UKT: The title may be misleading. The "Weikza" that the authors are describing is not necessarily a weikza {waiz~za) but what might be termed a Bodaw {Bo:dau:} dressed either in white as a layman or in dark brown robes as a {ra.thé.}. However, to bring ourselves out the mess with terms used in Burma (as of the year 2008), it is recommended that the reader should acquaint himself with brief biographies of the known historical personages (meaning those who were born humans and who had undergone Assumption (cf. Christian idea of Virgin Mary being taken into Heaven). The original paper which I downloaded from the Internet was a preview of the book. It gave only part of the Introduction, p.62-71. So far, I haven't seen the original book. -- UKT

Preface (part)

Introduction

Amadaw Gaing

Footnotes

UKT notes

• {tha.ma.hta.} and {wi.pa.tha.na} • {ag~gi.rat} and {ing:} • {htwak-rûp-pauk} • {a.htak lam:} and {auk lam:}

Brief biographies (based on known facts but tainted with speculation and hearsays)

• BoBo Aung • Bo Aung Min Gaung

Contents of this page

p.roman10

by John P. Ferguson, State University of New York, Cobleskill, U.S.A.

UKT: I have taken only the part relevant to this paper.

The essay on weikzas {waiz~za} brings together a mass of data acquired by both the authors. Mendelson has already published a number of articles on what he has called "messianic" Buddhism, but he had actually planned a full-length work on the gaings {geiN:} that would delve much more deeply into the mysterious and little known world of the Buddhist occult. When Mendelson left the field of active Burmese research, he most generously allowed me to use his notes, translations, photographs, and books. Adding these to my own data, I was able to construct the tentative essay included here. Clearly, the historical roots of Burmese occultism need much more research, but the paper at least explores some directions that might be profitable. The reader will also note that the [{p.roman10end}] essay does little to resolve the theoretical differences between our friend Melford Spiro and the co-authors. One might see the differences epitomized in how one deals with a monk who dabbles with the occult to alleviate suffering. We would see him as a Buddhist monk doing a forbidden, but not all-that-uncommon, thing. Spiro would not see a monk, but an exorcist, since monks are denied by precept the exercise of occult powers. We like to think in terms of a continuum of Buddhist practice and ideals; Spiro prefers to define Buddhism as not including the forbidden. It is a worthwhile debate on the nature of religion, not likely to be resolved easily.

UKT: The fundamental theoretical differences between Melford Spiro and the present authors simply boil down to how you define a monk. According to Theravada traditions, a person who has transgressed the Parazika rules of the Vinaya is no longer a monk, and according to one Parazika rule, a monk who practices the occult to show off his powers is no longer a monk. Whether the monk unavoidably has to exercise his powers while doing good for others or not is not an excuse. Since, Burma professes to be a Theravada country, a Burmese monk who dabbles in the occult is not a monk and is punishable by being disrobed. But the problem is solved for those "monks" who have undergone Assumption or {htwak-rût-pauk} since his "body" is no longer flesh and blood of a living human being!

... ... ...

Contents of this page

p062

In Burma, as in much of Southeast Asia, apparent reality is ultimately explained as metaphor, understandable at various levels depending upon one's fascination with the unknown. For those who seek the esoteric, Burmese popular religion has a whole of metaphorical universe of the occult to explore.

A host of Burmese religious specialists exist to explain the hidden meanings and causation behind "reality". The most abstract and lofty explanations are found in the Pali scriptures of the Theravada Buddhist canon, with the monks the living teachers of the Buddha's enlightened wisdom, which is considered the ultimate authority. Because the monks of Burma, however, exist under no unified ecclesiastical hierarchy that could define orthodoxy, sects, splinter groups, and individual monks are quite free to interpret the Buddha's teachings with a latitude only limited by the tolerance of the laity who support and feed them. (fn02b)

Over the centuries, Burmese Buddhism, even under the strongest purifying kings, has tolerated an amazing degree of doctrinal variance, incorporating a number of Mahayanist, Sanskrit, Hinayana, and Tantric beliefs. Rather than exclude, Burmese Buddhism absorbs competing ideas but gives them a Theravada interpretation, if possible, and it places competing notions and symbols into a hierarchy, with Pali Theravada beliefs considered the highest insights.

Over the centuries this absorption process has preserved a great many ancient beliefs and symbols that a more rigid religion would have rejected. Thus we can find in Burma today old Hindu gods transformed into Buddhist higher nats or deva, the ancient Hindu Mount Meru-centered cosmology inhabited now by Buddhist beings, the Vedic lore of astrology and alchemy taught within a semi-Buddhist framework, ancient deities of pre-Buddhist times such as the earth goddess, the serpent of the deep, or animist nature spirits all harnessed to glorify Buddhism, the Tantric and yogic austerities of the Tibetan hermits adapted to Buddhist forest monk practices, the concept of living, compassionate Bodhisattas translated into special arahats who delay their extinction in Nirvana [UKT: The Westerner always equate Nirvana with "extinction" little understanding that to the Buddhists this equating is a heresy in itself. My explanation of Nirvana is a state of mind that is free from "Greed", "Anger", "Sex" and "Pride" which is beyond the understanding of the uninitiated who is still chained to the idea of the indestructibility of something postulated as the indestructible "Soul" which has no scientific basis.] in order to help the faithful today, or even the most terrifying forms of white and black magic still taught under the umbrella of popular Buddhism. (fn03b). [{p062end}] Quite at home in this amalgam of belief is the master of the Burmese occult, the weikza (wei'za) {waiz~za}. (fn04b)

UKT: The word "weikza" {waiz~za} and English <wizard> are equivalent. A wizard (invariably a man) can be of the higher path, {a.htak lam:}, in which case he is a {waiz~za}. However, if the person (either male or female) is of the lower path, {auk-lam:}, he or she is a {ka.wé}.

Many in the West would restrict the term weikza to mythical beings who in popular belief are the subject of much fanciful literature and conversation but who do not exist in this world apart from the enthusiastic imaginations of the folk. In this paper we shall deal first with the idea of a weikza and then explain how there are real individuals whom others believe are actualizations of the idea. The concepts that center around the role of a weikza are very complex, and it is not easy to define such a being, separating him from others with supranormal powers.

UKT: One should not assume that a Burmese Buddhist monk with all the goodness in his heart would follow only the higher path, {a.htak lam:}. Actually there are monks who are following the lower path, {auk-lam:}. One such monk was exposed in the 1960's. He was U Laba of Rangoon, who was dabbling in {pau:ri.tha-ra. ing:} (sp.check needed). For his perfection, he had to eat human flesh, and accordingly he murdered quite a few, pickled their bodies, and even sucked the marrow out of the bones clean (according to an eye-witness who was living in U Laba's monastery and who was working as a menial worker in the Chemistry Department, Rangoon University while I was a senior lecturer in the department). U Laba was exposed only after he had consumed the prescribed number of humans. He was convicted of murder and died in prison before his execution was carried out. What would have become of him, if he was successful? Would you call him an {ing: waiz~za} or a {ka.wé}? Is it possible that he would be able to finish his work in prison? It is quite possible that he did complete his work and that his death was an {a.thé-htwak} and that he still "lives".

Basically a weikza is conceived as a human who has acquired supranormal powers through mastery of alchemy, astrology, spells, signs, meditation, or other occult arts. He is always male, and his knowledge is often acquired from a "master" in a strict teacher-pupil relationship. Sometimes, through a mysterious process, the spirit of another weikza inhabits him or "elects" him (his own soul or spirit temporarily is sent elsewhere). Once a person has acquired weikza knowledge, he can then postpone his soul's final extinction for thousands of years, he can leave his body and use another's, he can remain indefinitely youthful in appearance, he can cure and divine, he can speak many tongues, he can fly in the air to foreign lands or travel through the earth to realms below, and, most importantly, he can command and control a host of lesser gods and dangerous spirits that plague the human condition. (fn05b)

Before dealing with the weikza's historical evolution or his links with normative Buddhism, we should point out that all his unusual powers are unique to his role. In Burmese belief, unusual powers can theoretically be developed by many people. Since Theravada Buddhist thinking reserves the highest prestige in the entire cosmology for the human beings who best exemplify the teachings of the Buddha, who himself was entirely human, it follows logically that their gods, demons, spirits, witches, and so forth, no matter what powers such beings possess, can all be outdone by the perfected human beings, the Buddhas, or by those holy monks who are most like him in thought and deed. Humans can acquire unusual powers through meditation, alchemy, astrology, charms and medicines, recitation of Buddhist prayers over a rosary, or living a pure life and using it as a "vow of truth" to accomplish the miraculous. Orthodox belief, however, always eschews the use of any such powers that the less scrupulous might be tempted to test. Humans may be aided or harmed in miraculous ways by gods, spirits, or other non-human beings. In most cases, however, the acquisition or miraculous powers is directly proportional to one's progress in becoming a good Buddhist. Miraculous power without Buddhism is believed to cause insanity or death. Most Burmese who embark upon the quest for miraculous power consequently do so within the broad sanctions of Buddhism. Even a layman seeking a charm to win at poker must observe some additional Buddhist precepts if expects results. A would-be weikza must exist within the same framework.

To understand clearly the role of the weikza in Burma, one must determine how the role lays claim to miraculous power that differs in any way [{p063end}] powers attributed to others. Since the Buddhist monk is the society's exemplar, we shall begin with distinguishing weikza powers from those attributed to monks.

The critical difference is found to center around the concept of rebirth. Even the best of monks - the arahat - can aspire only to final release from further rebirths in this human world of sensual attachment and eventual suffering. The personal "soul" of such a monk becomes extinct, according to traditional thought, at his death, with his karmic forces producing no new attachment or debts to this world. The arahat is free at last to enter the higher heavens or Nirvana itself, never to return. ¶UKT.

UKT: The last sentence "The arahat is free at last to enter the higher heavens or Nirvana itself, never to return" is doctrinally wrong. The authors failed to understand that the idea of "soul" or Atta is nothing but an axiom. In actuality, when this axiom is removed (in accordance with the Principle of Anatta), then the idea of "rebirth" breaks down. For a person to accept or realize that his idea of "Self" is nothing but an illusion (axiom) is the key to "Final Liberation", and what lies beyond his physical death is best treated as unknown. However, instead of getting into such a dead-end, it is best to realize that: Every sentient being is not free from "mental suffering" (The Principle of Suffering); Suffering is the result of a person's attachment to an idea or an axiom such as Soul (The Principle of Attachment); and Removing the idea or axiom is Liberation (The Principle of Nirvana).

For the average monk, a few or many more rebirths will be necessary. In other words, final release, even for monks will take a long time - a much longer time for the laity, no matter how much Buddhist merit in this life they earn by generously supporting the religion. ¶UKT.

UKT: The statement, "a much longer time for the laity, no matter how much Buddhist merit in this life they earn by generously supporting the religion" is how a "non-Buddhist foreigner" would look at "doing good work" or {ku.thol}. There are three kinds: {da-na.} (giving away material wealth or money especially to the monks); {thi-la.} (morality); and {Ba-wa.na}. {Ba-wa.na} consists of two parts: practice of mental concentration {tha.ma.hta.} and "deep analysis" {wi.path~tha.na}. It is only by deep analysis that we can realize that the very idea of Self is without any physical basis and is therefore an axiom, the removal of which would make you realize Nirvana.

Therefore, a person aspiring to become a weikza has to do more {tha.ma.hta.}, and less of {wi.path~tha.na}. However, a person aspiring to become an Arahat to realize Nirvana has to do more of {wi.path~tha.na}, and less of {tha.ma.hta.}.

The weikza, it would seem, seeks a shorter path to final release. In essence, he hopes to keep his soul or personal identity while his countrymen lose theirs at death. He hopes to manipulate his rebirths himself, taking matters out of the hands of karmic reckoning. Most importantly, he hopes to schedule his rebirths or extend his present life so that he is here on earth at the same time the next Buddha arrives, popular belief asserting that all who hear the next Buddha preach will have the opportunity to attain Nirvana at once. (fn06b)

At a glance it is obvious that such attempts to prolong individual identity fly in the face of fundamental Theravada warnings that the self is an illusion and cannot survive death. ¶UKT

UKT: At the time of physical death, all five aggregates are dissolved. By five aggregates are meant the physical body (which is an aggregate of many parts which in modern terms are millions of individual living cells), and four mental aggregates. All the four aggregates dissolve at the time of physical death, but one of the mental aggregate - the {wi.Ñaañ} or {waiñ~ñaañ} (sp.check required) because of the yearning for a new existence {Ba.wa.ta.Nha} resulted in the appearance of five new aggregates. This idea is not the same as a permanent Soul seeking a new "body" at the time of death which is what "reincarnation" means. To me, at least, the idea of "reincarnation" is unacceptable.

Popular belief, however, has long included the notion of rewards in heavens or punishments after death as occurring to individuals not impersonal bundles of karmic consequences. Nats, of course, seem to retain their personal identity over centuries, and some who are critical of nats doubt that many still exist because they have passed on to another birth (Mendelson 1963a: 98-105). ¶UKT

UKT: Though deva {dé-wa.} and {nat-saim:} are generally described as "Nats", they are fundamentally different. By "nat" {nat}, the authors seem to mean {nat-saim:}]. This concept of nat should be compared to the Tibetan idea of the Bardo. See "The Tibetan Buddhist and Spiritualist Views of After-death States" http://www.spiritualtravel.org/OBE/afterdeath.html 080930, or in The Tibetan Book of the Dead.

Furthermore, popular Buddhism has elaborated belief in certain arahats, such as Shin Thiwali (see Figure 1), Uppagou, or Kassapa, who have earned but not accepted Nirvana and thus remain as guardians or supporters of the religion to whom the people can turn for help (Ferguson 1977b). Weikzas can and do borrow a similar role for themselves as guardians and helpers of the religion, thereby giving an altruistic purpose to what otherwise might be seen as an egotistic quest. Weikzas in the sky are said to be able to transmit promptings and messages to the faithful on earth - all for the ostensible purpose of promoting the religion. The weikza consequently claims a control over rebirth that gives him powers only attributed to a handful of monks in all of history. The Mahayanist Bodhisatta aspect of his claimed powers is quite evident (fn07b)

Other weikza powers, such as flying, curing, and providing protection from evil spirits, may be attributed to non-arabat monks by their ardent followers, despite the fact that the Buddha prohibited monks themselves from claiming such talents. The more charismatic and saintly the monk, the more his followers attribute miraculous abilities to him. Stories of his magical flying will be told; he will be expected to dispense charms of all kinds; and he will be asked to aid the people in ridding their environment of evil forces. Particularly [{p064end}] common targets of such intense popular expectations are solitary forest monks, meditating monks, and those skilled in alchemy, astrology, and/or folk medicine. Despite the injunctions of the Vinaya [UKT: the monastic code laid down by the Buddha himself for a monk to follow if he were to be a member of the society of monks known as Sangha {thän~Ga}), many monks cater to such needs of the people. The main difference between the monk and the weikza in these areas is that whereas a monk must be modest, dignified, and somewhat discreet in using what powers he has, the weikza can proudly claim to have all such powers and quite openly publicize them to the world. The monk must remain within the range of tolerated behavior for members of the order, whereas is more like the independent being who charts his own course, no matter how eccentric and flamboyant it may become. (fn08b)

UKT: The above phrase "The main difference between the monk and the weikza" is misleading, because "weikza" is a state.

To elaborate, consider a human being of flesh and blood. By taking certain vows he can enter the society of monks, and he is said to have become a monk. His body is still flesh and blood. His body still needs nourishment and sleep. He is a "human-monk". However, if he would choose to practice certain tasks, and become successful, his body of flesh and blood undergoes transformation and no longer needs nourishment nor sleep. That is the weikza state. Then he is a monk-weikza or weikza-monk.

On the other hand, if the human had not enter the monkhood (i.e., remain a lay-person), but chose to practice the tasks prescribed and became successful, his body of flesh and blood undergoes transformation and enters the weikza state. Then he is a lay-weikza or a human-weikza.

In cases of weikza-monk and human-monk, being a monk means he must be modest, and must not declare that he is weikza. However, in the case of the lay-weikza, he can proudly claim that he is a weikza.

Most importantly, the weikza [i.e. a lay-weikza] can orchestrate his bid for followers in a pragmatic way that allows him much more freedom than is available to a monastery-bound monk who is required to observe the demanding rules of the Vinaya. What is compulsory abstinence for the monk is voluntary for the weikza. A weikza [i.e. a lay-weikza] can have a wife but renounce sex , or he can keep as many Buddhist precepts as fit his life style; he can travel where he wishes, eat when and what he pleases, or handle money as he wishes. ¶UKT

UKT: A married person while following the {htwak-rûp-pauk}-path (ultimate aim of {a.htak-lam:) need not divorce his wife, and so even when he had become a weikza can be said to have a wife.

The monk [i.e. monk-weikza] has to live a much more constricted life style, making it more difficult to attract and nurture a following. In other words, the monk exists within a monastic framework that is 2,500 years old, whereas the weikza [i.e. human-weikza] is, significantly, quite free of such traditions and can tail his life style, his symbolic paraphernalia, and the construction of his cult centers to fit the expectations of his clientele. The weikza, then is ultimately a layman who lays claim to the miraculous powers of an arahat but who can be ecclectic in how many of the monk's rules he observes. There is also a tendency for the weikza of today to make a conspicuous virtue of austerities normally taken for granted when practiced by monks. (fn09b).

If we compare the weikza's role and reputed powers with other Burmese religious practitioners, we find that basically he claims superior ranking in the hierarchy of such roles and has reputed powers that supersede or equal those of his rivals. The practitioner most often thought of as most similar to a weikza is a zawgyi (zo:gyi) {zau-gyi}; long known to the Burmese public as a dramatic personage in theater presentations (pwes) or in puppet shows. Believed to a Burmese version of the Indian yogi, the zawgyi is generally conceived as a red-robed master of occult practices, particularly alchemy and charms, who uses his powers for non-Buddhist ends, such as obtaining women. Conventionally the zawgyi is portrayed as respecting the Buddha, although it is clear what does specifically to promote the faith. The zawgyi is frequently a scape-goat for anti-yogic sentiment. A popular figure in literature, dance and theater, iconography, and popular tales, the zawgyi does not seem to be a role seriously assumed by any living Burmese religious practitioners (see Figures 1 and 2). In any case, whatever a zawgyi can be said to do, a weikza can be said to do better, although skeptical monks may dismiss both as fatally fascinated by the female. (fn10b)

Much more evident in Burma are the hermits, whose history parallels that of the monks. Dressed in robes that range from brown to dark [{p065end}] red, holding beads, bowl, and cane, sometimes beating a brass triangular gong, they are seen both at popular religious pilgrimage centers and in lonely forest or mountain retreats. (fn11b). They are virtually an unstudied aspect of Burmese religion, either by the Burmese themselves or by outside scholars. Often found near forest monasteries, their solitary existence in nature makes them seem rather special and esoteric, with many people attributing to them special powers in alchemy, astrology, medicines, or, particularly Vedic magic (see Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4). Most keep eight to ten of the Buddhist precepts and often provide menial services to monks and nuns, some working actively as mediums for various weikzas. Hermits are particularly evident at the more esoteric weikza and monastic centers, seemingly attracted to the realms where the miraculous is believed most like to occur. They seen to serve rather than to compete with weikzas, but our knowledge of their role is admittedly most incomplete.

Much more competitive with weikzas and better known to all observers of Burma are the various lay sayas (masters of various arts), that exist all over Burma. Usually a saya (hsa.ya) {hsa.ra} will be expert in one field, such as traditional medicine or astrology, but a few master a combination of skills, thereby increasing their access to miraculous powers. (fn12b). As curers, diviners, and exorcists, they play vital roles in helping the Burmese people deal with their problems. Depending upon the degree of their successes, their their fame will be restricted to a village or can spread over a wide area that includes many ardent followers. The more successful ones may make a bid for weikza status. Most, however, remain well within the range of traditional semi-Buddhist practices, keeping their rituals close to accepted Theravada expectations. Since they do claim the powers to control nats and lesser spirits, they depend upon respect for such expertise to accomplish much of their work, particularly in exorcising, although they traditionally defer to monks in difficult cases. The sayas thus are the most serious rivals to the weikzas, particularly since they work more comfortably within the established Buddhist framework, and their claims to power are basically more modest. In many ways, the weikza can be conceived as a master saya.

This brief review of the weikza's rival religious practitioners is intended to illustrate the rather ambitious claims he makes for his powers and his place in the Buddhist world. The weikza has become associated, particularly in modern times, with more than religious matters. He also has been linked with various prophecies and traditions that relate to popular belief in the future king or world emperor. (fn13b)

Even though the last king of the Konbaung dynasty was dethroned by the British in 1885, many Burmese yearn for the restitution of the old ways. The dynasty itself was founded by Alaungpaya, who was catapulted to power on the belief of people in his native village that he was indeed the legendary strong man of Buddhist virtue who would lead the country to greatness. When the throne was his, he became known by a name that means "a being who will become a Buddha". Alaungpaya, in a sense, set the theme for the dynasty, [{p66end}] which was to be a fascination with the ancient dream of the world emperor who himself would also become the future Buddha. Alaungpaya chose as the leader of the Sangha a monk named Atula, who evidently was not adverse to giving the customary Buddhist sanction to such royal ambition. (fn14b)

It is quite possible that the origins of the modern beliefs in the weikzas are to be found in the complex events that surround Alaungpaya and his leading monk Atula. That possibility is suggested by some very interesting details on the life of Bo Bo Aung given by a Burmese informant at Pagan. Bo Bo Aung (see Figures 1, 5, and 6), perhaps the most famous of all the modern weikzas, was said to have gone to school with two companions, U Wain, who later became King Bodawpaya, and another schoolmate who became the Taungpila Sayadaw {taung-hpi-la hsa.ra-tau}, popularly associated with teaching qin (qin:) {ing:} practices (the powers of letters and numbers). ¶UKT

UKT: I have never heard {ing:} (or rune) being described as qin (qin:) . It is this kind of "mistake" that I have in mind when I remark "This work is full of mistakes: I have included it, to show how a scholarly article can be misleading".

While the story is strangely silent on the role of the sayadaw, it relates how the king tries later to kill his old friend Bo Bo Aung when the latter becomes a powerful weikza. This same king, who was the son of Alaungpaya, disrobed and banished his father's monk, Atula, who traced his monastic pupil-teacher linage back to the Taungpila tradition at Sagaing. Furthermore Bo Bo Aung is said to have been a monk at Sagaing when he first discovered some powerful qin on a palmleaf manuscript. What these details suggest is that the Bo Bo Aung tradition evolves out a matrix at Sagaing, the traditional base of meditating forest monks and hermits, that could be related to King Bodawpaya's futile but dramatic bid to force the monkhood to recognize him as both the world emperor and the future Buddha. Because the monkhood refused to sanction Bodawpaya's bid to fuse the emperor and Buddha roles into his person, the king carried out a purge of the monkhood, including the disrobing of Atula. (fn15b).

UKT: The episode involving Sayadaw Atula is what is known as {a.roän - a.ting} controversy that was creating a split in the monk community known as Sangha. As this split was creating havoc in the lay community as well, the king had to step in and using his royal prerogative as the keeper of law and order, decided to declare the group headed by Atula as preaching the anti-Buddhist doctrine, i.e. {a.Dam~ma.}, and was causing a split among the Sangha. Since, according to the Viniya rules set down by the Buddha himself, a monk causing a split is punishable by being expelled from the society of monks, Atula was declared persona non grata and disrobed. He was stripped naked, put inside a cage on a raft, and a sign saying that there is an animal inside was put on the cage. The raft was floated down Irrawaddy from the capital, and stopped at every village and town and the population made to see the spectacle. On reaching the town of Thayetmyo, Atula was released and and banished into the forests of the western Yoma. Atula, even when naked, considered himself to be still a monk, simply put back on his robes and disappeared from civilization into the wilderness. (Facts to be checked with my peers.)

When Bagyidaw, the son of Bodawpaya, became king in 1819, he tried to pacify the badly splintered monkhood, even going so far as to appoint a thathanabaing (head of the Sangha) for the forest monks, who traditionally considered Sagaing as their stronghold (Pannasami 1861: 144). While Bagyidaw may have done much to unify the monkhood, he had to watch the loss of much of his country to the British by 1826, and popular hope began to center on Bagyidaw's son, who was known as the Setkya (Sa.ca) prince. ¶UKT

UKT: The time frame in history coincides with the American incursion into the British territory of Canada in what is known as the War of 1812-14. During this war an expeditionary force of Canadians and British made a flash landing in the US, sacked Washington D.C. and attacked the residence of the American president just before dinner time. The occupants fled, and the Canadians and the British ate the dinner, drank the wine, burnt down the residence and withdrew to their ships. The American came back during the night and whitewashed the building from which time onwards it is known as the White House, As the British were busy with the Americans and the French on the other side of the globe, they tried to made peace with the Burmese forces in Bengal. Then they started their first campaign, under Amherst the British Governor of Bengal, against the Burmese king: the First Anglo-Burmese War, made a flash landing in Rangoon, seized the Shwedagon Pagoda and turned it into a fort. They even made a go at the pagoda treasures by digging a tunnel into the interior of the pagoda but had to abandon it when their Mon allies complained. When the Burmese forces under General Bandoola came to face them, the Burmese could not attack the Shewedagon with their canons, but undaunted the Burmese rushed up the eastern stairs of pagoda with their swords. They suffered heavy losses, but managed to kill at least two British officers. Bandoola then had to retreat from Rangoon. He fell in battle, by letting himself be sniped at by a British gunner, in Danubyu, after which Bagyidaw had to declare defeat, handed a large amount of money and some of his territory to the British. (facts to be checked with my peers.)

Perhaps the Setkya would swoop out of Upper Burma and rout the enemy [that time the Mons] as Alaungpaya had done a few years before. All such hopes were dashed when Bagyidaw was overthrown by his brother Tharawaddy, and the young Setkya prince was done away with by his uncle, using the velvet sack into the river method so favored by the Burmese royalty. The populace thus lost their savior prince.

UKT: Why the velvet bag? It is believed that shedding the royal blood would bring down the dynasty, and therefore capital punishment for the royal is drowning. But since it is a member of the dynasty an ordinary sack would not do - it has to be made of velvet!

Tales soon developed, however, that the Setkya prince had not been drowned but had been rescued miraculously by Bo Bo Aung himself. ¶UKT

UKT: The reader is bound to get confused if he were to continue reading the following line casually. Bo Bo Aung had already become a weikza in the reign of Alaungpaya, and then there was the reign of Bagyidaw. It was only in the reign of Tharawaddy that Setkya prince was executed.

Bo Bo Aung had developed his weikza powers, left the monastery at Sagaing, put on the white clothes of a layman who keeps more than the usual Buddhist precepts, and had mastered the use of magic signs and letters (qin:) to obtain weikzahood. Using his weikza powers, Bo Bo Aung spirited the Setkya prince [{p067end}] to the heaven [UKT: what heaven?] where the future kings are said to bide their time before coming down to earth. The stage was thus set in popular belief for a host of future contenders for the title as Burma lost its independence to a colonial power. Just as the deadly use of royal power had created a host of nats in the history of Burma, King Tharawaddy's palace purge created a new focus of national belief - the faith in the Setkya prince who would soon come, and with the aid of a weikza, to deliver Burma into freedom and prosperity, perhaps soon to be followed by the coming of the future Buddha as well (see Figures 1 and 2). Some people, in their impatience, even fused the emperor-Buddha roles so that the Setkya prince was seen as the being who himself was also the future Buddha (Mendelson 1961a: 1961b). To accomplish all of this, the weikzas would use their magic powers, and in popular lithographic prints, Bo Bo Aung is seen crowning the future king.

Bitter national events followed the loss of the Sekya prince in 1937, culminating in the humiliating deposition of King Thibaw in 1885 and the long struggle for independence thereafter. During this century of struggle, the Burmese people retained their faith in the coming king and the future Buddha. Such faith was an elaboration upon Pali orthodox Buddhism to fit the needs of wretched times. Some monks, as has been well documented, joined the populace in belief in the messianic saviors (Mendelson 1975: 173-179, but enough of the monkhood held to "orthodox" opinions so that the elaboration of a new quasi-Buddhist weikza-emperor-future Buddha cult had to take place at the periphery of normative Buddhism. Such developments occurred among the fringe members of the Sangha, those who delved into forest austerities and occult practices (alchemy, astrology, etc.) or who sought a quick route to Nirvana through meditation. Joining such monks were the hermits and sayas of various sorts. Groups of lay people (gaings or gain:) {geiN:} eagerly followed monks or lay masters who claimed varying supranormal powers, most centered around faith in the weikzas, such as Bo Bo Aung, who would restore the royal traditions and bring about Buddhist paradise on earth. (fn16b)

It would seem that the weikza cults that exist today represent a relatively modern development since the nineteenth century, to which have been added a number of ancient elements from the available patterns in the legacy of popular Burmese religion (see Figure 7). Nationalistic and messianic needs were answered by weikza cults, and Burmese gaing leaders were quick to develop a history that validated their needs. Monastic and lay chronicles were combed for weikza-like personages. Esoteric works were likewise searched, as were oral sayings and predictions. Out of the process came weikza "histories" which serve as charters for the believers.

We offer this as a working hypothesis on the origins of weikza beliefs, fully aware that in the future, evidence may be brought forward that makes our position untenable. The most likely source of such counter evidence would be additional knowledge about the Ari forest monks of Pagan fame, who existed for centuries after the fall of Pagan. (fn17b). Infamous in Buddhist chronicles for dabbling with the occult, the Ari were accused of preserving many non-Theravada [{p068end}] practices. They apparently fostered belief in the arahat Kassapa, who declined Nirvana to help the religion until the next Buddha comes, at which time he will give his robe (actually the Gotama Buddha's robe) to the Ariya Maitreya. Such notions are closely allied to the conception of the dead but living Bo Bo Aung. ¶UKT

If the Ari did indeed represent the Mahayanist, Tantric, and Sanskrit aspects of Buddhism, they did so as monks. What seems to us the critical issue is the weikza is a layman. Followers may claim a monk to be a weikza, but a weikza himself never claims to be a monk. In the brief historical review that follows, the claimed predessors of the weikzas, it will be noted, are all monks, not lay persons. Modern weikzas, like Bo Bo Aung, tend to leave the monkhood to achieve their goals. This assumption by the laity of prerogatives once exclusive to monks we see as part of a general pattern involving education, meditation, and abortive attempts of government to control the monkhood (Mendelson 1975).

Most weika histories recognize that non-Buddhist hermits of Jataka fame preceded Gotama and that these hermits possessed magic powers. Such hermits are not considered weikzas, presumably because they are not Buddhists. Most weikza histories begin with Ottamasiri (Qou'ta.ma.thi yi), a monk from Prome who was shown a copper plate from a cave in which the hermit Deikbasekkhu (Dei'ba.se'ku.) had formerly lived. (fn18b). Ottamasiri had previously orthodox Vipassana {wi.path~tha.na} meditation , but after deciphering the strange alphabet on the plate, he turned to writing books on magic written charms (qin:) {ing:} . In the eyes of the orthodox, Ottamasiri fell from the lists of the holy ones (Htei: hlan 1937:32), but to weikza cult people, he is a great writer on weikza knowledge (Than: 1965: Intro. III).

It should be made clear at this point that not all weikza histories list the same weikzas. One, for examples, rather outrageously claims the famous reformist monk Shin Arahan to have been a weikza because he gave a magic alchemical mercury ball to a group of kings of Ceylon (Zo: ti.pala. 1952: 41), but such a story is not confirmed at all by the Glass Palace Chronicle (Pe Maung Tin and Luce 1923: 89-90). In Pagan times the alchemist Eizagona (Qi'za.go:na.) [See Dr. Htin Aung's Folk Elements in Burmese Buddhism "Monk Goat-Bull" {rhing-a.za.gau:Na.} - ch05-magus.htm ] is, however, usually considered as a weikza because he had discovered the mercury ball that could turn base metals into gold; his knowledge is generally believed not to have survived him when he achieved weikzahood at Mount Popa (Mendelson 1963b: 796-797). Other nameless weikza monks of the Pagan are referred to under the generic name of Shin Mahti. It is significant that all Pagan "weikzas" are monks, usually dismissed by the orthodox writers as shameless Ari backsliders.

The next historical weikzas usually mentioned are Dhammaceti {Dam~ma.sé-ti} and his friend Dhammapala {Dam~ma.pa-la.}, who were both monks at Ava in the fifteenth century. They are said to have been taught weikza powers (qin:) by the famous Mon monk, the Bame Sayadaw {Ba:mè. hsa-ra-tau} (Ferguson 1975: 154, n. 1.), In a popular dramatic version of their lives, they use their great magic to abduct Queen Saw Bu from Ava to Pegu, where she marries Dhammaceti after he doffs his monastic robes (Htin Aung 1962: 55-57). ¶UKT