SUPREME Court lawyer Barrister Jyotirmoy Barua, 39, initiated a writ petition immediately after the violent attacks of September 29, 2012 when innumerable Buddhist monasteries, temples and houses in Ramu, Cox?s Bazar district, were set on fire, pillaged and looted by Bengali Muslim men, mostly youths. The attackers included both locals and outsiders, angered at the news that a picture defaming the Holy Qur?an had been discovered on a Buddhist youth Uttam Kumar Barua?s facebook account. Investigative reports reveal that the allegations against Uttam were manufactured since the picture had been tagged to his account; credible news reports also reveal that the attacks were pre-planned and pre-meditated, a view subscribed to by both the ruling party and the major opposition party, who, however, blame each other for the attacks.
Jyotirmoy Barua returned to Bangladesh last year after completing his Bar-at-Law; he lived in the UK for nearly nine years, partly financing his studies as karate instructor. He has filed the writ on the basis of being personally ?aggrieved? since he belongs to Ramu. It challenges the ?inaction? of the police; hearings have begun.
The interview is based on transcripts of recorded conversations held with Barrister Jyotirmoy Barua on four different occasions totaling more than fifteen hours. I am grateful to him for having taken me into his confidence, for having gone through the draft and suggested modifications.Continue reading “Communal attacks in Ramu: of family feuds and corporate culture”
by Pragyananda Bhikkhu
Translated by Rahnuma Ahmed
Translator’s note: Young Bangladeshi Buddhist monk Pragyananda Bhikkhu, of Ramu Shima Bihar, wrote “Ramu Shohingshota: Fanoosh kono balloon noy”, which was published in Dainik Cox?s Bazar, November 4, 2012 in light of the controversy created over setting afloat fanooshes as part of the celebration of Prabarana Purnima, the second largest Buddhist religious festival; to be noted, this year’s date coincided with the monthly anniversary of the communal attacks ?of September 29, 2012, which destroyed innumerable Buddhist monasteries, temples and homes, allegedly caused by an offensive photograph discovered in the facebook account of Uttam Kumar Barua, a Bengali Buddhist youth, several hours before the attacks occurred. According to press reports, the attacks were visibly incited by local leaders and members of the ruling Awami League (AL), the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat-e-Islami; the attackers included those belonging to these political parties, and also, other Muslims, both local inhabitants and outsiders. News reports have highlighted the “inaction” of police officials and the local-level administration. Both ruling AL and the opposition BNP agree that these attacks were “planned” and pre-meditated. The fanoosh controversy, as Pragyananda clearly explains, was the result of administrative interference in religious ceremonies and rituals; the Buddhists of Ramu had decided not to? observe their rites of virtue this year as they were “heartbroken” and grieving over their losses. Relief and rehabilitation (tran) actions taken by the government are satisfactory, but ones concerned with deliverance (poritran) are not, writes Pragynanda, since the issue of delivering justice to Buddhists in Ramu has by all accounts become “mired in the quicksand of [party] politics.” After reading his article, I had requested Pragyananda to elaborate on several things including worship rites regarding fanoosh, he responded to my request in writing, sections of which have been incorporated in this translation. — Rahnuma Ahmed?
ACCORDING TO some, a fanoosh is a light, its resemblance to a dole has led some to call it a dolebaji (large bin for storing rice). But in Buddhist vocabulary, a fanoosh is known as a sky light. Prince Siddartha (later Gautam Buddha) renounced kingdom, kingship, greed, a life of luxury and riches in his quest for freedom from suffering; he left his sangsar on a blessed day in the month of Ashar when it was full moon [purnima]. Continue reading “Ramu violence: A fanoosh is not a balloon”
In today’s column, I basically deal with three issues, firstly, a brief review of the government’s administrative responses, these suggest that higher-ups have ‘settled’ on making the officer-in-charge of Ramu thana the “fall guy” for the devastating waves of attacks on Buddhist temples, monasteries and houses on September 29; secondly, my examination of the report of the probe committee formed by the home ministry to investigate the occurrences in Ramu inclines me to think that the committee has produced a report according to the home minister’s requirements and guidelines as outlined in his public speeches instead of? investigating impartially as the committee is duty-bound to; third, in order to create appearances of communal harmony post-Ramu, government officials, ruling party members and ideologues, mostly Muslims (plus a few Buddhist quislings), have participated in government-funded Probarona celebrations this year, which has led to the (forceful) de-linking of religious rituals from a set of embodied practices which are a part of the Buddhist tradition; it bespeaks of government interference (hijacking), which again, is unconstitutional (freedom of worship).
Everyone, regardless of whether they belonged to the Awami League or to the BNP or Jamaat,?or was an ordinary citizen, suddenly became a Muslim.
— Adnan Wahid
HE WAS speaking of September 29, 2012, trying hard to explain to us, as we sat at a cafe in Dhaka, of how it could have been possible for local Bengali Muslims — who had lived peacefully with Buddhists, both Bengalis (Barua) and Rakhains, for many generations??in Ramu — to take part in wave after wave of assaults which destroyed innumerable Buddhist monasteries and temples where neighbours had worshipped and prayed, to take part in armed attacks which set fire to houses where Buddhist neighbours had lived. Continue reading “PART I: Punishing the innocent”
The phone calls went out from Saigon’s Xa-Loi Buddhist pagoda to chosen members of the foreign news corps. The message: Be at a certain location tomorrow for a ‘very important’ happening. Daily Mail
The next morning, June 11, 1963, an elderly monk named Thich Quang Duc, clad in a brown robe and sandals, assumed the lotus position on a cushion in a blocked-off street intersection. Aides drenched him with aviation fuel, and the monk calmly lit a match and set himself ablaze.
Of the foreign journalists who had been alerted to the shocking political protest against South Vietnam’s U.S.-supported government, only one, Malcolm Browne of The Associated Press, showed up.
In June 1963 Malcolm Browne, who has died at aged 81, captured the moment a Bhuddist Monk set himself on fire in Saigon to protest the Vietnam War