Author: Hafizur Rahman
Publication: Dawn
Date: February 12, 2003
URL: http://www.dawn.com/2003/02/12/op.htm#4
The interplay of the various cultures
of the world, their interaction and how they overlap, making it impossible
sometimes to draw the dividing line between them, has always been a fascinating
subject.
Now its tones and overtones are
also contributing to the common modern belief about the world being a global
village. Of course a universal culture for the entire globe is far away,
and may never materialise.
An accident some years ago connected
with the Sphinx near Cairo has given rise to a new controversy about the
cultural possessions of countries such as monuments and antiquities. The
controversy is whether the proper maintenance, repair and upkeep of an
antiquity is the exclusive responsibility of the country owning it or a
collective responsibility of the entire civilized world interested in culture.
The accident was that two large
chunks of limestone had fallen off the right shoulder of the Sphinx, the
66-foot high and 230 feet long man-cum-lion recumbent statue built in approximately
2600 BC. The accident claimed one human victim - the director of Egypt's
antiquities who lost his job because of it. Behind the dismissal was a
dispute between him and the minister concerned. He wanted Egyptian workers
to repair the damage, while the minister was all for associating foreign
experts in the job.
I read a report from Cairo some
days ago that the damage of ten years ago had been repaired to everyone's
satisfaction. However, as if to revive an old controversy, one foreign
expert did express the view that Egypt's antiquities belong to the whole
world, "because they are so ancient and so beautiful", and that damage
to any of them was a universal loss and not that of Egypt alone. I wish
somebody would say the same about our neglected historical monuments!
It sometimes happens that a monument
or a cultural relic has no emotional appeal for the people of the country
where it is located. We have an example in Pakistan. Moenjodaro and Gandhara
are disowned by some of us simply because they have nothing to do with
Muslims. Although it is worthwhile remembering that most of us (those few
whose ancestors did not come from Central Asia of the Middle East) are
the descendants of those non-Muslims.
For such people these ruins and
priceless antiquities may be just a meaningless collection of brick and
mortar furnishing them no pride and no inspiration. On the other hand there
is no doubt that to the rest of the civilized world their value is beyond
computation. According to these outsiders, their mere location in Pakistan
should be a matter of gratification and self-esteem for us.
Egyptians suffer from no such inhibition.
Muslims form 90 per cent of the population of Egypt. For them, too, the
pyramids, the Sphinx, the temples of Luxor and Abu Simbal and other magnificent
edifices should have no emotional appeal. But it is not so. Without detracting
from their devotion to Islam, the Muslims of that country take pride in
their pre-Islamic past and do not regard the people of the time of the
pharaohs as different from themselves. In their view, Islam is a part of
their total cultural wealth and they see no reason to distance themselves
from their ancient heritage.
But when Moenjodaro and Gandhara
are talked about, foreign lovers of antiquities would be justified in saying
that Pakistanis are not bothered about what happens to them. Therefore
it is good that UNESCO has taken upon itself the task of ensuring their
protection because they are of such great archaeological and anthropological
value to world cultural experts.
The concept that I have mentioned
above is very broad and laudable. In fact it should be the precursor of
a wider and more universal view of matters in which more than one country,
and sometimes the whole world, is interested. Another fitting example in
this context is the Taj Mahal. It lies in a country that is unfriendly
towards us but we consider that monument almost as a shrine and a part
of our heritage.
Let me add that the most ardent
desire of every Pakistani is to see the Taj Mahal. Indians also want to
see it, but for a different reason. For them it is just a beautiful building
which hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world come to see
every year. For us it is the finest example of the architecture left by
the Mughals who are the symbol of Muslim rule in the subcontinent.
Not only this. The Taj has another
aspect. The majority community in India may be emotionally indifferent
towards it but some sort of complex and collective jealousy pervades its
attitude towards the mausoleum. Some bigoted Hindus have tried to show
that it is in fact a Hindu building. The claim is too absurd for comment
but it serves to highlight the sharp cleavage in the psyches of the Hindus
and Muslims and underlines the influence of faith on the cultural thoughts
and practices of people.
The present state of the progress
and development of man is not due to the efforts of the West alone, which,
admittedly, is technologically and materially the most advanced. The sum
of human civilisation is the result of contributions from all corners of
the globe, howsoever backward the peoples of these remote places may seem
to be today.
That is why the so-called advanced
people of the West can never be forgiven for what they did in the past
to the indigenously developed cultures of the countries they invaded and
looted. The Inca civilisation of Central America is the most glaring example.
Not a trace, except some stone structures, was left of it by Spanish marauders
moved by a misplaced religious zeal. I can never forget a painting in which
Spanish soldiers are killing Inca princes while a priest holding a large
crucifix goads them on.
On a lower plane hardly anything
remains of the distinctive way of life of the original inhabitants of the
United States called Red Indians. In Australia the aborigines are crying
that whatever the state of their community life, the conquering whites
had no moral right to impose their own religion and the European way of
life on them.
The concept that culture and its
manifestations - antiquities above all - are a common heritage of entire
mankind deserves to be adopted international, for it can bring about tolerance
and a feeling of universal brotherhood. These are attributes that are most
needed in this strife-torn world.
