Yos thus became known as Kanhowte, Kanhow’s men, and as they intermarried with the Soktes who settled north with Kanhow, there is no real difference between the conquerors and the conquered”.

“While all clans and families belonging to the tribe who call their chief Topa designated themselves by ‘Yo’ or ‘Zo’, they in turn apply their common name to a particular clan. The Yos (Zos) are most unique in the sense of the name they bear and the culture they practice in reflection of the ancient Zo tradition” … No proper study has yet been made as to why the generic Yo as spelt in former literature was applied to them”.

Our forefathers of Mizos/Zomi hailed from place to place called CHHINLUNG PUK (Chhinglung Cave) between, 300 BC to 200 B.C. and came to Chin-Lushai Land to settle there between 2nd Century to 7th Century AD. The Chin-Lushai land (our land), hereinafter referred to as Zoram or Zoland is situated between 92 ° and 95 ° longitude (East) and between 20 ° and 25 ° latitude North of Equator. The whole area is roughly about 91,000 square miles with a population of about 5 millions in 1991. The Zo dynasty or Zo Kingdom was built sometime between 200 AD and 700 AD.

S. T. Hau Go, a former Lecturer of Mandalay University and an authority on the Zomi wrote: “Our present geographical distribution extends from the Naga Hills and the Hukawng Valley in the north to Bassein and the Irrawaddy Delta in the south, from the Irrawaddy and Sittang Valleys in the east to the Arakan coast, Bangladesh, Assam and Manipur in the West. In short, we occupy the mountainous region between India and Bangladesh in the west and the Chindwin-Irrawaddy valleys in the east, and the plains and valleys adjacent to these hilly regions.”

This Zoland is geographically contiguous, compact and has been the land where the Zomi permanently settled for centuries. Here they lived in complete independence before the advent of the British. They lived without any outside interference and domination, and no part of her territory had been subjugated. Within their territory, they were knitted together by common traditions, customs, cultures; mode of living; language and social life. They governed themselves in accordance with their customary laws. It was a sovereign land where the people enjoyed perfect harmony on their own.

The term ‘Zo People’ is derived from the generic name ‘Zo’. In the past they were little known by this racial nomenclature. They were known by the non-tribal plain peoples of Burma, Bangladesh and India as Chin, Kuki, or Lushai. Subsequently the British employed these terms to christen those ‘wild hill tribes’ living in the ‘un-administered area’, and was subsequently legalised to be the names for the newly adopted subjects by Queen Victoria of England. However, they called themselves Zomi since time immemorial. They are Zomi not because they live in the highlands or hills, but are Zomi and called themselves Zomi because they are the descendants of their great great ancestor, ‘Zo’. In this regards, F.K. Lehman, Professor of Anthropology and Linguistics, University of Illinois (USA), who had done extensive study on the Chin of Burma, said: ‘No single Chin word has explicit reference to all the peoples we customarily call Chin, but all – or nearly all of the peoples have a special word for themselves and those of their congeners with whom they are in regular contact. This word is almost always a variant form of a single root, which appears as Zo, Yo, Ysou, Shou and the like.’

Relating to this generic name, Fan-Cho a diplomat of the Tang dynasty of China, mentioned in 862 AD a Kingdom in the Chindwin Valley ‘whose Princes and Chiefs were called Shou (Zo) ‘ . In 1783, Father Vincentius Sangermano in his book, ‘A Description of the Burmese Empire’ described them as, “a petty nation called JO (JAW) “ Sir Henry Yule, as early as 1508 mentioned about the YO country the location of which was”west of the mouth of the Kyen-dwen (Chindwin) the interior of Doab, between the Irrawaddy and the Chindwin, from Mout-Shabo upwards and the whole of the hill country east and north-east of the capital, towards the Ruby-mines, the upper course of Hyitnge, and the Chinese frontier” . Rev. Howard Malcolm also testified thus, “The YAW (ZO) is on the lower waters of the Khyendiwen (Chindwin) not far from Ava. The district is sometimes called YO or JO”.

Another early use of the name ZO with reference to the Zomi (Kuki-Chin-Lushai), the first on the Lushai Hills side which till then was a terra incognito, was by Col. T.H. Lewin, the first white man to know the inhabitants of Lushai Hills (Mizoram). He wrote that he came to know, during the Lushai Expedition of 1871-72 that, “ the generic name of the whole nation is Dzo” Dr. Francis Buchanan also wrote of Zomi and Zomi language, while Captain Pemberton mentioned Zo or Jo in his “Reports on the Eastern Frontiers of British India 1835”. The fact that the Zomi were known as ZOU or YO or YAW, before their society evolved into clan based organisation and lineage segmentation, was pointed out by Dr. G.A. Grierson in his survey, thus, ‘The name (Kuki and Chin) is not used by the tribes themselves, who use titles such as ZOU or YO or CHO’.

Rev Sukte T. Hau Go, a former lecturer of Mandalay University (Burma) also shared the same view, “Zomi is the correct original historical name of our people, from the Naga hill to the Bay of Bengal. To the north of Tedim, the Thadous and other tribes call themselves Yo; in Falam, Laizo. The Tedim people call themselves Zo; the Lushais, Mizo; in Haka, Zotung, Zophei, Zokhua. In Gangaw area Zo is pronounced as YAW, in Mindat Jo or CHO; and in Paletwa Khomi. In Prome, Thayetmyo, Sandoway and Bassein areas they call themselves A-Sho. So, inspite of slight variations Zomi is our original historical national name “.

Two British administrators, Bertram S. Carey and H.N. Tuck who place Zo people under modern system of administration record as thus: ‘Those of the Kuki tribes which we designate as “Chins” do not recognise that name……they call themselves YO (ZO)…and YO (ZO) is the general name by which the Chins call their race’

Another European writer, Sir J. George Scott also claimed that, the Zomi never called themselves by such names as Kuki or Chin or Lushai. He wrote: ‘The names like Kuki and Chin are not national, and have been given to them by their neighbours. Like others, the people do not accept the name given by the Burmese and ourselves; they do not call themselves Chins, and they equally flout the name of Kuki which their Assamese neighbours use. They call themselves Zhou or Shu and in other parts Yo or Lai’.

It is, therefore, no wonder that Zomi use the term Zo, Zou, Zhou, Chou, Shou, Yo, Jo, Yaw, Shu, etc in their speech and poetic language as Zo-Vontawi, Zo-lei, Zogam or Zoram, Zo-tui, Zo-fa, etc; in naming geographical names such as Zotlang, Zopui, Zobawks; and in some of the clan names like Zophei, Zotung, Zokhua, Laizo, Bawmzo, Zote, etc. All these have a common derivation from the generic name, “ZO”. It is also because of this fact that scholars like Dr. Vum Kho Hau, Prof. Laldena, Dr. Vum Son, Dr. Tualchin Neihsial, Dr. H. Kamkhenthang, Dr. Mangkhosat Kipgen, Cap. Sing Khaw Khai, Dr. J. M. Paupu, Pu K. Zawla, Pu R. Vanlawma, B. Langthanliana, Dr. V. Lunghnema, Dr. Hawlngam Haokip, Pu L. S. Gangte, Pu T. Gougin, Pu Thang Khan Gin Ngaihte, Rev. S. Prim Vaiphei, Rev. Khup Za Go, Pu L. Keivom, Rev. S. T. Hau Go, Dr. Khen Za Sian, Prof. Thang Za Tuan, Rev. Sing Ling etc. concluded that ZO is the ancestor of the Zo people.

Common Race: People are easily tied to each other by the factor of common race or kinship. The Zo people are distinctly different from the Aryans of India and Burmans of Burma. All the Zomi tribes and sub-tribes resemble each other very closely in appearance, and their characteristics, behaviour and colour identify them as being of the Mongolian race. A unique Mongolian characteristic which is found among the Zomi is the ‘blue Mongolian spot”, which can be seen on the back and buttock of every new-born child, male or female. Being the Mongoloid stock, their skin colour varies between dark yellow-brown, dark olive copper and yellow olive. The face is nearly as broad as it is long and is generally round or square, the cheek bone high, broad and prominent, eyes small and almond-shaped, the nose short and flat, thick hair and usually straight and jet black. ‘The Zomi are well-built with strong limbs and good figures; the average height of the man is about 5 feet and 6 inches. Other common characteristics of the Zomi, as observed by Carey and Tuck are worth mentioning:

“………the main Kuki characteristics can be universally traced as – The slow speech, the serious manner, the respect for birth and the knowledge of pedigrees, the duty of revenge, the taste for and the treacherous method of warfare, the curse of drink, the virtue of hospitality, the clannish feeling, the vice of avarice, the filthy state of the body, mutual distrust, impatience under control, the want of power of combination and continued effort, arrogance in victory, speedy discouragement and panic in defeat are common traits throughout the hills”.

These traits were quite applicable to the Zomi in the past during the period of British rule. There are some traits which still hold good today, e.g. clannish feeling, knowledge of pedigree, impatience under control, virtue of hospitality and mutual distrust. The other traits are on the wane as a result of the influence of Christianity and exposure to outside world.

Religion: Religion has played a very important part in uniting the Zo people. The Zo people were not proselytized into Buddhism of Burma or Islam of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) nor Hinduism of India. They maintained their traditional belief, viz. animism up till the coming of the British who, not only conquered but also introduced Christianity in Zo country. The efforts of the Christian Missionaries of various denominations were nowhere more successful than in Zo country, and it was estimated that by 1947, about 80% of Zomi were converted into Christianity.
Common Language: Well known linguist, G. A. Grierson in his book, “Linguistics Survey of India, Vol. III, Part III” demonstrated clearly that Zomi language is a branch of the Tibeto-Burman family of languages. The Zomi speaks numerous dialects, but linguistic affinities prevail among them, and verbal or non-verbal communication has never been too great a problem. Much less in the olden days Vum Kho Hau writes: “But in traditional songs and poetry, they still retain its original uniformity and the meaning is generally understood by the hearer regardless of whether he comes from Teddim, Tukhiang, Assam, Manipur.”

Thus, not only do the old songs preserved among different clans but even the folk songs being composed at present, reveal the extent of the uniformity of language that existed in the not-so-distant past. The small dialectical differences that are there stem from the words that are borrowed from Burmese, Hindi, Assamese, Bengali, Manipuri or Arakanese, so that they sound mutually unintelligible to an unaccustomed ear. They remain basically the same, nevertheless.

On the basis of slight differences, the Zomi language may be divided into two: R-Group and Non-R-Group. The non-R-Group (like the Thadou, Paite, Simte, Vaiphei, Zoute, etc) has no R-sound and is devoid of some consonant clusters like Tl, Hm,….. in their dialects. The R-Group includes Lushai, Hmar, Lakher, Pawi and all the so-called Old Kukis like Kom, Anal, Chiru which have R-sound and are closer to the Lushai or Hmar dialects.

Professor Gordon Luce analysed 700 words of Zomi Language common to at least three Zo dialects. From these 700 words 230 words are common in all dialects of Zomi. Pu Lalthangliana also estimated that the Zo dialects share about 60% of the words in common. About 40% are peculiar to the locality in which they are spoken . An illustration of these linguistic affinities are provided by Lamka Town in Manipur, where people belonging to various Zo groups live together and are able to communicate with ease, each using their own dialect.

William Shaw also wrote: “The Koms, Aimols, Khothlangs, Thadous, Lushei, Chirus, Pois, Suktes, Paites, Gangtes, etc are undoubtedly all connected. The language also has many similarities and the syntax is not dissimilar”.

In the administrative system of the Zo kingdom, the people had a king under whom there were chiefs in villages. The king and the Chiefs were assisted by village Elders. It was also assisted by village priests, warriors, artisans and youth leaders of the village community.

Our social and cultural life of the Zo people was an independent and a peaceful. They lived freely and happily for about 1200 to 1500 years till the advent of the British Expeditions in 1777, 1824, 1849, and between 1871-1782 and 1888-1890.

The British had annexed the whole of Zoram, brought it under its rule in 1890 and divided into three administrative units. They divided the eastern and southern part of Mizoram including the present Chin Hills and Arakan under the Chief Commissioner of Burma; the central and Northern part of the country comprising of the present Mizoram state and part of Assam, Manipur and Tripura states which are contiguous to Mizoram fell under the administration of the Chief Commissioner of Assam while the western area of Mizoram including the Chittagong Hill Tracts was under the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal.

We, the Zo people were divided into three countries against our will into three countries – Burma, India and Bangladesh in 1890; The British rulers had considered it very desirable to put the whole tract of the acquired Chin Lushai country under one administrative head. The Chin-Lushai Conference held at Fort William in Calcutta on January 29, 1892 had adopted a resolution to this effect:

Resolution No. 1: “The majority of the conference are of the opinion that it is very desirable that the whole tract of country known as the Chin-Lushai Hills (Zogam) should be brought under one administrative head as soon as this can be done…”

As a first step towards implementing the resolution, the North and South Lushai Hills were amalgamated on April 1, 1898 through a proclamation of the Government of India. However, the other resolution about joining the Zo inhabited areas of India and Burma was not implemented even though there are no substantive arguments against its implementation. The proposal was not forgotten, however Sir Robert Reid, Governor of Assam in 1941 made a proposal for re-unification of the Chin-Lushai country under one administrative head. The late Sir Winston Churchill, then a Prime Minister of Britain, had approved Sir Robert Reid’s plan in principle. But the Labour party which came to power after World War II did not take up the matter.

Many efforts were taken for the reunification of the Zoram,
A memorandum was submitted to the Prime Minister of India by the Mizo National Front (MNF) under the leadership of Mr. Laldenga (L) on October 30, 1965 demanding full self-determination and territorial integration for Mizo people and the MNF launched its first armed offensive on midnight of February 28, 1966 against the Republic of India for securing territorial Independence for the same ethnic group of Mizo people. But the armed insurgency came to an end after 20 years.

The first political party of then Lushai Hills (now Mizoram) the Mizo Union, had submitted a memorandum to his Majesty’s government, the Government of India, on April 26, 1947 seeking to represent the case of Mizos for territorial unity and integrity of the whole Mizo (Zo) population and full self-determination and territorial integrity.

The 50 accredited leaders of Lushai Hills representing Chiefs and commoners, under the Chairmanship of the then Superintendent of Lushai Hills, Mr.L.L.Peters, had submitted a memorandum to the Adviser to His Excellency, the Governor of Assam, demanding, among others, that the Lushais be allowed to opt out of the Indian Union when they wish to do so subject to a minimum period of ten years.

President                      : Dr. Chin Do Kham, Jenks , Oklahoma , USA

Vice President (1)         : Pa Hang Khan Lian, Singapore

Vice President (2)         : Pa John Thang Sian Mung, London , UK

General Secretary         : Pa Go Sawm Khup, Tulsa , Oklahoma , USA

Asst. Gen. Secretary (1) : Pa Do Khan Khup, New York City , NY , USA

Asst. Gen. Secretary (2) : Pa Anthony Gin Khan Lian, Frankfurt , Germany

Treasurer                      : Pa Pau Khan Khup, Singapore

Assistant Treasurer (1)  : Pa Vung Lian Mang, Tulsa , OK , USA

Assistant Treasurer (2)  : Pa Khen Za Muan Thang, Denmark

Member                        : Siama Cing Pum Neam, Philippines

Member                        : Dr. Howard Chin Khen Mang, Tulsa , OK , USA

Member                        : Pa Kipp Kho Lian, Hamburg , Germany

Member                        : Pa Gin Mang, Calgary , Alberta , Canada

Member                        : Rev. Zam King Mang, Portland , Oregon , USA

Member                        : Pa Disciple Kap Sian, Kuala Lumpur , Malaysia

1. Gamukte deihloh thului le lai tuamtuamte hilo ding
2. Laibu dang ah kipuak ngei nai lo hi ding
3. Laidal A4 tawh hi ding in a lang khat bek gelh ding
4. Zolai bek tawh hi ding
5. Computer tawh na gelh le  alu a taw a vei a tak 1 inches tawh a Times News Roman size 12pt, tawh A4 maithum tungsiah gelh lo ding.
6. Min ( minsel a zat le minpi zong), passport khat, kizopna address , phone, email cihte le laigelhpa tangthu  gelh hamtang ding
7. 2010 May 30 ni ma in puak hamtang ding.
8. Thului puakzia a manlo le editor te deihna tawh a kituak kei khak leh kisuaksak lo ban ah lai hong kipuak kik lo ding cih thei khol ding.

hi teh. Laipen online tungpan magazine@siamsin. org,awging@siamsin. org,  michaelpau@siamsin. org, zamthuam@siamsin. org, hangdal@gmail. com, kssutpee@gmail. com le langhdolian@ gmail.com te ah hong puak un.

Zomi ading na veina le na deihsakna tawh na gelh laite kong muak uh hi.

Siamsin Media Groups
Kawlpi

The Reverend Khup Za Go, M.A., M.Th.,  had a number of books published both in Tedim Chin and English to his credit, namely,  Tedim Lai Siangtho Hong Piankhiatna, Tedim Pau  leh Lai Khantoh Thu, Zo Minam Tawh Kisai Thu, Lai Zat Tangzang, Khristian Khutzat, Leivui Panin,   Christianity in Chinland, A Critical Historical Study of Bible Translations among the Zo People in North East India, Zo Chronicles, etc.  This paper was prepared  back  in 1993 while doing   his  theological study  at  the UTC, Bangalore.

I. Introduction of the Land and the People

The Union of Burma, officially known as Pyingdaungsu Myanma Naingandaw, with an area of 676,577 square kilometres, is the largest country in the Southeast Asia. The population of Burma in 1992 is 43,466,000.(1) Burma shares long borders on the east with Thailand, on the northeast with China, and the northwest with India as well as shorter borders with Laos and Bangladesh on the east and the west.  Politically the country is divided into seven divisions, namely, Irrawaddy, Magwe, Mandalay, Pagu, Sagaing, Tenasserim and Rangoon, and seven states of Arakan,  Chin, Kachin, Karen, Kayah, Mon, and Shan. Rangoon is the capital of the country since British days.  Burmese(2) is the official language of the country and also the medium of instruction in schools and colleges. Besides, there are several languages and dialects spoken in different regions and states of the country.

Religiously Burma, famous as the land of Pagodas, is the Buddhist country since the 9^th century of Christian era.  As such Buddhism exerted great influence on the development of Burmese life and culture.  Islam is the religion of the minority Arakanese people who inhabitat the southwest near the border with Bangladesh.  Among the hill tribes traditional religions and beliefs are still practised.(3) “Religion is inextricably woven into the fabric of Burmese society; religious beliefs and practices are integrated into the life of the family, the community, the tribe and the nation.  This is true  both of the traditional faiths, Buddhism and animism”. (4) Religious affiliations in Burma as recorded in 1983 is as follows: Buddhist 89.4%, Christian 4.9%, Muslim 3.8%, Tribal religions 1.1%, Hindu 0.5% and other 0.3%. (5)

Like many other Asian nations Burma also has bitter experience with the British rule and Japanese invasion, and at last achieved her independence from Britain on 4^th January 1948.

With this brief background of the country and the people now we turn to the coming of Christianity in Burma through the foreign missionaries. We shall see the difficulties and hardships missionaries and first converts were facing for the sake of the gospel and also the factors which contributed to the growth and expansion of Christianity in the country.

II. History of Christianity in Burma

A. Beginning and growth of Christianity (1812 -1862)

The first “Christians” as recorded in Burma were Portuguese soldiers and a few
traders and adventurers.  In 1554 the first Catholic priests came to serve as chaplains.  But after three years they left the country for they were not welcomed by the Burmese Buddhists.  Therefore there was no record of Christian conversion before the arrival of American Baptist missionaries in 1813. (6)

Rev Adoniram Judson and Ann Judson started their journey by ship from United Sates of America on February 19, 1812 and arrived on July 13, 1813. Within a few days of their arrival Judson began to study the Burmese language.  When he realised that much of the Buddhist religious thought was expressed in Pali terms he started to compile a Pali-Burmese Dictionary of 4000 words as well as a Burmese-English Dictionary. Judson was a rare combination of meticulous scholar and utterly keen evangelist.  In his study of Burmese Felix Carey and his wife of Serampore Mission who were already in Burma were very helpful.  In January 1816 Judson began the translation of the New Testament in Burmese and also began to translate the gospel tracts. After six years of hard work the first Burmese, U Naw was baptised by Judson in 1819. The Lanmadaw Baptist Church in Rangoon called later U Naw Baptist Church was built in honour of the first Christian convert in Burma. In 1823 Judson completed the New Testament in Burmese and by 1834 the complete Bible.  The first school was opened by Ann Judson in 1821 and in the same year the first medical missionary  Dr. Jonathan Price and his wife also arrived from USA. (7)

In 1823 the Burmese king invited the missionaries to settle in Ava, the then capital of Burmese king in Mandalay.  Soon after their arrival at Ava the first Anglo-Burmese war broke out and Judson and Price were taken into imprisonment.  After 18 months Judson was released to act as interpreter in the Anglo-Burmese peace talks.

Regarding to the methods of evangelism Judson right from the beginning decided to preach the gospel rather than anti-Buddhism.  He opened a small roadside zayat (rest houses) where he talked about Jesus with anyone who would like to listen.  Later they moved to Moulmein the capital of Karen people, where a strong educational and evangelistic programme was started. They soon realised  that Moulmein was differed from Rangoon in its large Mon population.  In 1828 thirty-one persons were converted in Moulmein and another 28 more were baptized the next year. Among this group were Burmese, Mon, Arakanese, Indian and Karen. The first Karen convert Ko Tha Byu was included here. Within two years the Moulmein Mon Burmese Church, the 45^th Regiment English Church and the Moulmein Indian church were started.  In this way the gospel spread to those with languages other than Burmese to the Karens, the Indians, and the British soldiers and the Mons.  “Down through the years Burmese-speaking Mon Christians have enriched the growth of Burmese churches.  It is even said that U Naw, the first Burman to be baptized, was actually a Mon”. (8)

During this period before the end of the Judson era the church was organized among the Burmese, Mon and Karen in the Lower Burma.  More details about the evangelistic work and methods employed among these groups would be discussed later.

B. Consolidation of the Church in Lower Burma and Outreach to Minority Groups (1852-1886)

By 1852 the Baptist Mission work in Burma was forty years old.  During this perod Burma has passed through the three Anglo-Burmese wars.  First Anglo-Burmese war from 1824 to 1826 brought Arakan and Tenessarim under the British control. With the second 1852 to 1853 Lower Burma was added to the British section and the remainder of Burma came under the British rule in the third Anglo-Burmese war of 1885.  These wars and political changes caused hardships as well as opportunities for the missionary work in Burma.  During this period the church was consolidated in many areas.  Missionary convention was held and ideas on methods of evangelism were discussed.  Medical practice or the establishment of dispensaries was included as a means of evangelism.  The use of tracts in evangelistic work was considered to be of great use.  They also agreed that preaching should be held at stated times in the chapel, or in the rooms used for the chapel, but that this formal preaching should be supplemented by preaching in the zayat and from house to house in the villages.  Another important discussion was that there were then 117 churches connected with the Burmese and Karen Missions, with a membership of some 10,000 converts.  Yet there were only 11 ordained pastors.  Besides 11 pastors there were more than 120 national workers.  So the ordination of more pastors was recommended to serve every church.  Also the need of more mission schools was also felt.  During this period the new Baptist compound was also secured in Rangoon and the centre office was shifted from Moulmein to Rangoon again. The Burma Baptist Convention comprising all the American Baptist related Christians was organised in 1865 and was resolved to meet annually to transact business and to have fellowship with one another.

The next Protestant group to arrive in Burma were Lutherans and Methodist churches.  Salvation Army, Seventh Day Adventist, Assemblies of God, Church of Christ and Presbyterians came in the early part of twentieth century.  Regarding the Anglican Church though there were Anglican chaplains in Burma as early as 1825 the founding of the church was dated in 1877 when the first bishop of Rangoon was appointed.  The United Society for Propagation of the Gospel began its work first among the Burmese and then extended it to Karens and Chins.

The first Catholic contacts with Burmese were made by the Portuguese in the 16^th century. But today 90% of  the Catholism are Karen, Kachin, Chin and Kaw(9). Catholics, like in other countries, were well-known for their charities, social services and education in Burma also.  They maintain leprosia, orphanages, homes for the aged and infirm.  During this period the non-Burmese ethnic groups like Chin, Kachin, Shan, etc. were reached by the Protestant missionaries.

1. Contact with Asho Chins:  In 1863 Maung Coopany an evangelist of the Bassein Pwo Karen association  has reduced the Asho Chin language to writing.  He compiled and produced a spelling book and a small hymn book which were printed in Rangoon.  In 1866 Maung Coopany reported that twenty Chins had been baptized. (10)

2.         The Carsons and the Zomi Chins: Ann and Arthur Carsons were the first missionaries appointed by the American Baptist Mission to work among the Chins of Upper Burma who call themselves Zomi. They arrived to Chin Hills (the present Chin State) and started the work in 1899.  The missionaries reduced the Chin languages to writing and prepared small hymn books in different languages.  Although Arthur met his untimely death of appendicitis on April 1, 1908 Ann Carson continued the work till 1920.  Elizabeth and Herbert J. Copes came  to Chin Hills in December 1908. Herbert Cope gave 30 years to the Chin Mission and rendered a tremendous service to the Chins.  In addition to his evangelization work and tour he translated the New Testament in Tedim Chin and published in 1931(11) and prepared more than 35 small text books in several languages for schools.  In recognition of his outstanding service for the Chin people he was awarded the Kaisar-I-Hind medal by the British government in 1927.  Today the Zomi (Chin) Baptist Convention, with its baptized membership of 91,170 in 1988 is one of the largest groups in Burma.

3.         First contact with the Shans:  Mr Moses H. Bixby and his wife  who had worked in Moulmein with the Burmese and Mon churches from 1853 to 1856 were re-appointed in 1860 to work among Shans.  The first Shan convert was Maung Aung Myat, the son of Swabwa.  He was baptized in September 1862 and four months later two Shan women were baptized.  Mrs Bixly began a school for children and Mr Bixly a theological class with ten students.  They translated tracts into Shan and prepared spelling book and vocabulary.(12) In 1866 Mr and Mrs Josiah Cushing, another missionary couple from USA, Mr and Mrs Bixly in Shan Mission.  They made a tour of Shan country and selected Mongnai town as the best location for the Shan Mission centre.  Unlike Chins and Karens there was already Buddhist influence among the Shans.  Therefore Christian work among them was making slow progress.

4.         Beginning of the Mission to the Kachins: We have already mentioned Mr Cushing’s involvement among the Shan mission work.  Besides that, he was also partly responsible for the pioneering work among the Kachins.  He reduced the Kachin language to written form. In February 13, 1878 Mr and Mrs Lyon from USA reached Bhamo to work among the Kachins.  Unfortunately within a week of their arrival Mr Lyon died of fever.  Hearing the sad news William Henry Roberts, a young pastor in Illinois, volunteered with his wife to take up the missionary work.  They arrived on January 12, 1879.  The first baptism of Kachin took place in March 19, 1882.The gospel work among the animistic Kachins was successful.  They form a strong church group in Burma today.

C.        Joint activities of Christians from 1866 to the present

Under this section we shall see the highlights of the activities of the Christians in Burma with sub-headings as follows:

1.         Higher Education: As already mentioned here and there we know the pioneer missionaries were the people who reduced the languages of the minorities into written form and prepared spelling books, textbooks and dictionaries. Therefore when the number of Christians was increasing they felt the need of the church.  To meet this long-felt need a junior college was started in 1909.  In 1920 the college by the called Judson College after the name of the first missionary in Burma, became a constituent collge to the University of Rangoon.

2.         Theological Education: As the church was growing so also the need of the indigenous leadership.  The first step taken in this regard was that the Karen Theological seminary which was located at Moulmein was shifted to centrally location at Insein in the suburb of Rangoon to serve more students coming from different places in Burma. Also under the initiative of Burma Baptist Convention in co-operation with Methodist and other denominations, a new theological institution called Burma Divinity School was established in Insein.  This institution, now called Myanmar Institute of Theology, is affiliated with the Association for theological education in South East Asia, offering courses like B.Th., B.R.E., B.D. Similarly regional Bible institutions  such as Kachin Bible School at Kutkai in Kachin State;  Asho Chin Bible School at Thayetmyo; Pangwai Bible School and Shan State Bible school in Shan State; Zomi Theological College, Falam; Union Theological School, Matupi; Baptist Theological School, Tedim; in Chin State, were started.  All these institutions, to mention a few, become the back-born of the church for leadership training and advancement of theological education in the country.

3.         Healing Ministry: During this period when the missionary work was expanded in various fields, the medical service occupied the vital part of the Christian mission.  As a matter of fact, Dr Jonathan Price and Dr J. Dawson were medical missionaries appointed by the American Baptist Mission in the early mission work in Burma.  Yet comparing with programmes in some other countries of Asia and Africa medical work was not given enough emphasis in Burma.  In 1890s medical programmes were started in Shan State at Hsiphaw, Mongnai, Namkham and Kengtung.  Because of his dedicated and outstanding service Dr Gordon Seagrave is still remembered as legendary Burma Surgeon.  In the farflung Indo-Burma border of Chin Hills Mr N. East and Dr J.G. Woodin came in 1902 and 1910 respectively. Unfortunately due to health reasons they could not continue the work and left for home. In Rangoon with the initiative of Christian communities of Anglicans, Baptist, and Methodist a Christian hospital was started.  In the Sgaw Karen area Sir San C. Po Memorial Hospital was maintained by the Bassein-Myangmya Karen Association at Yedwinyegan.

4.         Agricultural School: As a part of the whole gospel missionaries started Agricultural School at Pyimana in 1915. J.E. Case and his wife were responsible for this unique ministry of the church among the rural poor in Burma.  Case was very much concerned about the hill peoples of Burma and their sub-marginal existence.  Maung Shwe Wa in Burma Baptist Chronicle wrote his moving account on this evangelism through agricultural as follows:

Staff and students were tireless in carrying the gospel of better rural life not only took the graduating class on a launch tour through the delta.  They carried with            them     band instruments, livestock, seeds, medicines, literature, and play costumes.  On   arrival   at a village, the first item on the agenda was an inspection of the nearby   fields    as a             demonstration to the students and as a basis for giving practical    advice   to the    farmers.  During the noonday rest period, when the villagers returned from the        fields, the brass band would play and lectures on various subjects were             given.  Free medical treatment was given to sufferers from itch and other diseases,         and       small packets of medicines were sold.  Charts and           demonstrations were      prepared during the afternoon.  Then more band music at dusk would bring from   two to   five hundred villagers from the surrounding fields and creeks.       Agricultural and health             talks, Burmese-style      drams about the Prodigal Son or the        Good Samaritan, and      the Christian      testimonies filled the evening and  sent         the villagers home with new      ideas and  new invention.(13)

5. Ecumenical Co-operation: Among the Baptist Christians back in 1865 the Burma Baptist Missionary Convention was formed with an objective to accelerate the evangelistic work in Burma.  Later the name was changed to Burma Baptist Convention to which all the regional and linguistic groups were affiliated.  In 1963 when the Sesquicentennial Celebration of the coming of the Judsons in Burma was held in Rangoon the first Christian conversions took place among the tribes and races of Burma were recorded chronologically as follows — Mon and Burmese in 1813, English, Chinese and Indian in 1827, Sgaw Karen 1828, Pwo Karen 1836, Pa-O 1838, Karen Hill Tribes 1853, Asho Chin 1856, Shan 1860, Kachin & Lisu 1877, Zomi Chin 1899, Lahu & Wa 1904, Akha 1936, Naga 1953. (14) Burma Baptist Convention is a member body of the Asian Baptist Federation and the worldwide Baptist World Alliance.

As regards to the ecumenical movement a regional Christian Council for Burma was formed in 1914 under the National Christian Council of India.   When Burma became independent country in 1948  all Protestant groups in Burma formed Burma Christian Council which became affiliated body to the East Asia Christian Council (now Christian Conference of Asia).  All the major denominations like Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, etc are affiliated to the Burma Christian Council.  Christians form 4.9% of the whole population. (15)

III. Church and State

Buddhism is the religion of the predominant ethnic and cultural group of Burmese who form the 89% of the whole population.  It was Theravada Buddhism which entered Burma in the first century of Christian era.  “A saying frequently repeated in Modern is: ‘To be a Burman is to be a Buddhist’”(16)  Therefore the relationship between the state and the religion has been strongly influenced by the political development of the country.  From 1950 till military take-over in March 1962 Burma followed a policy of close association between Buddhism and the state. During U Nu’s government the Sixth Great Buddhist Council was held in 1954-1956 for promotion of Buddhism.  The proposal to make Buddhism the state religion became an important election manifesto in the 1960 election.  U Nu’s party came into power and the constitutional amendment was passed to declare Buddhism as the state religion of the country.  It was done against the wishes of religious and minorities in Burma.  When the military regime under the leadership of General Ne Win took the administration of the country the new policy of  ‘Burmese Way to Socialism’ under the Burma Socialist Programme Party which did not recognise the state religion was introduced.  Under one-party state all the organizations including Christian organizations were required to register with the government.  All the Christian schools and hospitals were nationalized in 1965-66.  Government refused to renew the permits of foreign missionaries.  As a result 234 Catholic priests and nuns, 56 American Baptist, 29 Anglicans, 18 American Methodists, 15 British Methodists, 8 Salvation Army and 7 A.G. workers were expelled from the country.(17) Christian literatures, journals and magazines could not be printed without being officially censored. Supply of printing papers were controlled by the government, permits was required to buy papers for books and magazines.

Under such a critical situation what was the life and witness of the church? How Christians were living in such  hostile environments? These are important issues for Asian Christians who live in a pluralistic society.  In connection with this issue I would like to quote the comment and observation Mr Kambawza Win has made on nationalism and Christianity in Burma.  Mr Win is the coordinator of the Institute of  Christian Participation in the Development of Shan, Kayah and Karen State Communities.  I believe what he has written in 1988 is still relevant even today.  I quote:

In 1965 the Christian Institutions like schools, hospitals, training colleges were       nationalized.  The military junta perspective was that these private schools          especially those run by the Christian constitute a system apart from the             government run             schools undermine the Burmese culture and does not promote      nationalism. Together     with these nationalization the foreign missionaries were           asked to leave the country.         Several people thought that by these measures the Christians in Burma would             disintegrate and the church would only exist in name as in the Burmese monarchical      days. But soon they were surprised to discover that the Church not only survived but flourished by leaps and bounds. The Christian with a little 2% has now became   5%. The hand of Providence can be clearly seen             as the Burmese Christians were           emancipated from the strangle of the missionaries and could embark on its own    programme of propagating and identifying with the people. This incident greatly          changed the notion of Christianity in Burma.(18)

Today after forty years of military regime the political situation is still fluid. In 1990 multi-party elections for the first time after 1962 were held and the opposition party the National League for Democracy under the leadership of Mrs  Aung San Suu Kyi, daughter of General Aung San,  won the majority of seats in Parliament, yet the military government under the name of State Law and Order Restoration Committee( SLORC) did not like to hand over power. Recently many of Arakanese (Rakhine) Muslim minorities in Burma fled from their country and took shelter in Bangladesh. Like minority Christians in Pakistan and Bangladesh Christians in Burma also are silently struggling for the fundamental rights of freedom of religion and worship as envisaged by the international laws.

IV. Conclusion

An attempt has been made to trace the history of Christianity from the arrival of Adoniram Judson in 1813. As we have seen response to the gospel was slow from the Burmese Buddhist. Great conversions took place only when the mission centre was started in Moulmein in the area of Karen tribesmen.

As regards to methods of evangelism, in addition to personal evangelism with tract distribution, zayat preaching, house visits, establishment of schools for children, hospitals and dispensaries for the sick, agricultural evangelism among the rural poor, especially among the frontier tribes, proved to be and useful instrument.

During U Nu’s government Buddhism,  in spite of strong protest from religious minorities,  was made state religion in 1962. That was the beginning of the political trouble in Burma. Under the military regime of General Ne Win secular and materialistic philosophy of “Burmese Way to Socialism” was introduced in the country. Since then, Christians and other religious minorities have been facing all sorts of restrictions and hardships. In the midst of political turmoil and vicissitudes the church has been growing steadily both in quantity and in quality. Again this created another problem in the minds of majority Burmese. “Because Christians in the minority groups have received more education and have arisen as new leaders, they have often appeared to be anti-Burma and anti-nationalistic.”(19) The question could be asked what is the role and function of the Christian church as prophetic ministry in such a political and religious environment prevailing in the present Burma? I believe this is the relevant issue for discussion not only in Burma but also in other Asian countries we Christians are in confrontation with.

Endnotes:

1. Encyclopeadia Britannica, 1993, p. 676.

2. I have adopted for this paper the term “Burmese” as employed by D.G.E. Hall in A History of Southeast Asia as a dominant linguistic and racial group of Burma as distinct from the non-Burmese peoples – Karens, Shans, Kachins and Chins, etc. See p. 708.

3. Barrett, David B., World Christian Encyclopeadia, p. 202.

4. Hackett, William D., “Burma” in Church in Asia, ed. Donald H. Hoke, Chicago, 1975, p. 119.

5. Encyclopeadia Britannica, p. 676.

6. Hackett, William D., op. cit. p. 123.

7. Ibid., p. 124.

8.Wa, Maung Shwe, Burma Baptist Chronicle, Board of Publication, Burma Baptist Convention, Rangoon, 1963, p. 66.

9.Barrett, David B., op. cit. p. 123.

10. Wa, Maung Shwe, op. cit. p. 199.

11. Johnson, Robert G., History of American Baptist Chin Mission, Vol. II, Valley Forge, 1988, p. 1,302.

12. Wa, Maung Shwe, Op. cit. p. 204.

13. Ibid., p. 247-248.

14. Wa, Maung Shwe, op. cit., p. xiv.

15. Encyclopeadia Britannica, p. 676.

16. Smith, Donald E., Religion and Politics in Burma, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1965, p. 83.

17. Barrett, David B., op. cit., p. 203.

18. Win, Kanbawza, “Colonialism and Christianity in Burma (A Burmese Perspective)” in Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 2, No. 2, October 1988, Singapore, p. 278-279.

19. Hackett, William D., op. cit., p. 108.

Bibliography

1. Smith, Donald E., Religion and Politics in Burma, Princeton University Press, Jew Jersey, 1965.

2. Manikan, Rajah B., Thomas, Winburn T., The Church in Southeast Asia, Friendship Press, New York, 1956.

3. Hocke, Donald E., The Church in Asia, Moody Press, Chicago, 1975, “Burma” by William D. Hackett, p. 103-127.

4. Manikam, Rajah B., ed. Christianity and the Asian Revolution, Madras, 1954.

5. Cady, John F., Southeast Asia: Its Historical Development, Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1964.

6. Wa, Maung Shwe, Sowards, Genevieve, Sowards, Erville, Burma Baptist Chronicles, Board of Publication, Burma Baptist Convention, Rangoon, 1963.

7. Johnson, Robert G., History of American Baptist Chin Mission, Vol. I and II, Valley Forge, 1988.

8. Latourette, Kenneth S., Christianity in a Revolutionary Age, Vol. Pp. 338-343.

9. Hall, D.G.E., A History of South-East Asia, Macmillan and Co. Ltd., London, 1960.

10. Seagrave, Gordon S., Burma Surgeon, London, 1945.

11. Anderson, Courtney, To the Golden Shore: The Life of Adoniram Judson, Boston, 1956.

12. Hall, Gordon L., Golden Boats from Burma, Macrae Smith Company: Philadelphia, 1961.

13. Jessy, F. Tennyson, The Story of Burma, Macmillan and Co., Ltd., London, 1946.

14. Barrett, David B., World Christian Encyclopeadia, Kenya, 1980.

15. Encylopeadia Britannica, 1993.

Magazines  and Journals

1. Asia Journal of Theology

2. International Review of Mission

Tu’n India in uitalte pressure piapia ahih aman in joint operation bawlding tan kitun ta uh hi. 2004 lai in zong bawlngei uh hi. Meitei te pen uital te’n gumden uh hi. Tutung in zong “Na security ding uh ko hong guarantee zokei nung” ci uh ahih manin Meitei te tu’n Hongmalin lam leh Naga mualdung lam ah ki thehthaangta uh hi.

Ahi zongin Innngak pawlkhat nusia veve uh hi. Tuni ciangciang Tonzang gam ah Thuam Bual leh Sing Pial ah tawm omlai uh aa Kham Pat lam Kanmagyi ah zong tawm omlai uh hi. Tonzang khuasung BOC veng ah zong uitalte’ humbitna tawh omlai uh hi. Tatsatlo in ki encik gige hi. Mihai uh hisamlo ahih manin American te’n Vietnam ado lai un bangzahta in thuak uh hiam cih bel theitek buangding uh hi.Bek thamlo in Pu Kam Hau’ hunlai in lelh cihtak in hong lelhna te uh zong mangngilh nai hetlo ding uh hi.

A khaici uh tu’n Tonzang gam ah zavom kinak ciin mahmah hi. Ahauh lawh zong tampi omta hi. Uitalte ki theihmawh bawl lai uh hi.

Bangbang ahi zongin asawt lo in penalty kisui tading ahih manin amau gen loh apu uh ahi uitalte’ mailam ding nangawn agenhak mahmah thu hita hi. Akhoihkhialh vanglak uh leh hell gam ahingtang in tungding uh aa a road map pen uh road map to Insein khawng hikha ding hi.

Zomite‘ Biak Pasian’ Min Kiphatden Hen

Thangboi
Zangkong

Political Party phuatding leh phuatlohding kikup nawina om aa phuatding hoihsa tek uh hi. Thugen nawina nitak nai 3:00 in ki tawlnga photin sun siah nekna kinei phot hi. Sun siah nekkhit ciangin amin ding kikup ding hong suah uh hi. Pu Gin Kam Lian, ZNC Secretary leh Pu Khuang Lian te’n hun makaih uh hi.  Pawl khat in amin ah Chin mah kihel ngiat leh ci uh hi. Sponsorpu Pu Zung Hlei Thang in “Ken bel Chin cih kammal akihel teekteek kei zongin phamawh sa keng, Progressive Action Party khawng cisuk lel leng hoihsa ing” ci hi. Sia Khen Kawlpi in “Chin nacih sawm teeiteei uh leh bel ko hong kihel theilo ding suak mai nung” ci hi. Khat pa in “Chin ih cih kei leh koimah ah ngahkei ni” acih nong ciangin Pu Gin Kam Lian in “1990 kum kiteel lai inzong Chin minpua Chin League in koiteng ah ngahtuan ahiam? amin sangin ih nasep thupi zaw hi” acih baan ah “Leitung mun tuamtuam ah Chin min zuak mi tampi omta hi” cilai hi.

Thu ki baan gengen in among om thei meello ahih man in DAN in thukimna sa aneih tawh kituak in Pu Gin Kam Lian in “Tuni kong sapna uh pen tu aa bangmah aa ngaihsut hoih atuamtuam nongpiak ding mah uh kadeihman vua hong sam hi ung. DAN in ahoihthei pen in hong geel ding hi” ci in hunkhakna nitak nai 4: 00 in nei hi.

Hun mankhit ciangin a innteek deuhteng in mai kikup kik ding vai kikupna nei hi. Tua mun ah Pu Khuang Lian in “One Chin Organization te’n zong political party khat aphuan nuam uh hi in ei hong hungaih phot uh hi” acih baan ah “Bangbang ahizong in tutung hong khiam mai unla Chin mah cini” hong ci mawk hi. Kaheh hongsuak vat aa,  “Chin na ut leh One Chin Organization ah pai in” kacih leh “Tua ahih leh DAN phiat ding maw?” hong ci aa, “Ken phiat keng” kacih khitteh ka ciahsan leh kanung ah  amauzong avek un hong ciah uh hi.

Lungnuam tuanlo ahih manin Zomi makai Pu Chin Sian Thang’ kiang ah Tedim kampau teng ka paiphei uh hi. Ka kikupkup uh ciang un kum hitanvei Zomi mintawh kiding sa, Zomi te’n minam liankhat ih suahtheihna dingin hihzahta aa ih hanciam kawmkal ah Chin va kicih ziau ding pen haksa kasa mahmah uh hi. Tutung uital kiteelna ah constitution review omlo pi in Zomi te’n kiteelna ah katuh keiding uh hi ci aa leitungbup ii hongtheihpih ding aa ki taangko khin ahih manin Zomi mintawh lutlohding hoihzaw dingin ka um uh hi. Ciampeel kisuak ding aa uitalte mai et minam ih suak laiding hi. Kawlgam taangthu ah Zomi min ahoihlo in ih atnuam hetkei hi.

DAN mintawh hileh moderate pen khading baan ah  deihlohpen in uitalte’ ngimna hong tangtung kha leh cihna bek hilel hi. Uitalte’ ngimna atangtun lohna dingin bel septheih tawp in kisem ding hi. Pasian in hong makaih nak leh uitalte’ tupna hong tangtung hetlo lel ding hi. Akipelh theihna ding thu tampi omlai hi. Gen kholh ding ahoihlo bek hi.

Tukha 24 ni teh DAN thu kikupna omkik ding ahih manin Zomi te’n bangci ngaihsut ih hiam ahun omlai in gen dihni ei guai.

Veina bek tawh

Thangboi
Zangkong

Lungdam. GK

ZOMITE’ KHUA MUH CIILNA  by  Rev. G. K. Nang

Thu patna: Zogam pen Mikang kumpi in 1895 kum a kipanin hong uk uh hi. Kum 1914-1919 sung England leh Germany gam kido uh a, galpi khatna (First World War) kici hi. 1916 kumin  London khuapi-ah gal vaihawm pawl (War Committee) thukimna bangin Kuli (Labor Corps) lak ding thukim uh hi. Tua pen gal sung a Kuli nasem ding ci lehang kitel pen ding hi. Tua hun lai-in Mikang kumpite in gam tampi uk (colonized) uh a, Mikang Kumpi gamah ni tum ngei lo hi kici liang hi. Egypt, Fiji, India, Malta, Mauritius, Seychelles, British West Indies, South Africa leh China gamte panin Kuli ding la uh hi. Egypt panin 100,000, India panin 21,000, South Africa panin 20,000 kila hi. China panin mi 50,000 la uh a, tua lakah 2000 bang si hi kici hi. Kawlgam pen India tawh kigawm hi a, Hindu, Shynteng, Khasi, Lusei, Meitei, Bihar, Orissa, Pathan, Bengali, Kumoan,  leh Zomi zong  la uh hi. Mikang kumpi in Zogam Ukpite tungah mi pia dingin a nget bangin Ukpite in nial ngam loin piak dingin thukim hi.

Khamtung mi 3000 sung panin Zomi 1000 kila hi. A pai ding mite pen si dinga kipia ahi uh hi. Dahin kapin, innkuanpihte tawh khitui luangin a kimu nawn lo dingin kingaihsun uh a, sivui-in kivui-uh a, sa kigawh uh hi kici hi. Lawm ngaih neite ading bangin na diak ding hi. Mi tampi mah zong si takpi hi. Tua hun lai-in Zomite khuamuhna toi mahmah a, koimah puapial ngei lo, leitung dang a om cih zong thei lo uh hi. Zomite in Gunkhawm khang lamah mihing om nawn lo dingin ngaihsun uh a, Mizote in Silchar khang siahah mihing om nawn lo dingin ngaihsun hi kici hi. Kumpite in a paite pen Dolsing inn leh Zanglo piak ding ci-in kamciam bawl uh hi. Tedimah tawlkhat kisinna a neih khit uh ciangin inn lamah ciahkik sakin, Tedimah kituahkik uh hi.

Zogam panin Capt. Fowler makaihna tawh kum 1917 May 27 ni-in Gunkhawm paisuk uh a, tua panin meileeng tawh Zangkung tung uh hi. India panin khamtung mite zong Syhlet (Chittagong) zui-in Akyap tawnin Zangkung pai-in Zogam pana pai khamtung mite tawh kisutuah uh hi. Zangkung panin Teembawpi tawh dingkhia-in Kolkata, Mumbai, Eden, Suez Canal tawnin France (Piantit) gam Marseilles khua kum 1917 August 15 ni-in tung uh hi. Amau pen France leh Belgium gamgi-a om dingin kiseh a, kidona phual panin tai 25 bekin gamla hi. Nisimin galkidona thau kap leh thaupi kap  san ziahziah mu den uh hi. A nasep ding uh pen galsunga a liamte tawm ding, galvan suah leh kaihkhop cihte ahi hi. India Company 61 leh 62 ci-in ciamteh uh hi. Laisiam lo uh ahih manin a min uh leh a omna gam uh savun khat tungah gelhin a ban uhah bulhsak uh hi. A min uh a kisap ciangin a thei lo zong om a, a omna gam uh leh khua zong a gen thei lo om hi kici hi. Pu Song Theu leh Pu Thawng Za Kai cihte in kamphen uh hi. Zomite in misan, mivom, mikangte tawh na sem khawm uh hi. Marseilles panin Meaulte-ah kisuan uh a, tua panin Fricourt Salvage, tua panin Abancourt leh Rouen tung uh hi. Rouen panin Marseilles ah kilehkikin Taranto panin inn lamah ciahkik uh hi.

Khua vot thuak zo lo leh dam lohna tuamtuam hangin mi 1000 lak panin 24 si a, France gama galkapte han (war cemetery) ah kivui uh hi. Hih a kivuina mun pen Marseilles khua hi dingin ki-um mawh hi. Hih han-ah India mi 1002 kivui hi ci-in kiciamteh hi. Tua a site pen Suan Thang, Zuan Pum, Kai Gin, Maha Peng, Gin Dam, Ngul Gin, Pau Pum, Son Neng, Thang Eng, Tut Lang, Tuang Pum, Vial Dam, Vum Dai, Gin Nang, Kam Nang, Go Kam, Sian Lut, Lang Za Khen, Kam Ngul, Tual Kim, Lun Kap, Khup Za Dal, Khoi Cin, Cin Khai cihte ahi uh hi.

Nasepna-ah kuh kalin, thahatin, thuman uh ahih manin Mikang kumpi King George V in London khuapi en dingin sam a, Capt. Fowler makaihna tawh Mang Pum, Thawng Za Kai, Song Theu, Kam Za Mang, Vung Za Kham, Thuam Pau, Vial Zen, Hau Za Nang, Hang Khaw Cin, leh Cin Kamte pai uh hi. Mikang pau a thei teng hi kha ding hi. Kum 1918 March 27 ni-in London khuapi sunga Kumpipa inn Buckingham Palace kici tung uh a, innpi sung teng etpihin, datsian (cinema) ensakin, uliante an nekhopna-ah kihelsak uh hi. Kumpi inn cing santali (duty) te pen khauh lua uh a, mit zong phia lo liang uh ahih manin milim kisa-in, milim lah mihing kisa hi ci uh hi. Zomi khat in zong santali (duty) ding khat a lim sa-in a khoih leh mihing ahih lam phawk pan hi kici hi. Kumpipa  in “Haksatna khat peuh na tuak uh leh hong ko un, ahi thei bangin kong huh ding uh hi” ci-in Zomite tungah kamciam pia hi kici hi. Mikang galkap suak nuamte suak thei ci uh a, pawl khat in min pia-in tentan (training) zong nei uh hi. Ahi zongin inn lamah gal om cih a zak uh ciangin kuamah omsuak ngam loin hong ciahkhin leuleu uh hi.

Hih Kuli lakna-ah Khalkha mite ut loin nial uh hi. Khalkha khua-ah galsim ding mi 5000 kikaikhawm uh a, kumpite lehdo uh hi. Khalkha leh Falam kikal lampi khaktan uh a, kumpite na do uh hi. Inn lamah kidona omin lo kho thei loin mipite haksa mahmah hi cih a zak uh ciangin ciah ding ngen uh a, an ngawl liangin a nget uh ciangin ciahsak uh hi. France gama Kuli dinga paite pen “Piantit Pai” kici a, “Piantit” pen Kawl pau hi a, France gam cihna hi. “France Gam Paite” cih ding hi. Lungleng khuangai-in a omna uh panin ciahkik ding pen kilawp lua mahmah uh ahih manin  la phuak uh hi.

a)  Pian tui a gam lei aw e, sial zatam tuang a tunna,

b)  Sial zatam pian tui ngak hen aw, I sau lam zong ta ni e.

Galkap taktak ahih loh uh hangin, galkapte mah bangin ki-uk a, gawtna kipia a, khasum zong kipia hi. Khasum pen mi khat in 10, 15, 20, 25 bang hi a, kam phente in 20, a site luang man 100, liamna tuakte 50 kipia hi. Zomite gamdang zinkhiat a khatveina hi a, a khua muh ciilna uh ahi hi. A na muhte uh vanleeng, teembaw, thaupi leh tuipi a muhte uh thupi sa-in gencim thei lo uh hi. A muh thute uh leh a tuah thute uh tangthu banging en belin nei uh hi. La zong tampi phuak uh hi. Khasum cih bang a kitheih cilna ahi hi. Hong ciah uh ciangin sum pua tek uh ahih manin kithupi ngaihsut mahmah a, nungak a deih peuhpeuh uh tenpih thei hi kici hi. Khua muhna hong kidang ahih manin Khristian a suah lawh zong tampi omin, Khristian hong khang tuam hi kici hi.

France gam pai a meetna

1. France gam paite hong ciah uh ciangin sum nei uh ahih manin a pai lote sangin nuntak nuam sa zaw uh hi.  Leitung khua muhna bek hi loin sum thalawh ciilna zong ahi hi.

2. Galpi khit ciangin nakpi takin Zogamah Khristiante khang hi. 1918 kumin Khristian 500 bek om a, Kum 1924 ciangin 4,046 pha ta uh hi. Khristian a tam zaw pen Tedim mite sung pan hi a, France gam paite hang hi kici hi.

3. Zomite gal hang sa uh ahih manin Mikang kumpi in Zomite adingin galkap phuan uh a, “First Chin Battalion” kici 1921 kumin Kawlgamah kiphuan hi.  Battalion thum dong kiphuan a, First, Second, Third Chin Rifles kici hi. Kawlgamah galkap kumpi a khan ciangin kiphiat kik hi

4. France gam paite tung panin puansilh zia kithei ta hi. A puansilh uh pen Police puan tawh kibang khakhi puan, bombi sing, puan-ak bantawng, zian lukhu, puan khedap mawza leh ngalvial nei uh a, thupi kisa mahmah hi. Galpi khatna ma-in puan kisilh mel loin, pasalte in dialkaih tawh zum selin, numeite in puan them letmat li ding tawh a nuai lam sel a, a tung lam pen kai lihliah sak lel uh hi. Galpi khatna khit ciangin puansilh a kisap zia kithei ta hi.

A meet lohna

1) France gam pai ding  pen aana tawh  kila hi a, ut lopipi mahin a pai uh ahi hi. A pai nuam lo Khalkha mite leh kumpite kidona-ah Khalkha mi 40 bang si-in khua 18 kihalsak hi. Hih pen “Anglo-Chin War” (1917) kici hi. Hih kidona hangin France gama Kuli nasem a om Zomite hong ciahkik uh hi.

2) India lamah zong Manipur a om Kukite in France gam pai nuam loin nial uh a, kumpite lang pan uh ahih manin Mikang kumpi in galkap 100 sawlin simsak hi. Kukite in zong na do uh a, kum nih sung bang kido uh hi.  Khua 86 kihalsakin, mi tampi kithat uh hi. Hih kidona pen “Anglo-Kuki War” (1917-1919) kici hi.

3) Mikang kumpite in Zomi Kulite tungah  a kamciam uh ahi Dolsing inn leh Zang lo pia lo hi. Capt. Fowler in a genna-ah Zomite in gal kidona a tawp dong sem zo loin gal a venh ma-in ciah uh ahih manin a kipia lo hi ci hi.

Thukhupna: Khatvei Lusei nupi khat Kolkata pai hi. Vanleng tual pan a tuah khiat ciangin Kalate na tam mahmah hi. Pau dang thei lo ahih manin Lusei pau tawh hopih a, kua mah in thei lo hi. Nupi nu in zong “Mizo trawng pawh hre lo in va aa tak e” ci hi kici hi. Tua mah bangin Zomite in leitungah mi dang om ding cih zong a theih ma uh a France gam pai cih pen lamdang a sak ding mah uh hi. Niikten puansilh zong a silh nai lo minamte France gam pai cih mawk pen lamdang thu khat hi mawk hi. Nidangin sum kizang loin, van kilei ciangin van mah tawh kikhek cih danin kilei hi. Gan a lei nop uh ciangin buh seu tua zah, cih danin kilei uh hi. France gam paite hong ciah uh ciangin sum zatzia kithei ta hi. Puansialh zia a thei nai lote in puansilh ding ahih zia kiphawk ta hi. Nagate bang pen puan zong silh loin dialkaih bek mah tawh pai uh hi. Ahi zongin thatang hat uh ahih manin Mikang kumpite in pakta mahmah uh hi. Hih pen Zomite khuamuh ciilna hi a, “Uino mit keuh” a kicih mah bangin Zomite’ khuamuh ciilna ahi hi.