This is the text of my talk at the International Conference on the Importance of Early Indian Cultural Heritage in the Making of a Better World organized jointly by the Indian Museum, Kolkata and the North American Institute of Oriental and Classical Studies, USA.

The text follows:

कुछ बात है कि हस्ती मिटती नहीं हमारी – there must be a reason that keeps us from perishing – this is what Allama Iqbal had to say about the Indian Cultural Heritage! And believe me the reason that keeps us from perishing also holds the key to a better world!

Namaste – as I greet you with this word, I may also like to remind you of its meaning. Namaste is composed of namah and te, उसे प्रणाम. I bow not to you, but to the merits in you; I bow not to you, but to the virtues in you. Each and every one of us possesses some virtue. To identify with that virtue and respect it more than the physical appearance is perhaps the core to our culture – the Indian Culture!

I am neither an academician, nor a historian as my other able friends here, but then my thoughts do not come from some books, but straight from the life itself. I may not have much to say, but I certainly have too much to share with you all.

Religious intolerance is as bad as human insanity; and yet religious intolerance is part and parcel of every religion. As soon as a religion is launched, religious intolerance follows. This may be manifested in the form of riots at the worst or as a hostile so-called cultural statement in the form of iconoclasm. Remarkably, whereas riot usually irrupts as animosity between different religions, iconoclasm is often generated because of frictions between different sects within the same religion.

Intolerance breeds injustice; Injustice leads to rebellion and retaliation; and these in turn make reconciliation almost impossible. During times of stress, despair and frustration, people become increasingly irrational, and act inhumanly. Because of the rising conflicts, today, the world is a crumbling place. The radical Muslims and non-Muslims have been at war with each-other in Afghanistan; Christians and Muslims have been at loggerheads in Bosnia, Cyprus, Timor and Indonesia; Shiite and Sunni Muslims have been engaged with each-other in Iraq and Pakistan; Hindus and Muslims are pitched against each-other in India; Jews, Muslims and Christians want an eye for an eye in the Middle East; Wahhabi and Sufi Muslims are fighting with each-other in Somalia; Buddhists and Hindus are at conflicts with one-another in Sri Lanka; Buddhists are struggling with the Communists in China; Uganda, Thailand, Russia, Chechnya, Kosovo, Macedonia, Northern Ireland, South Africa, Sudan and Nigeria are all burning with rage… a rage out to engulf the very human system.

The question is – where do we look for solution?

That takes me to the subject of today’s deliberations: Importance of Early Indian Cultural Heritage in the Making of a Better World.

Yet, here I would not like to discuss about Devanampriya Priyadarshi Ashoka and his attempts at establishing the Reign of Dhamma; nor would I like to speak about Akbar and his secular vision Deen-e-Illahi; I would not even talk about the Golden Age of Indian History, the Gupta Period. Much has been talked about these wonderful eras in history. Instead, I would like to draw your attention towards two icons developed during the Pala period, that of Trilok Vijay and Aparajita, meaning the Conqueror of the Three Worlds and the Invincible respectively. It can easily be guessed that both these name are more of an adjective than noun. Why would a deity be called the Conqueror of the Three Worlds or the One who cannot be Conquered? Looking closely at the two figurines kept in the Patna Museum, we find that the idols in question point towards some of the gory religious conflicts of the times.

The Pala era can be considered as one of the most prosperous periods in Indian Art during which the universities of Nalanda and Vikramshila attained their zenith; and yet the early Pala period was faced with a simmering discord between the Shaivites and the Buddhists. It is a well known fact that after Harshvardhan, Buddhism was faced with the possibility of extinction, but the Pala kings emerged as the champions of Buddhism and patronized the Mahayana sect. The two icons I previously referred to are creations of this very Mahayana order.

It is not only that the two names – Trilok Vijay and Aparajita – reflect ostentation, but their exterior too is provocative. Both these idols have armors in their arms and garland of scull around their necks. While Trilok Vijay is seen stamping his foot on Hindu Goddess Saraswati, Aparajita is seen with Hindu God Ganesh beneath her foot. Remarkably, one of them is the consort of Lord Bramha, and the other is the son of Lord Shiva.

In yet another reference to Aparajita, Janice Leoshko writes: In this late ninth century sculpture of the Buddha in bhumisparsamudra, two females appear on the base. One, as in the previous examples, kneels and holds a pot aloft with one hand, while the other hand is raised. The second female in the Kurkihar work assumes the half crouching pose and hand gestures seen in the ninth century Bodhgaya sculpture. But now the figure of Ganesa appears beneath her feet. And so here the second female could be identified as Aparajita. (“The Case of the Two Witnesses to the Buddha’s Enlightenment” contained in ‘A PotPourri of Indian Art’ edited by Pratapaditya Pal)

I have yet to see the idol described by Ms. Leoshko, but the one I referred to earlier that is housed in the Patna Museum is not a subsidiary figure carved at the base, but it is the principal figure that in fact itself stands on the base. Likewise the idol of Trilok Vijay too is a standalone figure. Needless to say that these icons are religious intolerance personified.

It may be recalled that the era in question, that is, the Early Pala Period was marked by communal tension in which the Buddhists were more aggressive than ever before. Shaivism being the most powerful and dominant cult at that time, the Buddhists were in direct conflicts with Shaivites. On the other hand, the cult of Bramha, a part of the Hindu trinity, had faded, whereas Vaishnavism was still in its adolescence. Perhaps the Buddhists thought it easier to weaken Shaivism rather than strengthening themselves. Thus, they chose the path of offence. For this they adopted myths as means and hence the icons of Aparajita or Trilok Vijay were developed. Instead of harnessing their own potentials, they sought to shake up the faith of their detractors by portraying their deities as inferiors to their own Gods.

While the Buddhists prepared to take Shaivites head-on, they also tried to stretch their hands towards the Vaishnavites. Whichever sect may have initiated this, but there was definitely an attempt to knit closer ties between the Buddhists and the Vaishavites that found expression in the establishment of Buddha as an incarnation of Vishnu. Though it may have been a common stand of the two seemingly feeble sects, but its ultimate beneficiaries were the Vaishnavites and not the Buddhists.

In my personal opinion, the Vaishnavites could succeed because they did not adopt the path of offence, but thrived on the path of confluence instead, while trying to develop their own possibilities from within. I may not be wrong to say that the basis of any civilization and culture is concordance and not conflict and so the myth of Vishnu incarnate Buddha sustains, while that of Aparajita or Trilok Vijay perished. It is a pity that the hard-liners of various religions – be they Kar Sevaks or Talibans – have not learnt any lesson from these instances.

With this I am reminded of the savage and barbaric act of the Taliban regime in which not one or two, but hundreds of idols, including the two largest Standing Bamiyan Buddha images, were either smashed by axes and hammers or crushed by rockets and tanks. It is not that the Taliban regime was unaware about its obligations towards the cultural heritage, yet it chose to disregard it for what it termed as ‘its duty as a True Muslim’. In its spate of madness, the Taliban regime did not even heed to the Iranian offer to buy the statues and take these to Iran for safe-keeping. Instead of being ashamed, it in fact took pride in the fact that it was continuing with the implementation of its edict despite the global outcry against it! Its then Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil justified the senseless decree saying: Islam is against keeping statues and hence the order to destroy these.

Obviously it was not the first time that the world witnessed such acts of religious intolerance. Back in India, we too witnessed such insanity when a large number of so-called kar sevaks demolished the Babri Masjid brick by brick. From the debris of the gigantic monolith of Bamiyan Buddha and the Babri Masjid emerge various issues concerning protection of cultural relics as well as religious intolerance. No amount of rhyme and reason can corroborate these acts as sane or humane. I am also drawn towards a few core issues that have surfaced from the rubbles of these unfortunate structures.

First, were these Buddha Idols destined to meet their fate because they stood on a land that was then ruled by staunch Muslims? Could these have been saved had they been stolen or smuggled out from Afghanistan before they met their fate? As the Taliban tried to stretch their regime beyond time, what if they try to stretch it past the space, to places where remains of Gandhara Art – of which the two Bamiyan Buddha were a part – are housed? Being the rulers of Afghanistan if the Taliban could not tolerate idols in their kingdom, being Muslims would they tolerate idols in other parts of the globe? What if every individual, in his or her capacity, takes on himself or herself the onus of eliminating the icons that he or she considers to be against his or her religious belief? If every subsequent ruler decides to eliminate the cultural relics of its predecessor, what will remain of the world heritage? If these primitive traits persist, could a common heritage of mankind be ever evolved? Do not the concerns that relate to the Buddha Idols, relate to the Babri Masjid as well? How can we differentiate between the conducts of Babur who is said to have demolished the Rama Temple to build a mosque at Ayodhya and that of the Kar Sevaks who demolished the mosque hundreds of years later? As the Taliban exhibited scant regards for people of a different religion, so did the Kar Sevaks. Perhaps there is not even a thin line that separates the kar sevaks from the Taliban!

In context of the Ayodhya dispute, it is often argued that this issue is more of feeling than of reasons; and thus it would be improper to test it on the touchstone of history. Dharma does not raise doubts, but demand faith. The publishers of these arguments will acknowledge the fact that to make the abstruse elements of religion easy to understand, we create myth. It is the myth that elevates the status of River Ganges from a body of streaming water to that of the Mother or Goddess. Even if contaminated, it remains sacred and pious as faith of millions of people is attached to it. Likewise it is the myth that elevates Rama from a mere ruler to that of the Maryada Purshottam. But then, can a myth, however strong, remain to be accepted even though it aggravates segregation?

The Taliban or the Kar Sevaks should have learnt a lesson from the Trilok Vijay and Aparajita experience. Sustainability comes from acceptability. How can there be  acceptability, when there is conflict? Let us also face the fact, the past cannot be undone. In trying to undo the past, we unsettle the future too! The Indian Civilization is accommodative and so it survives; the Indian Culture is adaptive and so it sustains. यह बात है कि हस्ती मिटती नहीं हमारी – this is the very reason that keeps us from perishing.

While addressing the World Congress of Religion at Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda had not said anything new. What he said has been in the chants for thousands of years. If his address to the august gathering as the Sisters and Brothers of America was greeted with a three minutes standing ovation from the audience of 7000, it was because this was new to them. The Indian Civilization has always believed in the fraternity of beings; The Indian Culture has always believed in the equality of beings; वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम – that has been our mantra since ages.

अहम् ब्रह्म अस्मि – this has been our teaching to the world – I am what you are; you are what I am. Thus where is the scope for conflict? Unfortunately, today the world thinks differently – I am what I am; You are what you are! And thus the conflict.

A broad mind, an enlightened vision and an open heart is what can make the world, a Better World!

As I end my talk, my imaginations are drawn towards the battle field of Kurushetra, and I am reminded of the first chapter of Bhagvad Gita, in which Sri Krishna had listened to Arjuna with deep understanding and passion till Arjuna had nothing more to say and he went on to take the back seat of the chariot. You all have been Sri Krishna to me as you listened to what I had to say with such patience. For this I am indebted to you. Thank you all!