Childhood is the most important period of every person’s life. It’s this period when whatever experiences, whatever you see, hear, learn, watch, and think that shapes, and makes you what you’re today. Your attitude, whatever perception and views you wear and hold during this period impacts your whole future life. I also believe that that very attitude and views you wear during your childhood is your active and conscious choice.

This is not to say that teenage years and early twenties doesn’t matter. In fact, they matter a lot.

I found out this the hard way. And paid for it,too.

The Right Attitude

Due to communal conflicts and tensions we shifted from Manipur to Shillong whilst I was in Standard X. It effectively means I lost a year. Nevertheless, I had the right attitude and continued my studies in Shillong. I had to read both Standard IX and X syllabuses in one single year as Meghalaya Board Exams cover both. I came out with flying colours – getting 86% in Maths, 93 in Math 1 alone.

I used to modestly credit my success that exam to my studious nature!

How wrong I am!

In retrospect, I now realise it takes more than being studious to overcome setbacks even in High School. Right attitude, willingness to dream big – I was actually aiming for the top 20 slot! – persistence, discipline and sacrifice has more to do with my success than being studious. Seeing myself and my other “studious” friends fail again and again in college is testament to this.

The Wrong Attitude

During my XIIth everything went wrong.

I somehow developed this desi attitude – chalta hai! It simply means everything is okay. Everything will work out fine, in the end. How was I to know between now and the end lies a long, long time.

This attitude almost did me in! I began to ignore my studies. I simply couldn’t care less about anything. I accepted, nay, invited mediocrity, and failure.

I got only 59% at the Boards. Only in English did I get over 80, what a waste! Getting a college admission in New Delhi was a struggle. And, by the time I went to classes, I was, in hindsight, simply doomed to failure. Only I still didn’t care.

Why are you telling us your sob story?

Well, you may be good at studies and do well in exams but without the right attitude, big dreams and discipline, you will falter and stumble in your life. Don’t be me. Great exam results are not indicative of a great life ahead, but, boy, will they help!

Related posts:

1. Be a Success- Improve Your Self
2. Zomi Theological College 49th Graduation
3. Central YMA Readies To Face the World – Gets a Website!

The recent formation of Leitungbup Zomi Innkuan Kipawlna proposed by Zomi Innkuan Oklahoma is a proud moment for me. It has been years since we have hoped and prayed for something like this to be formed. To collectively share our burdens and wade forward into the future as a community defined by our common shared legacy and aspirations.

However, on reflection, I realised this organisation is formed by the first generation Zomi diaspora, not the youths. That is not necessarily bad. But isn’t it time for the new generation to come and take charge? Isn’t it time we heed the call of thousands of people back home hungry, tired and hopeless?

Where are my fellow Gen Y Zomis? Where are the youths who got everything their previous generation can only wish for?

Some three decades ago, when the Burmese Junta came to being, the Zomi community of Chin State like other ethnic communities in Burma were left with no choice but to abandon their own community and homes to seek refuge in developed western countries where they are free to pursue their dreams of freedom and good lives.
Since then thousands upon thousands of Zomi population has made countries like United States, Canada, Australia, Germany, etc their home. They found peace and development. They found progress, education and social security.

However, the question that I want to ask is this: Aren’t we paying too high a price for all the good things that a foreign land has to offer?

I believe this is a question that each of us should ponder upon and ask ourselves. You may be tempted to say “Carey, its easy for you to ask such a question, as you are not displaced and your life is more or less never in any danger.”

Well, that may be the case. But I also feel very much displaced and misplaced! I am living in India and this is not exactly a Zomi domain. Delhi is not exactly the kind of place one can call Zogam.

It may be a surprise for you when I say, I long for the time when we all move back to Zomi domain. I wish we could all come together again and live in our own homes.
I secretly wish that someday I would be able tell my daughters, “See, this is the land where our forefathers hunted and lived. This is the land for which men have fought and died, this is the land where we belong. We don’t have to fear anyone here. We are safe here. We are home.”

Coming back to the question at hand, I am amazed at the apathy of the youths today. I have been hoping that the second and third generation Zomi diaspora youths will now be able to say “Guys, its our time now. We’ve got to help our brothers and sister back home, who are not as fortunate as we are. We’ve got the education and the environment and everything {insert country} has to offer. Now its time to give back.”
So, I ask myself again, it is worthwhile to give up your homes, communities and legacies in spite of the Burmese Junta for the next generation to want nothing to do with the problems back home?

I have no pride in living so far from the land my ancestors used to live. I think we are paying too high a price for the elusive “freedom and good lives”. If the Gen Y don’t give a damn for the land where our forefathers live freely and in pride, a few years from now there will no more be a place we will be able to call home!

Your cars and houses and businesses and dollars cannot wipe away the tears, pain, humiliation and lost faces of your brothers and sister back home. Even as I write this, there is reports of foreign elements harassing villagers in the Indo-Myanmar border within Chin State.

Is it worth it?

Related posts:

1. Zomi in Diaspora Rev Ngul Khan Pau
2. Zomi in Diaspora for World Evangelism Questionnaire Download theih
3. Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) defends Zogam

2. March 8, International Women’s Day kum 100 cinna (centenary) tawh kituakin CNN in Asia gam numei minthang 8 a teelna lakah khatna China, India in nihna pan 4 dong ngah.
1. Zhang Yin, China’s Paper Queen
2. Indra Nooyi, Pepsisco Company CEO, 185,000 nasem nei.
3. Sonia Gandhi, India Congress President
4. Chandra Kochhar, Chief of ICICI Bank, India Bank golpen nihna.

3. India in Women’s Day tawh kituakin March 8 ni-in Vanleeng 22 numei bek hawlsak. Hih vangleengte pen international leh domestic hi a, Mumbai leh JFK (New York) zong kihel. A dangte Mumbai pan Bangalore, Delhi, Nagpur cih bang paite hi. India gamah numei pilot 136 om cih kiza. Rajasthan state-ah Women’s Day lopna-in kumpi Bus a tuang numei khualzin peuhmah lamsap om loin paisak cih kiza. Mumbai-ah numei Police Inspector teng Senior Inspector za ah khangsak uh a, numei driver 10 zong lathak cih kiza.

4. Lamka khuapi-ah tu laitaka DC (Deputy Commissioner) pen Numei Jacintha Lazarus IAS hi a, SDO dingin Rachel N. Guite MCS, w/o Paukhanmang Guite kila thak cih kiza. Pherzawl ADC zong Ms. Mannuamching MCS ahi hi. Numeite maimai nawn lo.
Lamka khuapi sungah February kha sung bekin Motor 71 kibehlap cih kiza.

5. March 8 ni-in Numeite ni tawh kituakin India vaihawmna Parliament ah Numeite 30% reservation bawl ding vai kikupna om a, langpang lamte nuak tai ahih manin thupukna bawl thei loin tawp cih kiza.

GK

Related posts:

1. Aizawl Khua Hun 04 March 2010
2. Aizawl Khua Hun 15 January 2010
3. Aizawl Khua Hun 13 January 2010

Eco-“In”justice in Myanmar
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, is a resource-rich country with a strong agricultural base. It also has vast timber, natural gas, and fishery reserves and is a leading source of gems and jade. The most productive sectors will continue to be in extractive industries, especially oil and gas, mining, and timber with the latter especially causing environmental degradation. Building eco-justice in Myanmar is an urgent need.

Under the British administration and until the early 1960s, Myanmar was the wealthiest country in Southeast Asia. It was once the world’s largest exporter of rice. While under the British rule, Myanmar supplied oil to the world through the Burma Oil Company. Myanmar also had a wealth of natural and labor resources. It produced 75% of the world’s teak and had a highly literate population. The country was believed to be on the fast track to development. But it is now one of the poorest nations in southeastern Asia, suffering from decades of stagnation, mismanagement and isolation.

photo credit: Avia Venefica
Myanmar is also the largest country in mainland Southeast Asia, with a land area of 676,578 sq km (261,227 sq mi), the 40th-largest in the world (Zambia being the 39th). A wide variation in altitude, latitude and climate creates high diversity of habitats and species: nine of the WWF Global 200 Eco-regions lie wholly or partly in Myanmar, and the World Resources Institute (WRI) has described the Indo-Burmese region as one of the eight hottest hotspots of biodiversity in the world.

The country is blessed (or some would even say cursed) with a wealth of natural resources. Its extensive forests, perhaps the largest intact natural forest ecosystem in the region, contain commercially-valuable and increasingly rare timber such as Burmese teak (Tectona grandis), Pyinkado or ironwood (Xylia dolabriformis), Padauk or rosewood (Pterocarpus macrocarpus) and Kanyin (Dipterocarpus spp.). Natural resources are concentrated along the frontiers with Thailand, China, Bangladesh and India, regions mainly inhabited by Myanmar’s numerous minority ethnic groups.

Unfortunately, these forests are now being methodically and relentlessly destroyed, while Myanmar’s fisheries are being stripped. New agricultural policies imposed by the ruling State Peace and Development Council (known from 1988-1997 as the State Law and Order Restoration Council, or SLORC) force farmers to double and treble crop rice, ignoring the traditional wisdom of crop rotation and opening the way to potentially disastrous soil depletion and pestilence. Mining and oil and gas operations are being rapidly expanded with dangerous disregard to environmental impact.

This destruction of Myanmar’s environment has been documented in several international reports. But Myanmar’s peoples today have absolutely no say in how their country’s resources are developed. The military closely guards all information, allows no public discussion or dissent, and punishes anyone who dares question its development priorities or other policies.

Broad swaths of rainforest, especially highly-prized teak forests, were opened to Thai loggers to earn foreign exchange and quickly denuded. Forests that for centuries provided the livelihood and cultural milieu for many ethnic minority peoples are being destroyed at an alarming rate exceeding that of Amazonian rainforests. The massive deforestation is causing new problems of erosion, floods, and landslides. It is also threatening some of the last habitats on earth for endangered animals such as the clouded leopard, gaur, silvered leaf monkey, tapir, tiger, Asian elephant, and Asian rhinoceros, which even vigorous reforestation projects can never re-establish. There is no indication that this logging is slowing.

Tragically, none of these issues receives any recognition, discussion or publicity in the media, which are totally state-controlled. Equally disturbing, the environmental consequences are largely bypassed in intergovernmental, regional and trading debates on Myanmar’s precarious economic development. Yet, the country’s social and ecological crisis is deepening, evidenced by the growing poverty of the people and the new phenomenon of “environmental refugees” fleeing their homes.

Only very recently did Christian leaders and theologians in Myanmar begin to address the environmental and ecological issues from a Christian perspective. Dr. Samuel Ngun Ling, Director of the Judson Research Center at the Myanmar Institute of Theology, Yangon, voices the feeling of the people when he says: “Indigenous people in Asia, particularly ethnic peoples in Myanmar have experienced bitter suffering in our land such as Western colonization, slavery and subjugation, social and religious discriminations, internal exploitation of the minority groups by the dominant and majority Burman society. In fact, in our search for liberation from oppression and suffering, to protect our land and natural resources is very crucial and central.”1

The words of Dr. Ngun Ling echo the view of an indigenous Indian Christian theologian, K. C. Abraham, who strongly advocates the preservation of mother earth, saying that “our ecological crisis should be seen as a justice issue. Political and social justice is linked to ecological health. We shall not be able to achieve social justice without justice for natural environment. We shall not be able to achieve justice for nature without social justice.”2 Dr. Ngun Ling tries to bring to our attention the fact that “the ethnic conflicts in Myanmar cannot be handled properly and peacefully without referring to our environmental issues such as deforestation, land degradation, water pollution, species extinction, and climate change. Justice to the land is the key to liberation and human dignity.”3

As pointed out by Ken Gnanakan, concerns of eco-justice are deeper than preserving nature or solving human conflicts. There are at least three areas of concern, the first of which are matters relating to our personal relationships, which deal with issues where individuals or communities exploit powers, pervert justice and deprive the poor of their basic necessities. The next concern deals with issues relating to countries or communities that exploit the poverty of another country. The third concern is a matter of a just relationship between human beings and creation itself: a call to check our exploitation of nature.4

The Term “Eco-Justice”
“Eco-justice” means the well-being of all human kind on a thriving earth. As a goal, it retains and reinforces all of the church’s longstanding commitment to justice in the social order, and it adds a major new insight of our time: that justice to human beings is inseparable from right relationships with and within the natural order. Eco-justice includes social and economic justice and, by combining it with ecological awareness and appreciation, profoundly affects the way it is to be achieved. Eco-justice means justice to all of God’s creation.

In this spiritually grounded perspective, all beings on earth make up one household (oikos), which benefits from an economy (oikonomia) that takes ecological and social stewardship (oikonomos) seriously. Eco-justice provides dynamic frameworks for thought and action that fosters ecological integrity with social-economic justice.5 Ecojustice applies the concept of justice to the environment. The primary argument of ecojustice is that the natural world must be included in an evaluation of ethics or morality. Many supporters of eco-justice also support sustainable development throughout the world. But, suggested Rasmussen, the vision, aim and framework should not be that of “sustainable development,” the way to go is “sustainable community.”6

Is Christianity or Its Lack of Teaching the Root Cause of Ecological Crises and Injustice Today?
Just over forty years ago, in 1966, Lynn White, Jr., in his lecture7 in UCLA, California, laid the blame on Christianity and its teaching about nature as the cause of our ecological crisis. He argued that it is the Christian teaching that “it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends” which contributed largely to present-day ecological crisis. He declared that Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has ever seen and that the exploitation mentality is built on this religious outlook. And indeed, modern science traces its roots to this very doctrine of “dominion” for which White accuses Christians for the ecological crisis we are facing now as a historical root.

But White’s critique and accusation of Christianity as the root cause of environmental crisis need further analysis and study in the light of the Biblical teaching and the history of the church. Simon Pau Khan En, a prominent Christian theologian and church leader in
Myanmar, does not blame Christianity per se for our present ecological crisis. But he lists four reasons as the basic causes of the present-day ecological crisis:
(1) Inadequate treatment of Pauline theology, by which he means that “the emphasis of human salvation had watered down the cosmic and universal aspect of salvation in the whole structure of Pauline theology.”8
(2) The bifurcation of theological emphasis at the great schism, by which he means that after the great schism of the church, the Eastern Church had embraced the doctrine of ecological soteriology or cosmic salvation while the Western Church from which all major churches today descended emphasized anthropological soteriology, the salvation of human beings only.
(3) The partial emphasis of Reformed theology, especially the three solas : sola- scriptura, scripture alone, sola gratia- grace
alone, and sola fide- faith alone of Martin Luther, which Dr. En says, could well serve to counter the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrines of that time but had accentuated the anthropological soteriology.9
(3) Revival movements in the history of the church with their emphasis on personal conversion of individuals, which inspired believers to anticipate heaven for the future rather than empowering them to have concern for the nature and environment in the present. His charge is that “this inadequate and defective theological position emphasizing only human salvation does not only make Christians
irresponsible to care for the earth and nature but makes them to abuse and exploit the whole creation of God.”10

Is Christianity really deficit in its teaching about nature and our need to care for it, and thus responsible for our present ecological crises? Francis Bacon used to be one accused for advocating the view that human dominion over nature is the God-given right.
Writing in 1620, at the dawn of modern science, Francis Bacon said, “Only let the human race recover that right over nature which belongs to it by divine bequest, and power be given it.”11 But this is not simply true. Norman Geisler points out that “the celebrated
statement for Bacon is misunderstood by his critics, for in the very next sentence, after noting that man’s rights over nature are of divine origin, Bacon carefully adds, ‘The exercise thereof will be governed by sound reason and religion.’” 12 McGrath observes
that White “was completely right when he argues that human self-centeredness is the root of our ecological crisis; and completely wrong when he asserts that ‘Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen.’ The most self-centered religion in
history is the secular creed of twentieth-century Western culture whose roots lie in the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century and whose foundation belief is that humanity is the arbiter of all ideas and values.”13

It is true that Christianity is the mother of modern science and technology. But it is unfair to blame it for the ecological crisis we are facing today for several reasons. Even though the Judeo-Christian concept of creation is at the root of modern science, it is wrong to claim that this gave rise to the exploitation of creation. One of the central Christian doctrines is the teaching that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth to which Christian theology traces the origin of the universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps. 147:1).

The earth is the LORD’s with all its fullness (Ps. 24:1). Not only the earth, but also the heavens declare the glory of God (Ps. 19:1).
White’s statement in the form of blame on Christians for our present ecological crisis shows his ignorance of the history of the church and its theology. The doctrine of creation has been the theme of many Christian theologians and philosophers throughout the history of the church. Francis of Assisi (1181-1226) has always been referred to as “the patron Saint for” environmentalists not without sufficient reason. To him, “all nature became a sign of the love and generosity of God: the whole of God’s creation was
touched by the new life brought about by Christ.”14 Bonaventure (1217-1274) instructs the soul journeying toward God to see the universe as a wonderful work of art in which one can trace its Maker: “Whoever is not enlightened by the splendor of created things is blind; whoever does not praise God for all these creatures is mute; and whoever after so much evidence does not recognize the First Principle is an idiot (stulus est)”15

Modern Christian theologians and writers have stressed that, far from being the enemy of ecology, the Christian doctrine of creation affirms the importance of human responsibility toward the environment. The noted Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall can be taken as a representative who, at the invitation of the National Council of Churches’ Commission on Stewardship, wrote in a study on human responsibility on nature, entitled Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship. He summarizes his viewpoint thus: “My thesis, stated in the most rudimentary manner, is that the vocation of the human being within creation is to image God, and that the imaging of God (Dominus) described in the tradition of Jerusalem would mean exercising the dominion of stewardship.”16

The influential German theologian Jürgen Moltmann, noted for his concern to ensure the theologically rigorous application of Christian theology to social, political, and environmental issues, argues that the exploitation of the world reflects the rise of technology and seems to have little to do with specifically Christian teachings. Moltmann stresses the manner in which God can be said to indwell the creation through the Holy Spirit, so the pillage of creation becomes an actual assault on God.17

The Evangelicals, who have had least interest in the environment until the recent past, have changed these days. The 1994 “Evangelical Declaration on the Care of Creation,” brought together many of the leading representatives of the movement in a
common affirmation of the legitimacy of ecological concerns for evangelicals. It states at the outset of the Declaration: “As followers of Jesus Christ, committed to the full authority of the Scriptures, and aware of the ways we have degraded creation, we believe
that biblical faith is essential to the solution of our ecological problems.”18

Modernization and Eco-Justice
When asked to give a detailed assessment of our time the Venerable Samdhong Rinpoche, a prominent Buddhist intellectual and present Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile, follows Mahatma Gandhi in using the Hindu word “kaliyuga,” or “black age” to describe modern civilization, which is self-destroying and according to the teaching of Mahatma this could be considered as a Satanic Civilization. For Samdhong Rinpoche the five basic challenges facing human society are economic disparity and the
exploitation of the poor, population increase, the direct violence of wars and armed conflicts, ecological degradation, and the abuse of religion. Like most Asian thinkers interviewed he traces the root cause of problems Asian society is facing to the
fundamental Enlightenment assumptions and values of the modern West.19

Modernization also encourages individualism and competition.20
The Enlightenment desire to dominate nature was realized with the rise of science and technology which backfires in the manipulation and exploitation of nature at many levels. While the western world prided itself in the advances made in science and technology, Romano Guardini (1885-1968), an Italian philosopher, reflected on their impact on environment and lamented in his famous Letters from Lake Como. As a Christian philosopher, Guardini was deeply concerned over the failure of technology to
respect boundaries.21

Paracha Hutanuwatr’s critique of modernity is focused on five major elements which, he believes, are destroying Asian values: (1) the belief in a linear kind of progress and the associate summary dismissal of traditions; (2) the belief in science as the only or
primary valid way of knowledge; (3) a skeptical attitudes toward religion and spirituality; (4) a tendency to embrace materialism and over-emphasize individualism; and (5) a belief in human supremacy over nature and the right to conquer and subdue nature.22 He
believes and so do many Myanmar and Asian thinkers that the adoption of Enlightenment world view is one of the root causes of ecological crises and injustice in Myanmar and Asia.

Building Eco-Just Society From Myanmar Christian Perspective
The theme of this brief paper is simple and practical: building eco-just society from Myanmar Christian perspective. Having seen the root causes of ecological crisis and injustice in the society, it is easy now to see the need for building an eco-just society based on the teaching of the Bible. How should we proceed with the practical aspect of putting the Biblical teaching of Christian principles in building an eco-just society in countries like Myanmar?

Dr. Pau Khan En puts forward several suggestions as to how we can build an ecojust society in Myanmar. The first of which is to restructure a new theology in ecological perspective, by which he means a holistic biblical view of redemption to recapture the
all-embracing understanding of the world and redemption as the transformation of individuals as well as society.23 He also suggests to formulate relevant spirituality from two sources: (1) the spirituality of the church fathers like John Chrysostom and Francis of
Assisi who were very close to nature, and (2) the relevant spirituality from primal religion called “Nat” worship in which every object is believed to be inhabited by different “nats.”

His third suggestion is that of inter-faith cooperation among the world’s religions in combating the evils of modern society and building eco-just society in its place.24 It is difficult to accept some of his views and proposals to be compatible with the
core teaching of the Bible, especially when he suggests that Christians should do well by borrowing concepts from primitive religions.
Does the Bible say anything about eco-justice on which we can build our theology? Is there a clear teaching of the Bible? The Bible definitely has much to say about justice in human relationship to one another and to God’s creation as well. “Like everything else, Christian ecology flows out of Christian theology. Our view of the world flows out of our world view.”25 The prophets constantly cried out against exploitations in their community and time (Isaiah 28:17; 30:18; 42:1; 42:4; Amos 5:15, 24 etc.). “While it
was social justice that the prophets addressed, the framework has today been appropriately widened to ecological justice or eco-justice.”26 Jesus’ teachings reflect His concern for justice in all human relationships.

Calvin B. D. Dewitt, a University of Wisconsin professor of environmental studies who founded the Au Sable Institute for Environmental Studies argues in an important paper in 1995 that four fundamental ecological principles can readily be
discerned within the Christian Bible:
1. The “earth-keeping principle”: just as the creator keeps and sustains humanity, so humanity must keep and sustain the creator’s creation.
2. The “sabbath principle”: the creation must be allowed to recover from human use of its resources.
3. The “fruitfulness principle”: the fecundity of the creation is to be enjoyed, not destroyed.
4. The “fulfillment principle”: there are limits set to humanity’s role within creation, with boundaries set in place that must be respected.27

Building right relationships is the key to building eco-just society. But on what principle should the right relationship between God, and humanity and the rest of creation be built? Of the several metaphors suggested in recent environmental and ecological
writings, the principle of stewardship seems to be most appropriate as suggested by Hall: The Steward is a particularly apt metaphor for humanity because it encapsulates the two sides of human relatedness, the relation to God on the one hand and non-human creatures on the other. The human being is, God’s steward, accountable to God and responsible for its fellow creatures.28
In the New Testament usage, the “steward” is oikonomos, “the householder,” one who knows the house rules and cares for the life of the household members. It signals trusteeship, and means broad responsibility and wise management. Another oikos word is ecology (eco+logos) – “the logic of the house” or knowledge of the structures and dynamics of the household, how it has been configured and run.

“Ecology thus means knowing from inside, the interrelated dynamics that make up the total life of the household and the requirements for living together. This is to respect creation’s integrity and live in accord with it.29 Because “ecology is a good
stewardship,”30stewards must be found faithful (I Corinthians 4:2).

Another Myanmar theologian, Dr. Samuel Ngun Ling, lays out his agenda in the following way:
1. Re-read the Bible from an ecological perspective
2. Re-visit exclusive church’s traditions, doctrines, and theologies and practice
3. Re-examine human moral attitudes, especially towards environment and nature
4. Re-examine human moral attitudes, especially towards environment and nature.
5. Reform communities in order to build an ecologically sound and healthy community where people consume less, share equally, and live simply.31

Building eco-just society is not merely seeking solution to ecological problems; at the heart of ecological problems are basic ethical issues, which must be addressed. It must be based on right relationship between God, humanity, and God’s creation. The
right environmental32 and ecological theology must have God at its center as the Creator and Sustainer of the whole creation and the One who would bring all things to perfection. It must look forward to the future redemption of the whole creation as its consummation. The Biblical mandate for us to be stewards of God’s creation must always be our motivating and guiding principle.
That political peace plays a very important role in achieving social justice without which there can never be ecological justice must be acknowledged. “This interdependence is the message implied by the biblical concept of shalom, and by The World Council of Churches’ current theme, “Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation” (JPIC).”33 As Paul exhorts us in his letter to Timothy: “I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone – for kings
and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness” (1Timothy 2:1-2 NIV). The best we can do in the current situations in Myanmar is hustle and hope!

References

1 Samuel Ngun Ling, “World Environmental Day Message,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 8 (June, 2007), 45.
2 K. C. Abraham, Liberative Solidarity: Contemporary Perspective on Mission (Tiruvalla: Christava Sahtiya Samithi, 1996), 114.
3 Samuel Ngun Ling, “World Environmental Day Message,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin,, Vol. 8, 45.
4 Ken Gnanakan, God’s World: A Theology of the Environment (London: SPCK, 1999), 136-137.
5 Dieter T. Hessel and Rosemary Radford Ruether, Christianity and Ecology, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2000), xxxvi.
6 Larry L. Rasmussen, “Global Eco-Justice,” Christianity and Ecology, edited by Dieter T. Hessel and Rosemary Radford Ruether (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2000), 525.
7 Lynn White, Jr., “The Historical Roots of the Ecological Crisis,” Science, Vol. 155 (1967), pp. 1203-1207.
8 Simon Pau Khan En, “Building An Eco-Just Society,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Volume 4 (June, 2005), 55.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid., 56.
11 Francis Bacon, The New Organon, ed. Fulton H. Anderson (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merril, 1960), 119.
12 Noman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Issues and Options (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989), 308.
13 Alister E. McGrath, The Reenchantment of Nature (New York: Doubleday, 2002), 54.
14 Ken Gnanakan, God’s World: A Theology of the Environment, 92.
15 Bonaventure, The Mind’s Journey to God, trans. Lawrence S. Cunningham (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1979), chapter 1, no. 15.
16 Douglas John Hall, Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 60.
17 Alister E. McGrath, The Reenchantment of Nature (New York: Doubleday, 2002), 31.
18 http://www.creationcare.org/resources/declaration.php, accessed on November 9, 2008.
19 Paracha Hutanuwatr, “Modernization in Asia: Ecological Crisis and Alternatives” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 4 (June, 2005), 74.
20 I do not think it is right and wise to blame the Western democracy and capitalism as the cause of modern social problems and exploitations as Kark Marx used to attack them since we have witnessed what devastation communism and socialism had brought to countries in East Europe and Asia. Myanmar (Burma) itself has known it by experience how the “Burmese Way to Socialism” had isolated it from the rest of the world and plunged it into utter poverty while her neighboring countries made astounding economic growth during the 60s and afterwards.
21 Alister E. McGrath, The Reenchantment of Nature, 94.
22 Paracha Hutanuwatr, “Modernization in Asia: Ecological Crisis and Alternatives” Engagement: Judson
Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 4 (June, 2005), 78.
23 Simon Pau Khan En, “Building An Eco-Just Society,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Volume 4 (June, 2005), 61.
24 Ibid., 62.
25 Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Issues and Options, 302.
26 Ken Gnanakan, God’s World: A Theology of the Environment, 139.
27 Alister E. McGrath, The Reenchantment of Nature, 29.
28 Douglas John Hall, Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship, 36.
29 Larry L. Rassmussen, Earth Community, Earth Ethics (Geneva: WCC Publications, 1996), 93.
30 Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Issues and Options, 306.
31 Samuel Ngun Ling, “World Environmental Day Message,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 8 (June, 2007), 46.
32 Nash prefers to use the word ecological rather than environmental to describe his treatment of the same issues. He says, “The latter often seems to have anthropocentric connotations, suggesting moral concern only for the human environment, rather than for the context of all life.” See James A. Nash, Loving Nature: Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility (Nashville: Abongdon Press, 1991), 21.
33 Ibid., 218.
Bibliography
Abraham, K. C. Liberative Solidarity: Contemporary Perspective on Mission. Tiruvalla: Christava Sahtiya Samithi, 1996.
Bacon, Francis. The New Organon, ed. Fulton H. Anderson. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merril, 1960.
Bonaventure. The Mind’s Journey to God, trans. Lawrence S. Cunningham. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1979.
En, Simon Pau Khan. “Building An Eco-Just Society,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Volume 4 (June, 2005).
Ling, Samuel Ngun. “World Environmental Day Message,” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 8.
Geisler, Norman L. Christian Ethics: Issues and Options. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.
Gnanakan, Ken. God’s World: A Theology of the Environment. London: SPCK, 1999.
Hall, Douglas John. Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1986.
Hessel, Dieter T. and Rosemary Radford Ruether. Christianity and Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2000.
Hutanuwatr, Paracha. “Modernization in Asia: Ecological Crisis and Alternatives” Engagement: Judson Research Center Bulletin, Vol. 4 (June, 2005).
McGrath, Alister E. The Reenchantment of Nature. New York: Doubleday, 2002.
Nash, James A. Loving Nature: Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility.
Nashville: Abongdon Press, 1991.
Rassmussen, Larry L. Earth Community, Earth Ethics. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1996.
Rasmussen, Larry L. “Global Eco-Justice,” Christianity and Ecology. Edited by Dieter T.
Hessel and Rosemary Radford Ruether. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2000.
White, Jr., Lynn. “The Historical Roots of the Ecological Crisis,” Science, Vol. 155 (1967).
http://www.creationcare.org/resources/declaration.php, accessed on November 9, 2008.

Related posts:

1. Baptist Socio-political Ethics in Myanmar
2. Maximum PC Guide to Building a Dream PC [download]
3. Ethnic tension and minority perspective on Burma’s problems

Nehginpao Kipgen is a researcher on the rise of political conflicts in modern Myanmar (1947-2004) and general secretary of the U.S.-based Kuki International Forum (www.kukiforum. com). He has written numerous analytical articles on the politics of Myanmar and Asia that have been widely published in five continents (Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe and North America).

Related posts:

1. Aung San Suu Kyi to be freed in November
2. NCGUB Statement on Daw Aung San Suu Case 14-05-2009
3. Interview with Pu Cin Sian Thang and U Aye Thar Aung

Gen Than Shwe has warned people to make “correct choices” in the polls

Burma’s military government has passed long-awaited election laws which pave the way for polls expected this year.

Details of the laws have not yet been revealed but they are likely to include issues such as campaigning and the number of candidates per constituency.

No date has been given for the polls, although the junta has previously said the elections will be held this year.

Detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi cannot stand and her party has not confirmed it will take part.

The five new elections laws will be published in detail on Tuesday, Burma’s state media said.

The laws are expected to lay out rules on how long candidates can campaign for and how many candidates can run in each constituency.

Correspondents say they could also include a date for the elections, the first in 20 years.

Burma’s last general election, in 1990, was overwhelmingly won by Ms Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), but the military government annulled the result.

Related posts:

1. British MPs Called For Crime Investigation Against Burma’s Military Regime
2. Zomi Christian Fellowship Vs. By-Laws & Constitution
3. 10 Things You Should Know About Burma

photo credit: kutterkriminal

I love stories – hearing them, reading them, seeing them – in fact, or fiction. Every story has its own enchanting quality to it as it weaves and warps along the medium it’s being narrated in. And the art of storytelling fascinates me too. I believe that it is among humanity’s oldest professions – after all, history is indeed a long story. Stories are what draw us together, you know, once upon a time when we all huddled around that fire as our imagination lit up and took flight. They say there aren’t really any new stories, it’s just the way they are being told that’s different. They say, there are no real new stories as such, only the same old stories told in new and different ways. Or so, have you already heard this too?

Somewhere in the Animal Kingdom, there was a certain jungle ruled by a lion called Pazo who was well-learned and crafty. And it was part of his pride that all the animals under his domain both respected and feared him. He was the total master of his subjects, and known to come up with new-fangled ideas and decrees regarding the administration of his states of affairs.

One fine day, after some brainstorming and pondering over his new diet plan, he called upon all his subjects and proclaimed a formal announcement that henceforth, he would hereby quit hunting out his kill and instead every species of animal under his authority should take turns each day in dispatching one of their kind for his daily food. And thence, this new statute came into effect and all animals under his realm and in his menu had to pick one of their own to feed the king. And thus, it came to pass that it was the turn of the Rabbits to serve as breakfast to their king.

But it so happened that the rabbit who got the meal ticket that day was Fasty, a smart-aleck good at making up stories. So on his way to the lion’s den, Fasty racked his brain trying to figure a way out from Pazo, who was then impatiently waiting at his table for his food to arrive. Then, as the rabbit wandered around taking the long road for survival, he stumbled into a deep fountain of water. Wallowing in his well of misfortune, Fasty gazed deeply at his own image reflecting in the water, suddenly sprang with inspiration! Hope floated, and dragging himself up from the quagmire, he leapt and bounded with joy towards his final destination.

Meanwhile, Pazo in his lion’s den was feeling cheesed off, hungry and angry. Thus, by the time the rabbit finally reached him, the lion was livid with rage and upon seeing the puny rabbit got in such a bad mood that he even lost his appetite. So then, he ordered the rabbit to explain the reason as to why it took him so long to reach him.

On being asked so, Fasty proceeded to cook up a story and told the lion that as he was making his way towards the lion’s den, he was halted by another lion at a watering hole. This fresh lion, the rabbit told Pazo, had arrogantly accosted him on his way and questioned him as to where and why he was going about.

Upon learning the whole story of his undertaking, Fasty continued to tell Pazo, this new lion told the rabbit to make haste and convey a message to the old Lion King challenging him to a duel before lunch that day itself, down at the watering hole.

After hearing this, Pazo got further enraged and infuriated that he demanded Fasty to take him then and now to the rendezvous for this confrontation, which the rabbit eagerly did. Having brought the old lion to the water, the rabbit then pointed to Pazo’s own image reflected in the water, and told him that there was the lion which was roaring for a fight. The old Lion King growled at the lion in the water, and the growl bellowed back; he roared and the same happened.

Then, turning to Fasty, Pazo snarled, “You petty rabbit, you little prig, do you really take me for such a sucker? That lion out there is I-Me-Myself, my own reflection in the water! You know, I think I’ve already heard of this story even before you could even talk! So you think I am going to fall for this childish trick?”, and then gobbled him up. And so our story goes…

Related posts:

1. Pu En Kho Suan Gualnam-Thu Go Siah
2. Sia Langh Sawm Mang Gualnam hong nusiatna leh phawkna
3. Jojo ft Michael – Sometimes Love Just Ain’t Enough

Online etiquette seems to be something the Zo online community is completely unaware of or lacks.

Etiquette is a code of rules which govern socially acceptable behaviour. Therefore, netiquette is a code of rules, written or unwritten which govern socially acceptable online behaviour. It is derived from network etiquette and is also known as internet etiquette.

Netiquette or Internet etiquette is a must for online civility and community.  Etiquette is meant for the good and smooth running of the society as a whole. It should be and is beneficial to all parties involved – be it individuals or corporates.

11 Quick Tips For Better Online Etiquette:

1. Be polite. Treat people the way you want others to treat you.
2. Be honest. Don’t lie about your age, sex etc just for the heck of it. Always be truthful in your dealings online.
3. Write, comment, say or do things online that you want people to see. That is to say, don’t send emails or pictures that may be embarrassing if you are exposed. Remember even emails can be intercepted.
4. Protect your privacy. This also includes respecting others’ privacy too.
5. Send emails only if the need arises. Do not send random pictures, articles and links that you find interesting every time you find one.
6. Write brief emails. Keep it short. 3 to 4 short paras is more than enough for an email.
7. Communicate clearly. Use short sentences and proper (English) grammar.
8. Keep to the subject at hand. Do not bring up topics after topics when discussing something online. The person on the other end may not have as much time as you do!
9. DO NOT SCREAM! Writing online in capitals letters amounts to screaming. Don’t!
10. Don’t start a flame war. Flaming is when you provoke one online with racist remarks, derogatory remarks, etc.
11. Lurk before you post. Before asking a question (eg in a forum) first see if the question you have in mind is already asked or read the FAQ page first, if you still don’t find the answer to your query only then ask. In case of commenting, read the full post and previous comments first before you post a comment (eg on a blog).

Just like in the real world, we have to follow certain rules, written or unwritten, for the smooth running of online activities. Only by maintaining proper etiquette can we sustain groups and communities online.

What more would you add to this list? Why do you think people behave badly online? How would you help such a person?

Related posts:

1. Daily Writing Tips – Free Online English Grammar Lessons
2. 18 Practical Tips for Living the Golden Rule
3. Valuable Tips to Save More Money

This article is originally written on ZoAw.info, which is now NOT online. More articles from Zo Aw blog will be post on Vaphual.net in the future. Hope you enjoy them!

Paupu The Hero is a movie that enthrals young and old alike.

This movie is actually a Thai movie called Ong-bak starring Tony Jaa “the next Bruce Lee”.

The original Thai movie is great in itself, though it lacks a decent plot, here I want to focus on the dubbed version in Zou dialect from Manipur.

The fact that a motley crew of dubbing artists, who did voice-overs for the movie turned a Thai movie into a Zou movie in itself is creative enough.  But what the dubbed movie achieved is something they themselves might not even be aware of.

Paupu The Hero is especially popular amongst children. Even in New Delhi. A cousin’s son loved the movie so much that he practically was mimicing the dialect wherever he goes! More importantly, he is therefore learning to speak Zou. If not for Paupu The Hero, it would not have been possible for him to learn Zou.

Now even my daughter M, is always saying things like “Nang bang bawl a kinei la zawlpa!”. (Popular phrase from the dubbed movie).

You see Paupu The Hero may have achieved far greater impact than a literature board coming out with a couple books a year!

Let me list out some points why any Zo Lit Board* should learn from Paupu the Hero.

• Utilize more powerful media: Our Zo lit boards seem to think that literature can only be taught and learned via books alone. Printed materials will always be there but there are not always that effective. More people are now watching TV than reading books. People prefer watching movies to reading scholarly literature articles. Zo lit boards should therefore use the more powerful media like movies, songs (videos), internet, etc in trying to popularise and reach out to more people. Do our Zo lit boards even have a website? Don’t tell me. I know the answer.
• Universal Theme/subject: Zo lit boards should utilize universal themes and subjects to propagate the dialect they want to promote. Had those creative youngsters dubbing the Paupu The Hero pasted ‘Zou ham hi Zomite ham tahtah hi‘ on the CD cover, they would not have the enjoyed the level of popularity and success the dubbed movie enjoyed. Instead they created this for fun. And fun is universal enough. It was fun learning Zou dialect whilst watching Paupu the Hero.
• The theme/subject is as important,if not more, as the message: Zo people really have no tact. We say what we mean and mean what we say. The Zo lit boards ought to be more tactful when broadcasting message or propagating views and opinions. Don’t simply say ‘ ‘Zou ham hi Zomite ham tahtah hi’, weave that message around an interesting story. An interesting story like Ong-Bak! Paupu the Hero is successful mainly due to the popularity of the original movie itself, the thrilling action sequences to be precise.
• Don’t ignore less powerful media: Although Zo Lit Boards should pay more attention to powerful media like TV, videos, radio, Internet etc, they should not ignore less powerful ones like books and magazines! Do publish more books and magazines but please change the subject. Write a fiction, interview an interesting professional, writing shocking stories, love stories, sad stories, etc. The idea is to captivate attention by involving the readers emotionally and by catering to their every senses. Write these with your correct grammar and word-combinations. (These two elements seem to be the most problematic elements of Zo literatures!)

What do you think? Care to share your thought on this?

*Zo Lit Board = Zo Literature Board representing the host of literature boards we have.

Related posts:

1. Asian Hero Bruce Lee
2. Rev Dr JM Paupu tawh Minam Vai Kikupna
3. US ah Kumnih Sung Om thei Ding – Dr JM Paupu

Kawlgam khuapi thak Nyipyidaw ah abeisa February 19-21 Feb 2010 sung a vahawh India gam Union Home Secretary Mr.G.K Pillai in India le Kawlgam gamgi  zul tengah Zomite abuai sak den Meitei (Kate) singnuai mi thautawite gam nih galkapte kipawlin hawl khiat dingin thukimna lai bawl uhi ci’n India gam thukizakna laihawm khat in pulak hi.

Kawl galkapte in gamgi-a om India gam langpang singnuai thautawi mite nawh khiat mang dingin thukim uh a, huh/ panpih ding akiap leh India  Kumpi in akisap leh  kong huh ding uh hi ci in Mr.G.K.Pillai in gen hi. Hih India leh Kawmgam gi zuul a om thautawi pawlte ahi United National Liberation Front (UNLF), People’s Liberation Army (PLA), NSCN (Khaplang) le NSCN (Isak-Muivah) te’ gamtatna leh a phualpite munlahna (Maps) te zong India uliante in Kawlgam thunei khat ahi galkap mang Gen Phone Swe, (Deputy Home Minister) tungah piakhin ta hi. A hi zongin bang hun ah kipan ding cih pen kician lian nai lo hi.

Hih gamgi sung a Zomite a buai sak Thau tawite in India gam sung pan lutin Kawlgam Chin State sung ahi Tonzang, Cikha, Suanghoih leh akim khuate le Sagaing division sung ahi Kawlpi, Tamu khuapite ah Kawl galkap thuneite panpihna nuaiah khuasat in a utut in gamta uh hi.  Hih India-Kawlgam gamgi ah adang singnuai thautawi kipawlna dangte ahi Chin National Front (CNF), Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) le Arakan Liberation Army-te zong gamtang uhi.

Zomi Revolutionary Army (ZRA) pan thugen theihna anei khat ii genna ah, ” hih gamnih kipawl-a galsimna hong piang tatak kha thei ding hi. Ahi zongin hong piantaktak mateng uphuai lo ding hi ci-in gen hi. Ama genna- ah , ” hih galsinna a om zongin India kumpi tawh galkhawlna ding thukimna nei ahih manun pataulo hi ung”  ci’n gen beh lai hi. Galsinna ong piang tatak leh Kawl galkapte sawltak dingin tualmite in thuak lawh lel ding uhi cih zong gen uh hi. (Ref: Khonumthung News )

Reported by- Tongsan Media Groups

Related posts:

1. Khamtung Mite Kong Vang Ding Thu
2. JH Cope Pawlpi Mite in Cope Centennial Jubilee Uap Ding
3. Mara Nam in 2010 Kiteelna Ah A Ding Ding Teel