CHIN

CHIN

The Chin is a group that lives in the mountains along the Myanmar-India borders and neighboring areas. The name “Chin” comes from the English version of the Burmese name and is used mostly in Myanmar. The Chin call themselves the Zo or Zomi, names used for them in India. Regional and dialect groups include the Chinbok, Chinbon, Dai, Lai, Laizo, Mara and Ngala. They are related to the Mizo, Kuki and Hmar in Mirozam and Manipur state in eastern India.

There are believed to be around 300,000 Chin in Burma and roughly 600,000 in Mizoram State in eastern India. They have traditionally lived in an area of high mountains in villages that ranged between 1,000 and 2,000 meters. These areas were traditionally seen as so inhospitable few other groups wanted to lived there. The northern Chins have different customs and beliefs from the southern Chins. Groups like the Purum, Lakher, Mizo and Thadou also live in the hill country of northeastern India and northwestern Burma and have customs and lifestyles similar to that of the Chins.

 The Chin are a predominately-Christian ethnic group that lives in the remote mountains of northwestern Myanmar in an area that borders Assam, India to the west, Bangladesh to the southwest, Myanmar ‘s Arakan state to the south and Burmese-dominated Myanmar to the east. It is estimated that the Chin, in a general sense including outside and inside of Chinland, number as many as two million, with the largest and noticeable number concentrated in the Chin State. [Source: Salai Bawi Lian, Executive Director, Chin Human Rights Organization, April 2005]

 According to the Myanmar government: Because Chin State is hilly and access is difficult, there is a slight difference in languages spoken in one region and another. It had a population of about 412,700 in 1983 and 465,361 in 1996 respectively.

 Chin State borders India in the north and west, Rakhine State to its south and Sagaing and Magwe divisions in the east. Chin State can be reached in an arduous seven hour overland journey from Pagan to Mindat , with very poor accommodation options. An easier way to see the Chin by using the ancient kingdom of Mrauk U in Rakhine State as a base. It is about 3½ hours up river from Mrauk U and its eerie, endless and spectacular temples. Here the population are primarily Chin as it is near the border with Southern Chin State. To get to Mrauk U you can fly from Yangon to Sittwe — an area that is 40 percent Muslim — then take a four hour boat up the Kaladan River.

 The Chin tend to have darker skin than the Burmese.The Chin languages belong to the Kuki-Chin Subgroup of the Kuki-Naga Group of the Tibeto-Burman family of languages. They are all tonal and monosyllabic and had no written form until missionaries gave them Roman alphabets in the 1800s.

Akha, Lahu, Kachin, Wa, Shan, Karen, Naga See Separate Articles Under the Hill Tribes and Famous Ethnic Groups Category Hill Tribes and Ethnic Groups

Siar bet

The Origin of The Chin: By Dr. Lian Hmung Sa Khong

As the title indicates, this paper investigates, by applying a comprehensive approach of ethno-symbolic theory, who the Chin are? Why can they be described as separate ethnic group? What are their chief features that distinguish the Chin as separate ethnic nationalities from other human collectives or ethnic groups? And what criteria make it possible for them to be recognized as a distinctive people and nationality in Burma?
Anthropologists such as A. D. Smith, suggest that there are six main features, which serve to define “ethnic nationality”. These are: (i) a common proper name, (ii) a myth of common descent, (iii) a link with a homeland, (iv) collective historical memories, (v) one or more elements of common culture, and (vi) a sense of solidarity. [1] A causal link between the “ethnicity” and the formation of an “independent homeland” or “Autonomous State within the Union” — which the Chin and other non-Burman nationalities in the Union of Burma today are fighting so hard for — is the search for what Clifford Geertz called “primordial identities”, that is, the search for the past to find the evidence of the existence of “collective memories, symbols, values and myths, which so often define and differentiate” the Chin as a distinctive people and nationality throughout history. [2] However, since I am going to opt for a comprehensive approach, I shall not limit myself within any single theory of either “primordialism” or “circumstantialism” but apply both theories when they are deemed to be appropriate the context of the study as I explain the ethnicity of the Chin.

One of the main arguments in this paper is that the word “Chin” is not a foreign tongue but the Chin in its origin, which comes from the root word “Chin-lung”. According to the myth of the origin, the Chin people emerged into this world from the bowels of the earth or a cave or a rock called “Chin-lung”, [3] which is spelled slightly differently by different scholars based on various Chin dialects and local traditions, such as “Chhinlung”, “Chinn-lung”, “Chie'nlung”, “Chinglung”, “Ciinlung”, “Jinlung”, “Sinlung”, “Shinlung”, “Tsinlung”, and so on. In doing this, I am going to differentiate between national name of “Chin” and tribal names such as Asho, Cho, Khuami, Laimi, Mizo and Zomi. In other words, I shall argue that term “Chin” is the national name of the Chin, and the terms such as Asho, Cho, Khuami, Laimi, Mizo and Zomi are tribal names under their national name of “Chin”.

In this study, I shall therefore define the Chin people as a ‘nationality’ or ‘ethnic nationality’, and Chinland or Chinram [4] as a ‘nation’, but not as a nation-state, based on already well-recognized theories but also based on the traditional Chin concepts of Miphun, Ram, and Phunglam. The meaning and concept of Miphun is an ‘ethnie’ or a ‘race’ or a ‘people’ who believe that they come from a common descent or ancestor. Ram is a homeland, a country or a nation with well-defined territory and claimed by a certain people who have belonged to it historically; and the broad concept of Phunglam is ‘ways of life’, which includes almost all cultural and social aspects of life, religious practices, belief and value systems, customary law and political structure and the many aesthetic aspects of life such as dance, song, and even the customs of feasts and festivals, all the elements in life that ‘bind successive generations of members together’ as a people and a nationality, and at the same time separate them from others.

Siar bet

Book Review By Dr. Vum Son On "Religion And Politics Among Chin" By Lian Hmung Sakhong

Book Review and Discussion: by Dr. Vum Son Lian Hmung Sakhong, 2000 "Religion and Politics among the Chin People in Burma (1996 –1949)," Studia Missionalia Upsaliensia LXXX, Uppsala University Table of Contents 1. Conversion to Christianity 2. The origin of the name "Chin" 2.a 2.a.i Previous studies on the origin of the name "Chin" 2.a.ii Colonial studies proving that "Chin" is not a native name   2.b.ii The foreign origin of the name "Chin" 2.a.ii.a Foreigners on the source of  "Chin" 2.a.ii.b Natives on the source of  "Chin" 2.b  Misrepresentations of others' work 2.c  Errors in tribal groupings and namings 3. Historical mistakes 3.a Hakha as the capital of Eastern Chinram 3.b Omissions I first came to know Dr. Lian Hmung Sakhong personally from political seminars related to the restoration of democracy in Burma , and since the inception of the Chin Forum in 1998 (?) we have been working together very closely under the Forum.  When Dr. Sakhong generously sent me a copy of his dissertation, "*Religion and Politics among the Chin People in Burma (1996 -1949)*," I felt honored and thankful to him that he valued my opinion.  According to his references Dr. Sakhong graduated with a degree in theology, and had done his masters degree in history at the Rangoon Arts and Science University . The "Chin" people had no writing before the Christian missionaries came, so that researchers and layman have had to refer to books and notes from the colonial administrators when we wanted to know about our own history, social structure, religion, etc. Being the author of "Zo History" (1986), I welcomed the idea that a native academician like Dr. Sakhong would investigate the religion and politics of our people.  I was also looking forward to it after having read some of the comments made in the internet (Chinlandnet) in which one made a comment on the book said "...one of the most analytical and encompassing academic works ever under taken by either a native Chin or a foreigner especially on the Chin's traditional religion". Because foreigners (i.e., non-native speakers) gathered the historical stories on which most previous work had been done, they have had the added disadvantage that the writer was an extra degree of separation from his source. The stories were often recorded through interpreters, who could embellish or omit parts at will, by choice or simply out of sheer ignorance. In some cases where qualified professional interpreters were a rarity, the researchers had to content themselves with local interpreters with limited knowledge of the lingua franca used to communicate between them, causing some of the recorded stories to be miserably distorted.  On the other hand, the history of the "Chin" people that has been written by non-professional natives is mostly based on myth and legends. Because these myths and legends were handed down through generations, seldom were there specific times and places attached to them. Although interesting, these narratives have never been systematically studied and documented, and therefore, are often vague, unsubstantiated and unverifiable.  Nevertheless Dr. Sakhong's work is naturally not immune to mistakes and shortcomings, which prompted me to thoroughly review the book and constructively contribute comments as necessary. This Book Review and Discussion is my attempt to keep the record straight on a few of the issues I have carefully selected since it would be too time consuming to cover every flaw in his paper. Moreover I opted to avoid heavily commenting on those parts related to religion as this is not my field of expertise and it is best left to the religious people or scholars for further investigation and scholarly debates. But I would briefly comment on one important part before going over to the main content.   For example Dr Sakhong stated that (page 21) "the theological similarity between Christianity and traditional Chin religion, which meant that conversion was not a radical change but a religious transformation from /Khuahrum/ oriented ritual practices to a /Khuazing/ oriented worship within the same pattern of belief system." Apart from such rather vague assertion there was no comprehensive explanation of the "theological similarity" throughout the book.

Siar bet

How Chin Capital Was Moved

How Chin Capital Was Moved

 By. Dr. Vumson Suantak

  (This is a comment I wrote on the Chin State Capital in response to Dr. Lian Hmung Sakhong’s book. He writes) “Since the arrival of the British, Haka became the capital of Eastern Chinram.” To my recollection Haka had never been the capital of Eastern Chinram until 1964. Let me give an account of the Eastern Chinram capital.

When the British annexed the Chin Hills, they first established their camp at Thangmual, calling it Fort White after General White, who was the commander of the army that subdued the Sizang and surrounding areas. Fort White was in the Sizang area. In 1892, the Sizang chiefs and other chiefs of the general Tedim area planned the assassination of Carey, who was the political officer. The players were Thuam Thawng of Kaptel, his son Pau Dal, Khan Dal, chief of Heilei, and the Sizang chiefs. They invited Mr. Carey saying that they were to give him some presents. However, on the appointed day Mr. Carey was ordered by his superiors to go somewhere else and the Myo-Ok who was an Arakanese was to come to receive the presence.. The plotters decided that as the Myo-ok , being an agent of the British should be welcome and assassinated. The plotters then informed and received their approval from the Lusei, Haka, Tlasun, and Zahau chiefs.

Siar bet

Abortion

Abortion 

Ting Hlei Thang

Introduction:

Abortion is one of the most persistently controversial issues in American culture and politics today. Since the 1973 national legalization of abortion, competing groups have fought to either restrict or increase access to the procedure, leading to heated debates among political activists, religious organizations, state legislatures, and judges. Let’s see some arguments with the Bible.

Group Discussion

1.      Define abortion on your own understanding.

2.      How will you view the fetus in the mother’s womb? When a human is became a human? Cite biblical support on your stand.

3.      Based on your definition of abortion, how will you consider the life of the mother it is threaten?

THREE VIEW OF ABORTATION

Status of unborn	Fully human	Potentially human	Subhuman
Abortion	Never	Sometimes	Anytime
Basis	Sanctity of Life	Emergence of Life	Quality of Life
Mother’s right	Life over privacy	Combination of rights	Privacy over Life

Siar bet

Chin National Font (CNF)

The Chin National Front (CNF) was formed on 20 March, 1988, dedicated to securing the self-determination of the Chin people, to restore democracy, and to establish federal Union of Burma.

The Union of Burma has been ruled by illegitimate military regimes that have suppressed all peaceful demands for democratic political change since 1962. The regimes have not only violated the basic canons of democracy, freedom, and human rights, but have also denied the Chin people to enjoy the right of self-determination to promote, protect and preserve the Chin national identities and Chin national interests through peaceful political life.

The Chin National Front welcomes and invites any peace, freedom, and democracy loving nation, organization, and individuals to join in the effort to regain Chin self-determination, restore democracy, freedom and establish federalism in the Union of Burma.

Siar bet

Chin History Timeline (AD 1800-2006)

Chin History Timeline (AD1800-2006)

Chin History Timeline (AD1800-2006) collected by Salai Biak Lian Sang

 Pre-Colony Period, Anglo - Chin War

1800 - 1870 - Chinland was peaceful and quiet, thus practicing feudal chief ruling system even though cruel slavery was avoided by their conscience. In these years, new villages were established by the descendents of chiefs.

1871 - British established tea plantations in the Chin territory on Indian border. The Chin people on the western side therefore raided the British tea planters accusing them intruding into the Chin territory. The Chin captures a little young girl the age of five by the name Mary Wincherster who was left behind by adult tea planters as they all ran away from the raid.

Siar bet

ZO REUNIFICATION ORGANISATION (ZORO)

ZO REUNIFICATION ORGANISATION (ZORO)

Political Background : Before the British Colonisation, the ZO race remained undistrubed and enjoy her Fundamental freemdom and no foreigner dominated the ZO country and the ZO inhabitants therein. But after the British Coloniser ruled over India for a hundred years and Burma for fifty years; they also started invading the ZO country from different corners and atlast, the Britsh also subjugated the ZO people and devided the country with the people living therein into three different segments. Eastern ZO country was kept under Burmese Administration, Western ZO country under Bengal and central and northern parts under Assam, in 1890.

Siar bet