!1 Buddhism and the State in Burma: English-language discourses from 1823 to 1962. Jordan Carlyle Winfield, BA (Hons,) MA. ORCID identifier: orcid.org/0000-0001-9446-572X August, 2017 Asia Institute / School of Historical and Philosophical Studies Faculty of Arts The University of Melbourne Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. !2 Abstract This thesis examines three English-language discourses on the relationship between Buddhism and the state in Burma: its core focus is a postcolonial narrative produced largely by Burmese lay Buddhists writing in English, a narrative that I examine with reference to two other Anglophone discourses – a nineteenth and early twentieth-century colonial European narrative and a mid- twentieth-century narrative produced by academic historians and other scholars, most of them non- Burmese. The thesis contributes to recent scholarly efforts reappraising the narrative of Buddhist primordialism or changelessness in Burmese state-society relations that has dominated English- language scholarship on Burma in the twentieth century. I also highlight the significance of English as a language for discussing Buddhism in Burma, paying particular attention to the colonial and early postcolonial periods, when English was a language of education and statecraft. The thesis begins by examining the emergence of twentieth-century English-language scholarly discourse on the relationship between Buddhism and the state in precolonial Burma. I suggest that three core concepts have guided the modern academic understanding of this relationship: the concept of the state as a religious entity, the concept of the state as a harmonious mirror of the greater Buddhist cosmos and the concept of the sangha as the state’s most influential constituency beside the monarch. I trace the emergence of these core concepts by examining three influential texts by three well-known scholars produced at three different periods in the twentieth century. I use this this academic discourse about the relationship between Buddhism and the state in precolonial Burma as a point of reference and contrast for the other two strands of English-language writing that this thesis examines – colonial-era discourse and the postcolonial discourse which inherits and challenges colonial ideologies. The thesis then considers an earlier stratum of English-language commentary on Burmese religion and society produced by precolonial and colonial observers between the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These writers contrasted a ‘pure’ idealised Buddhism with a ‘corrupt’ and ‘degenerate’ Burma, setting up a dichotomy between a simple and ‘correct’ textual template and a degenerate local reality. I assert that there is a continuum of English-language discourse about Buddhism in Burma: while the British deployed this narrative as a justification for colonialism, it was coopted by later postcolonial authors who placed a ‘pure’ Buddhism at the centre of Burmese political life, subverting the characterisation of Burma as backward. !3 The core of the thesis is an analysis of how postcolonial lay Burmese authors, writing about Buddhism in English in the years from 1948 to 1962, imagined Buddhism as a modern philosophy in an effort to lend religious legitimacy to the postcolonial state. This discourse linked Buddhism to three key ideologies that epitomised modernity: science, socialism and democracy. The similarities of Buddhist doctrine to scientific theories and to Marxist materialism and democratic individualism were emphasised in an effort to imagine Buddhism as a rational and modern philosophy. Colonial discourses were both inherited and refuted in an attempt to articulate a Burmese Buddhist modernity. !4 This is to certify that - (i) the thesis comprises only my original work; (ii) due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used; (iii) the thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Jordan Carlyle Winfield !5 Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisors: Charles Schencking, who got me started and Kate McGregor and Pat Grimshaw, for their support and feedback. Special thanks, however, goes to my primary supervisor, Lewis Mayo, who gave up endless hours of his time to sit with me in offices and cafes, whose encouragement and wisdom inspired me month after month. Lewis, without you, this thesis could not have been written. Thank you. I would also like to thank others whose support and encouragement has been greatly appreciated. My parents, Glenda and Martin, my children Felix and Marius. Miriam Lang, whose kind words meant a lot to me. My friend Janet Borland. My fellow postgraduates and staff in the Asia Institute. My teachers at SEASSI, U Saw Tun and Daw Than Than Win. Thank you. Most importantly, I want to thank my wife Vannie Ip-Winfield, for her kindness, patience and love, who put her own desires and career on hold to support me in mine. You are the best person I know. Thank you. This thesis took a very long time to write. Often, I despaired of ever finishing; yet the people above never seemed to. I marvel at that, and I thank you! !6 Table of Contents Acknowledgments 5 Note on Terminology 8 Glossary 9 Introduction 11 Chapter 1: Twentieth-century English-language scholarship on Buddhism and the State in Precolonial Burma 28 Introduction: The Scholarly Consensus on Buddhism and the State in Premodern Burma 29 The Dharma State: Discourse on Buddhism and Kingship 32 The Cosmic State: Discourse on Cosmological Conceptions of Authority 44 The Sangha State: Discourse on the Role of Monks 49 Chapter 2: English-language discourse on Buddhism and the State from Colonial and Precolonial European Observers 58 Introduction: Glorious Past, Debased Present 59 The Alabaster Image: Idealised Dogma versus Corrupt Practice 63 Invisible Dharma State versus Visible Tyranny 75 Passive Sangha versus Activist Sangha 83 Chapter 3: English-language discourse on Buddhism and Science in early Postcolonial Burma 91 Introduction: A Modern Buddhism 92 The Origins and Uses of Buddhist Modernism 101 Buddhism and Science: Points of Similarity 109 Buddhism and Science: Complementary Philosophies 121 !7 Chapter 4: English-language discourse on Buddhism and the State in early Postcolonial Burma 129 Introduction: A Modern Buddhist State 130 Earthly State: The Rejection of the Magical 132 Buddhism and Socialism 144 Buddhism and Democracy 155 Chapter 5: Transformation, Comparison and Analysis 168 Introduction: The Dharma State versus the Science State 169 Building Ivory Towers: The Cosmic State versus the Earthly State 183 Modern State, Modern World: U Thant and Buddhist Internationalism 192 The State Religion: The Sangha State versus the Democratic State 199 Conclusion 211 Bibliography 216 !8 Note on Terminology The term I generally use in this thesis to describe the Buddhism that was imagined by lay Burmese authors in the period ranging 1948 - 1962 is ‘Buddhist modernism.’ I considered a variety of labels - including ‘Protestant Buddhism’ - for this cluster of ideas, but settled on Buddhist modernism as the term that best encompassed the characteristics of the ideology and the ambitions of the formulators of this discourse. ‘Buddhism modernism’ has been used by other writers. Donald Lopez, for example, uses it in his work Buddhism and Science: A Guide to the Perplexed. In that book, the term is understood as a general one applying to various interpretations of the idea, both European and Asian: In the last half of [the nineteenth] century, a movement that has retrospectively been dubbed “Buddhist modernism” began. One of the several family resemblances of its various manifestations was the emergence of Asian elites who adopted the European representation of Buddhism, at least the more romantic aspects of it, and then put it to use in defending the dharma against both colonialism and missionary Christianity.1 In this thesis, however, the term is used only to describe the postcolonial Burmese ideology and not the earlier European variant. Because postcolonial discourse is my core focus, I use the term Buddhist modernism to refer to the concepts of postcolonial writers as a way of maintaining conceptual clarity. I have chosen to use the term ‘Burma’ rather than ‘Myanmar’ to describe the country and its people. The official romanisation of the name was changed by the ruling junta in 1989 and was considered by many at the time to be illegitimate; the historian David Steinberg noted in his book Burma: The State of Myanmar (published in 2001) that ‘one person’s use of the term “Burma” or “Myanmar” indicated political preferences and indicts one in the eyes of another.’2 Since the end of the military dictatorship and the transition to civilian government, however, the issue has become less contentious. Mary Callahan informs us that ‘Myanmar’ and similar revisions dating from 1989 are now widely used within the country itself and that ‘some minority leaders prefer Myanmar, as less associated with the Burmans (now renamed “Bamars.”)’ These points notwithstanding, I have 1 Donald S. Lopez Jr., Buddhism and Science: A Guide for the Perplexed (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008.) 2 See David I. Steinberg, Burma: The State of Myanmar (Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2001), xxvi; Mary Callahan, “Myanmar’s Perpetual Junta,” New Left Review 60, (2009), 28f. !9 decided to use the term ‘Burma’ in my thesis for the sole