SUDHARSHAN SENEVIRATNE
Professor of Archaeology
University of Peradeniya
Sri Lank

*VESAK COMMEMORATION LECTURE. KATMANDU 28TH MAY 2007 EMBASSY OF SRI LANKA

“The foothill of Himalaya,

Inhabited by Kosalans

Whose race is named after the Sun

Whose lineage is Shakyan”

“At a Shakyan city in the land of Lumbini

A being to be enlightened, a priceless jewel,

Is born in this world of men for welfare and weal;

Because of that we are extravagantly gay.

The Unique Being, the Personality Sublime,

The Lord of all men and Foremost among mankind,

Will turn the Wheel in the Grove of the Ancient Seers

With the roar of the Lion, the monarch of all beasts”

(Samuytta Nikaya III. i, III. ii)

Thus I pay homage to an exalted son of Nepal – Shakyaputta Gautama Buddha, the compassionate one endowed with perfect wisdom, who gifted to humanity the doctrine of dialectics and analysis – to be self-realized and attained by the wise, here and now, each for himself.

Some thirty five years ago a youth who was seeking the roots of his own intellectual culture undertook a pilgrimage to Lumbini, or ancient Rumindai known to the Asokan edicts. He journeyed along the ancient route traversing the Ganga valley and entered the fertile Terai. A stranger he was not to the landscape shaded with green paddy fields or to the people who greeted him with a gentle smile. His own culture had introduced him to Tathagata or ‘the Perfect One’ who was born in a beautiful grove at Rumindai in a far off land to one queen Maya. The prince, who was named Siddhartha or “the one who achieves his goal”, was to gift to the world the message of loving kindness, peace, contentment and seeing things in their true perspective! Siddhartha’s doctrine shaped the culture and thinking of this youth who was now excited at the prospect of reaching and touching the hallowed ground where the illustrious teacher first saw the light of this world. Finally having reached Rumindai under a canopy of stars he rested embracing exuberant thoughts of his own encounter with Siddhartha. At dawn he stepped out of the lodge and then – time stood still!

What visually greeted me thirty five years ago that morning is imprinted in my memory never to be forgotten! Colors of all shades merged with the dawn sky depicting a vast emerald sea. The green hue from the paddy fields touched color purple seeping into the blue horizon of the misty mountains and reaching out to the majestic sun bathed snow capped mountain of gold that glittered and released rainbow colors in all directions. Was this symbolic of the dhamma of Shakyaputta, son of Suddhodana and Maya that reached the wider world? Or was this Siddhartha’s own way of reaching out and providing me with a visual beacon that would entrance me to return to this land – his place of birth! This must be the center of the Universe I thought, where the Great Mount Sumeru majestically occupied its epi-centre. The whole saga of Siddhartha’s birth unfolded before me. The dream of queen Maya, collection of water from lake Anavatatta, the procession to her parents’ home and finally the birth of Siddhartha. This was spiritual and cultural connectivity at its best.

Distinguished members of the learned audience, it gives me immense pleasure to situate myself in the beautiful valley of Katmandu and unfold a discourse on peace to your cultured minds. Quite fittingly I am performing this valued task at the Wesak Commemoration Lecture. You are very much the inheritors of a culture that is so vibrantly enriched by the social philosophies of Buddhism and Brahmanism and also by both indigenous and shared values. This is indeed a tribute to the remarkable synthesis that has been achieved in Nepal between the two related but divergent value systems. As South Asians we are in more than one way shareholders to a common heritage situated in time and space. We in Sri Lanka have been inspired by the message of  peace that emanated from this land, not only in terms of its sublime message of cultivating the supreme humane personality but also as a social philosophy that released dynamics of an expressive higher culture in art, sculpture, architecture and literature. To me this connectivity also has greater personal value. I therefore wish to thank Excellency Sumith Nakandala, the Government of Nepal and the Nepal – Sri Lanka fraternity for bestowing upon me with this rare honor of celebrating our connectivity.

Today I retrace my steps to relive that memory. This is also the cultural and spiritual map of Nepal imprinted in my memory. To the residents of the island of Sri Lanka, known as Tambapanni in the Ashokan edicts, this memory passed down from generation to generation for over two thousand five hundred years. The story of the Shakya, Koliya and Malla clans, cities such as Kapilavattu and Medalumpa, the village of Samagama, beautiful flower and fruit groves Lumbini, Nigrodha and Anupiya – all associated with the life of the Buddha are known to us and is very much part of our cultural ethos as well. Connecting that past with the present are my students from Nepal who are following their undergraduate and postgraduate courses in Archaeology at the World Heritage sites in Sri Lanka. We must recognize and celebrate these elements of our shared heritage lending connectivity to the poles of South Asia!

Celebrating Lakshman Kadirgamar

As a prelude to my discourse, I wish to dedicate this talk to the memory of the late Lakshaman Kadirgamar, one of the most revered statesmen of Sri Lanka and certainly the most brilliant Foreign Minister we had since Independence. As his Senior Cultural Advisor, I had the privilege of working with Kadirgamar on cultural diplomacy often in association with Excellency Nakandala. The following excerpts are from an appreciation I composed celebrating Kadirgamar’s memory soon after his execution by terrorists. The words I record here have direct relevance to our discourse on conflict resolution.

“Since the glow of Lakshman Kadirgamar’s life and thoughts were extinguished from its existence my mind refused to come to terms with that tragedy. The image of Lakshman reached out to me in an anguished cry thrusting me into the tortured history of an island society in search of its precarious existence in the Post Colonial period. Along with him there are many others who sacrificed their gentle breath of life so that humanity may perpetuate the meaning of its valued existence. His death was a tragedy inherent in the dialectical contradiction of a liberation movement transforming itself into totalitarianism and he died challenging those very forces of social fascism. Living images of Richard Zoysa, Neelan Tiruchelvam and Rajini Tiranagama unfolded the pathetic narration of a society increasingly brutalized with each decade. They depicted senseless dehumanized acts of depravation unleashed on fellow humans in the name of ‘good governance, social justice, nationalism and patriotism’.

As much as I am nurtured in a culture that taught me the nature of impermanence of mind and matter, the thought of death at that moment was not only revolting, it was unacceptable! His final rite was also the Swan Song of yet another son of Mother Lanka who did not compromise her independence, dignity and territorial integrity. That evening I cursed the cruel flames impatiently waiting to embrace a patriot who had developed a poetic love for this land and its people.

Kadirgamar shaped his thinking in response to existing socio-political realities, be it questioning the hegemony of the Western culture as President of the Oxford Union in England or as a senior statesman in Sri Lanka challenging the social fascist hegemony of terrorism. The Sri Lankan society to him was not a complex one. His worldview was quite uncomplicated. Every one of its citizens had a right to live in dignity within this island and no one could deprive another of that sacred right. His philosophy of life, political philosophy and cultural philosophy, both, as a Sri Lankan and as an uncompromising internationalist, derived from this simple axiom. His respect for all religions, languages and cultures expressed in numerous eloquent speeches was a way of life for Kadirgamar through absolute conviction of his belief that while taking pride in his or her culture one must celebrate and respect other cultures. Respect for diversity was his norm.

He vehemently denounced any tribal and parochial labels as his identity. The Sri Lankan identity enriched by a three thousand years old multi cultural ethos shaped his intellectual personality celebrating diversity. A liberal to the core, who nurtured the best of democratic norms, Kadirgamar opposed right down to the wire any centrifugal forces threatening the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka thereby depriving this island society of its inclusiveness. Being a man of reason he also pleaded to look into the causes that give rise to dissent but cautioned us not to play footsy with terrorism.

To me, after Ananada Coomaraswamy, Kadirgamar epitomized the best qualities of Classical Sri Lankan culture blended with the highest cultural norms of modernity of the Internationalist. Our relationship with him celebrated a higher essence of life and culture. It was a precious living memory of a loving friend who cared; who worked with us but never imposed himself on us. It was an association of quality that humbled a University Professor.

No one has the right to deprive any society of such an elegantly accomplished individual who believed in the beauty of all encompassing culture of human dignity. Kadirgamar’s memory and ideals will be a permanent beacon to all those who value quality of life and the culture of dignified humane aspirations” (Seneviratne 2005).

II

Conflict – a retrospective historical perspective

I wish to dwell deeper into our discourse with an opening remark by Romila Thapar. “In a seemingly contradictory way, looking into the future requires an understanding of the past. Such an understanding can illumine the present and enable one to think more meaningfully about the future” (2004:9). It was popularly held that the past determines the way we view the present. Conversely, it is now evident that the present also shapes how we view the past (Blakey 1990:38). This is dialectics for you. The above statements may be drawn into our discourse in two dimensions.

• Firstly, there is a need to understand the historical process of conflict in human society with special reference to South Asia.
• Secondly, there is also the need to situate conflict in modern South Asia within an alternative perspective.

Conflict is understood as competitive or opposing action of incompatibles expressed through physical or mental struggle arising from discord. Two other conditions synonymous with conflict are competition and marginalization. The nature of conflict is not a static factor either. It changes its form and content during different techno-cultural epochs. Conflict in Pre Historic communities seems to have arisen largely from competition for territoriality – the space that provided the habitat and sustainable resources for subsistence. Neolithic communities, who domesticated plants and animals and founded the earliest villages, accumulated resources in their fortified settlements. West Asian and South Asian archaeological sites also indicate destructive ends to village sites. Cattle raids become a dominant feature in the political-economy leading to new forms resource accumulation, leadership, control and social differentiation through competition what Marx and Engels some what crudely called Communal, a situation later explained more lucidly with sound material evidence by Gordon Child. Interestingly enough, in the Agganna Sutta the Buddha attributes the origin of conflict to the forcible removal of grain harvested. Accumulation of surplus grain has been highlighted as a factor leading to social tension in this sutta.

Conflicts become much sharper with the emergence of the metal age. The use of bronze and later iron not only provided a new production technology but a technology that carried striking power and from it social control. The beginning of civilization witnesses the establishment of fortified urban centers, the early state and social stratification, demographic shifts triggering-off migrations and/or the displacement of communities, new production relations and the emergence of slave labor, private property, standing armies, money economy the rise of temples and organized religion. These were very much part of the conflict ethos either creating conflict and marginalization or regulating disruptive social stresses, either by force or through political and religious ideologies. Each civilization deified war and each of them had their dedicated god of war such as, Ares in Greece, Mars in Rome, Skanda in North India and Murukan in South India to name a few.

First millennium BC South Asia had pastoral communities unleashing conflicts in an effort to accumulate cattle wealth as described in the Vedic and Sangam literature. If this is considered to be the horizontal dynamic, the vertical dynamic is seen in the process of marginalization. “It is evident that we-they dichotomy did appear in these societies along with processes of marginalization. The concept of the ‘other’ was primarily based on technology, speech, lineage and affiliations with exploitable resource zones identified as ‘territory’” (Seneviratne 2006). In fact kinship and language identities demarcated the Barbarian or the ‘other’ in these societies. Romila Thapar illustrates how early Sanskrit texts structured early division as Arya-varna and Dasa-varna and used the word mleccha to describe the barbarian who spoke mrd-vac (or an alien language) and later (5^th Century AC) Pali texts use the word milakka referring to Andhra and Tamil people among others (1979:152-192).

With the introduction of iron a different dimension in conflict arose in early societies. The Mahabharata represents the conflict and competition between lineage-based territorial groups of the pristine state for resources and fertile tracts in the upper Ganga valley. The underlying message in the Ramayana is the justification provided for encroachments made by the iron-using Indo-Aryan speakers on resource-areas held by non urban societies of a different cultural milieu in the Middle Ganga and central Indian regions. The Tamil Sangam texts describe intense conflict between lineage groups where the fallen hero is lauded as a cult figure in poetic form.

Conflict, social tension and processes of marginalization increased its tempo during the Early Historic period (C 6^th Century BC), popularly known as the Janapada Period, which also coincides with the emergence of Buddhism. “Buddhism and other movements of dissent originated within a society that was undergoing tremendous change. Pre existing social, economic and political relationships were redefined and conclusively altered. Social values of pre urban communities were replaced by impersonal relationships of the new class-based society that essentially functioned within a new production – distribution system.

The effort to secure political, social and economic hegemony resulted in tensions and it consequently unleashed destructive confrontations among lineage societies (e.g. Vajji, Shakya, Koliya) and nascent kingdoms (Magadha, Kosala etc). The life story of the Buddha narrated in the Pali Canon; provides a graphic picture of social tragedies, conflicts within families, between villages and political entities. The Shakya and Koliya clans confronted each other over the sharing of waters of river Rohini. The Mahaparinibbana sutta provides us with insights on the war between the kingdom of Magadha and Vajji republic, which was based on economic interest and a confrontation between two systems of governance. It is possible that some of their descendents may have founded the later dynasty of Lichchavis in Nepal. During Buddha’s life time his kinsmen were annihilated by Vidudhabha, the monarch of Kosala. We also hear of marginalized groups such as cleaners, hunters, pastoral communities, barbers and also instances when people fled from the military, cities, villages and even craft guilds due to oppressive conditions.

Some three centuries later with the rise of the empire system conflict reached even a higher plane. The inscriptions of Ashoka provide a clear insight on the wars of destruction to life and property. Reading the Arthashastra is educative on the levels of control and tensions that prevailed at different levels in society and polity. The list is unending as the nature of conflict and marginalization takes different forms through the period of the Land-Grant Economy (popularly known as the Feudal Period). To this one may also add waves of invasions during different periods into different cultures in South Asia and the nature of conflict inherent in such situations. These ranged from new political systems, new forms of religious icons, language and other cultural elements etc. including processes of marginalization of the conquered that were imposed from above by the invader that had conflicting interests with pre existing customs and institutions.

Resolving Conflicts in Antiquity

Resolving conflict is not a novel concept to pre modern societies. It is my personal and professional view that we need not be educated by the west on the nature of conflict and the modalities of neutralizing conflict. Our cultures had evolved in-built safety mechanisms resolving tensions and stress points in society as a survival strategy. In fact one of the earliest instances of a social contract, reflecting people to people connectivity, is attributed to this country. The Agganna sutta describes how the people, oppressed by conflict, elected an individual who was called Mahasammata (‘the great elect’) as ruler to settle disputes. Mahasammata was expected to maintain peace and equilibrium in society through the laws of Dhamma or righteousness. Pali chronicles of Sri Lanka identify Mahasammata as the lineage ancestor of the Okkakavamsa from whom the Shakyans are said to have descended!

Interesting to note in this context is the in-built concepts of accountability, transparency and good governance that are inherent in the norms worked out by society, be it from above or from below. With the emergence of the advance state developing into empire systems, Buddhist texts highlight the concept of the Universal King or Chakkavatti raja. The Chakkavatti Sihanada sutta and Mahasudassana sutta, credit the universal king as the person responsible for duties and obligations not only towards the subjects but also for the total environment of his domain assuring his responsibility to maintain quality of life. The king agrees to uphold the code of conduct prescribed to the ruler known as dasa raja dhamma. Thus society and its habitat are considered integral components. This is repeated in the popular Buddhist invocation as:

Devo vassatu kalena May there be rains at the right season

Sassasampatti hotu ca May there be a plentiful harvest

Pito bhavatu loko ca May the people be happy

Raja bhavatu dammiko May the rulers govern with righteousness

Movements of dissent emerged in response to growing levels of internal conflict. Responses to conflicts, alienation and marginalization occurred in different forms. Often individuals opted out of the system and carved out alternative spaces. The forest tracts (aranya) became the alternate habitat juxtaposed to the city, stratified society and the state for those who went from a house holding to a houseless state to become wandering ascetics or the shramana and paribrajaka. It was they who triggered off the brilliant intellectual discourse on conflict resolution of the mind and society of the C. 6^th Century BC Middle Ganga valley.

Siddhartha Gautama unfolded a people friendly movement for this purpose. The creation of the order of bikkhu, also known as sangha or gana, was to resolve conflict at the group level. The guiding norm of this people to people connectivity was his instructions to the sangha in the following words. “Charatabikkhave charikam bahujana sukhaya lokanukampaya atthaya hitaya devamanussanam..” (Mvg. I.ii.I). In translation it implies the sangha must wander among the people and spread the dhamma for the betterment for the people and the deities. Inner democratic norms were constituted according to the traditions of the Vajji republic so as to avoid conflicts within the sangha.

At the individual level one had to be accountable for ones own acts, to ones own self and to society in order to curtail conflict. The five precepts (or panchasheela) where one resolves to abstain from – destroying life, taking things not given, sexual misconduct, false speech and intoxicant drinks are basic tenants of ethical conduct that do not disturb society. Lay ethics   pronounced by the Buddha in the Sigalovada sutta, Parabhava sutta, Dhammika sutta, Mahamangala sutta to mention a few, clearly prescribe the duties and obligation of an individual towards his or her immediate family, society, servants and slaves, teachers, holy people and even the state. Perhaps one of the best examples of concord and amicable behavior neutralizing tension and conflict is know as the seven factors preventing decline (sapta aparihaniya dhamma) prescribed by the Buddha in the Mahaparinibbana sutta. The Lichchhavi of Vaishali were instructed by the Buddha that as long as they assemble in concord, rise in concord, continue time tested traditions, respect elders, respect women, respect places of worship, and respect the clergy they shall continue to prosper in unity and not decline. It is recorded that the ministers of Ajatasattu of Magadha took note of this and created dissension and conflict among the Vajji before they were finally subjugated.

Significantly enough, early historic texts such as the Kautilya Arthshastra and Manu Dharmashastra prescribe norms of behavior imposed from above on easing situations of conflict. Drawing inspiration from the code of conduct prescribed in religious teachings, mainly Buddhism, Ashoka Maurya developed his own brand of conflict resolution through Ashoka Dhamma. This was his royal pronouncement of easing tensions following a series of brutal and repressive wars within an empire that covered a vast physical expanse housing communities at different levels of social, economic and technological development.

III

Situating the discourse

This backdrop provides my entrée to the topic of our discourse – the relevance of people to people connectivity and alternative systems of conflict resolution. Is this just rhetoric or are ground realities demanding rethinking on the part of thinking people? I shall largely confide myself to Sri Lanka in terms case studies. You Ladies and Gentlemen are intelligent and cultured enough to make the connections.

For centuries the rich cultural personality of South Asian countries were nurtured through cross-cultural interactions. It is ironic that during the advanced period of ‘print capitalism’ (after Benedict Anderson) sustaining distance contraction, we have constructed vertically arranged ethno-national compartments. As Eric Wolf points out, one nation or culture cannot be studied in isolation because “human populations construct their cultures in interaction with one another” (1982: ix). Even the Diaspora does not form an isolated entity.  One of the critical challenges we face in South Asia is bridging national, religious and cosmopolitan identities with a futuristic vision.

South Asia is not a-historical but a historically evolved region drawing its ‘identity consciousness’ from the rich heritage found in the classical literary texts and inscriptions, the sculptured art, architecture and from its extensive oral historical tradition. We in South Asia are nurtured within legacy of a shared heritage for over three thousand years. Its ethos is a classic representation of diversity and commonalities. Our heritage is essentially inclusive and not exclusive. The shared heritage of the people of South Asia is a key to understanding that diversity, which is the factor of commonality in our society. Compartmentalization of our society was a legacy of the Colonial rule where ‘imagined’ racial categories, mythic martial races along with policies of divide and rule formed the basis for multiple dichotomies in South Asia. The Post Colonial period witnessed the continuation of such dichotomies resulting in a sharper polarization and marginalization of communities through imagined categories introduced from above.

For years various groups and policy makers attempted to arrive at different formulas and processes seeking that illusive ‘peace’. Ironically enough peace initiatives have less involvement of the people, academics, artists and other social activists and are more the purview of policy makers, bureaucrats and politicians. In all their imagined wisdom they pronounced the basis, modalities and the execution of the ‘peace initiatives’ and peace processes that were inevitably doomed to failure. The people, academics, artists etc. who are primary stake-holders in society were but by-standers watching the ‘unmaking of history’ through peace imposed from above. It is a process that must be embraced, cultivated, expressed and sustained by people and not by unimaginative decision-makers in society.

The discourse takes up specific areas that go beyond the narrow confines of hacked politics and administrative issues. The focus has to be on heritage, as an area of refinement that was never grasped by the crass minds of dull-witted policy makers. Heritage in this discourse is to be considered as a multifaceted catalyst. Heritage in the main is viewed as a source of people to people connectivity in conflict resolution. It seeks to understand the Pre Colonial heritage and question exclusiveness against inclusiveness; grassroots level peoples’ connectivity cutting across ethnic, language, religious and political divides juxtaposed to divisions imposed from above by Colonialism and later by local decision-makers. It looks at heritage as an idiom that expresses a common language of humanity where people reach out to each other for understanding, sharing and co-existence.

In view of the apathy shown or ignorance displayed by national policy makers of the need to redefine heritage beyond parochialism, it then brings up the critical need to create an alternative space for a discourse leading to an alternate perspective for peace.  The critical need of the hour is a definitive paradigm shift where a new discourse within a newly created alternative space will be a benchmark for future peace initiatives and a new thought process by the next generation. This perhaps is the pluralist intellectual personality challenging exclusiveness of futuristic South Asia envisioned by Amarthya Sen in Argumentative India.

Redefining Heritage

Heritage is synonymous with inheritance, legacy, and tradition and custom. We seek to redefine heritage from a trajectory – culture, environment and knowledge – as its integral components providing it with a deeper construct. In my view the primary stake holder of heritage is the next generation and the process of disseminating heritage is education. It is not surprising that UNESCO has categories such as tangible and intangible heritage and it sponsors World Heritage Sites and promotes conventions on Diversity and Peace Education

Heritage therefore must be thrust beyond the narrow confines of culture per se. Culture undoubtedly is a product of human thought and action and it essentially reflects the achievements and refinements of any society. Firstly, culture does not evolve in a vacuum or in isolation. It is cross fertilized by other parallel cultures. Culture therefore is essentially shared. It represents the best of humane aspirations and connected destinies. It is in fact one of the best sources of understanding societies, their behavior and thinking patterns. Each community carries its own cultural personality while it shares many elements of other techno-cultural groups as well. Cultural diversity is a living reality and will continue to be so despite the overarching (and imagined) global culture imposed from above.

Secondly, Culture also does not stand alone. Culture and environment   essentially have a symbiotic relationship. This calls for an alternative understanding of the total cultural ecology or the interacting and symbiotic relationship between resident communities and the natural environment of their habitat. It is a process that ultimately determined the nature and level of social, economic, political and religio-cultural formations in pre Industrial societies. We have to recognize it as a discursive processes interacting with two or multiple systems in the formation of social systems on the one hand and cognitive aspects associated with such societies on the other.

Information on the culture-environment symbiosis shaping the thinking and behavior patterns in society be it in the past or present is transmitted to us through knowledge. In addition to traditional knowledge contemporary knowledge is embedded in each culture. We have gradually come to appreciate them as factors critical for the very existence and sustenance of the South Asian society in the coming decades. It is incumbent upon us, as concerned citizens of South Asia, to recognize the enormous complexities involved in the maximization and application of knowledge information in multi-cultural societies situated within altering patterns of globalization.

Redefining the vision of the futuristic role of education is one of the most central and challenging issues facing contemporary South Asian societies.  The crisis in education and its functional use conclusively emerged in the Post Colonial period. There is yet much soul-searching in Sri Lanka as to why several generations of Sinhala and Tamil speaking youth in Sri Lanka took up arms against the existing socio-political and economic system and sacrificed their lives to realize a dream of creating their own space and culture. Not only has our generation failed to come up with answers, we have miserably failed even to understand the problem. Our failure to find out timely solutions to this crisis has unleashed violent, anarchic and parochial responses from the next generation that is rapidly developing a bias towards social fascist and fundamentalist ideologies. The critical factor to be noted is that each individual from the next generation is a non-renewable resource.

Ironically enough, education is yet to be recognized as a valid factor in conflict resolution in South Asia. The negation of a liberal education in the Post Colonial Period is a major impediment that has produced a vertically divided society in this region. Reggie Siriwardena, a radical humanist, highlights this tragedy in the following words. “In the history of communal conflict in Sri Lanka especially in the last quarter of a century, education has been one of the principal battlegrounds.” Texts books became the ‘New Testament of Parochialism’, derailing any sense of aesthetic and intelligent appreciation of technological and cultural achievements of humanity as a whole.  Humanizing and democratizing education through the Liberal Arts is seen as a remedial strategy in the process of restructuring the future educational policy in multi cultural South Asia. It is seen as a process that will ultimately sustain an intellectually independent next generation of South Asians who will represent the best of humanistic traditions and values as citizens of the world. In view of this, the document on Peace Education propagated by UNESCO must receive serious cognizance by all organizations and individuals who desire a liberal and inclusive education for the next generation.

Structuring Conflict

This region therefore had its own tradition of grasping the essential dynamics of conflict and had evolved remedial strategies in dealing with such situations as well. While conflict did exist in pre modern societies, it is Colonialism that inducted entirely new forms of conflicts that had long term consequences running well into the post Colonial period. Imaging South Asia and its past in the Colonial mind directly contributed to the rise of new forms of conflicts based on identities which spilled over to other issues such as access or alienation from resources and decision-making process.

The past envisioned by the antiquarians and Orientalists under Colonialism was perpetuated by various groups of Nationalists, who read the past from their own ideological position as an anti thesis to Colonialism. This process had strong undertones of political legitimation based on ethno-linguistic, ethno-religious and ethno-cultural identities and they unobtrusively developed centrifugal forces at different levels. It is argued that in South Asia exclusionist nationalism tends to regard other cultures as subordinate and with an increasing tempo of intolerance (Thapar 2001:xix).

It is not surprising that the post Colonial generation viewed sectional ideologies as a consequence of identity based on religion, caste, language, ‘race’ or some other form of group affiliation and also as a natural process associated with the historical evolution of social systems in South Asia. Clearly the dominating features of this period are: economic alienation and the possibility of geo-political units being carved out on ethno-cultural or more specifically ‘racial’ lines. Such inverted sentiments are further compounded by internal readjustments demanded by those who wish for alternative political systems – such as social fascism, and externally through altered processes of globalization. It is correctly pointed out that “Current nationalisms – ethnic religious, linguistic – cannot be entirely isolated from globalization” (Thapar 2004:21). It is in this context one must understand the role of reading the past in contested identities and in legitimating social and political power. This is the ‘other’ picture of our shared fate in South Asia.

Towards an alternative dialogue: heritage and conflict resolution

The cultural landscape of South Asia essentially represents a habitat of multi-cultural and varied biological identities. In contemporary South Asia we possess ethnic, language, religious and religio-cultural diversity providing its regional society with multiple identities. To this, one may also add class, caste and gender variations that have an additional bearing on identities shaping the cosmopolitan cultural ethos of South Asia.  The critical question is the level of our commitment to the ethical aspect of respecting other cultures. This is all about sensitivity towards cultural identities and interaction among culturally diverse resident communities.

Contemporary States and others groups contending for state power have increasingly come to appreciate the functional value of symbols drawn from the past, especially in the construction of ‘national’ identities and ‘imagined’ political communities.  The above situation is real because archaeological and historical studies have been deeply involved in the nationalist enterprise since its inception. Evidently political uses of culture-related material or heritage from historical and archaeological sources are now applied with much sophistication and at an enhanced scale.

As professionals reading the past we have an obligation to study the heritage in the most scientific manner devoid of biases and prejudices.  The primary objective of the professionals reading the past is to place before public knowledge the manner in which we have come to inherit our heritage, with special reference to its shared nature and inclusiveness. Above all the professional archaeologist must rise above parochial thinking and situate archaeology as a science reading the past and also as a futuristic science.

It is now felt that, the young professionals must move on to the next phase of specialized studies and development. These entail broadening their out look, up grading of information, information exchange with professional colleagues (here and overseas) and develop a cross regional and cross cultural perspective. For this purpose a new generation of professionally skilled specialist archaeologists and heritage managers must be developed for heritage studies to be established as a skill based science.

Contraction of cultural spaces through globalization and the need to reorient the existing mindset from the narrow spectrum compartmentalized time, space and cultural rubric is an imperative. While South Asia celebrates a vibrant history of cultural pluralism and diversity, there is a tragic contradiction posed by conflicts triggered off on the basis of imagined racial lines. One of the most unfortunate features of such conflicts is the conscious and unconscious impact it has on educational policies, cultural resource management and the archaeological agenda in South Asia. Secondly, it also results in the destruction directed at cultural property by all participating groups. While Archaeology and history are subjects that are effectively used by all contending parties in conflicts where the past is subverted in creating imagined identities, conversely archaeology and heritage studies are perhaps the best avenues that could rectify the process of cultural plurality and demythifying all forms of parochialisms in a scientific manner and place alternative histories before the next generation for a better and rational understanding of the past. The mind set must be reoriented beyond the mono country and monoculture and be exposed to cross-regional and cross-cultural horizons.

All this calls for soul-searching exercise on the untold human misery caused by ethnic and other forms of conflict in the former Colonies and in Post Communist countries in Europe. It is the social responsibility of professionals and intellectuals with a humanistic social awareness to provide the society at large with an alternative strategy for social change and sustenance against destructive processes dislocating historically evolved social systems in South Asia or for that matter those found else where in the world. The ideoscape of presenting the heritage and the re-introduction of a liberal education in conflict resolution is suggested as an urgent remedial strategy as against the self-destructive path currently unfolding in our region.

Sri Lanka, and other South Asian countries are facing a grave threat of preserving its heritage conditioned by human created environmental problems, looting, war situations, natural disasters and threat to the tangible and intangible heritage introduced by ‘modernization’ and images of parochialism negating its cultural plurality. While there is a growing consciousness about the need to preserve our heritage for the next generation, there is yet some ambiguity as to what needs to be protected and the modalities of protecting cultural property.

In view of this, a convergence of all stakeholders – incorporating the general public, relevant officers of the state, private sector (banking and hospitality management sectors), school children, other professionals, clergy, and  international organizations – is seen as a logical necessity in this capacity building and awareness elevating exercise. Bringing the message home on UNESCO Charters to all stakeholders through discussions, the audio-visual medium, interactive programs and hands-on activities is seen as a positive pro-active method that would yield a long term spin off of shaping an inclusive society and an appreciation of cultural property as an endowment of humanity from the past to the present and future generations.

Therefore, as an alternative to the monologue with the past we now have to carry out a dialogue with the past and utilize education, environmental studies, archaeology and heritage studies as a major avenue of chartering a new road map in conflict resolution. The state, UNESCO and the public at large must come to terms of a partnership in relation to Heritage Sites. Unless and until we learn to present the past incorporating all communities as its stakeholders respecting their tangible and intangible heritage and develop an unbiased historical explanation of the past, it will only alienate different groups from the mainstream culture for different reasons. We have been able to carry this out at one level through the familiarization of the concept of shared cultures in our academic and field activities.  The primary target group in our effort therefore is the next generation, who are the primary stakeholders of the heritage. While they belong to different religious, language and ethnic denominations they essentially form the future leadership of heritage managers.

Our activities are carried out from the base at Jetavana, which is one of the segments within the Sacred City of Anuradhapura World Heritage Site and from the Department of Archaeology, University of Peradeniya. Following two decades of excavations and conservation, Jetavana is now ready for public presentation based on a new concept, vision and state-of-the-art techniques. It unveils a totally novel concept in the presentation of heritage sites in Sri Lanka known as the Public Participatory Interactive multi cultural Museum and Site Presentation. This idea signals a definitive paradigm shift in site presentation away from Orientalist-Antiquarianism and it introduces an alternate concept of Shared-Cultures representing the actual but somewhat less known personality of such World Heritage sites situated in multi-cultural societies.

Grasping the social archaeology is a vital factor in stating the rational for a shift in the paradigm of site presentation. The intangible cultural value is critical in establishing an identity to the site. It is identified as a place of religious observances that is entwined with sentiments of piety and dedicated expressions emotions. There are no complications in understanding Jetavana as a religious site. This site, which is primarily a Mahayana Buddhist site, has yielded several statues of Hindu deities. A Mahayana statue carries a 10^th Century AC Tamil inscription recording an endowment by a mercantile guild in south India. The discovery of West Asian ceramics and large quantities of imported ceramics and raw material for beads only speak of the multi cultural and multi religious character of this site. The 6^th Century AC Nestorian cross (now located at the Anuradhapura archaeological museum) was discovered in the elite Citadel complex adjacent to the Jetavana site.

The whole exercise is also done with a view to present Anuradhapura in its real context. This magnificent site has been for too long presented in the main as a religious site and identified with a dubious term ‘Monastic City’. It has been robbed off its true legacy as a colorful multi cultural city and a thriving commercial hub. The artifacts retrieved from this site provide an insight to the actual dynamics and its personality. Hundreds of thousands of beads, ceramics, ivory, and other luxury items speaks volumes for the arrival of merchants from the Mediterranean, the Far East, West Asia, South Asia and the existence of people of different faiths and cultures.

Jetavana is now one of the most regularly visited sites in Anuradhapura, as it houses the tallest brick built monument in the world.  In addition to foreign tourists, it draws a large number of school children from the Tamil speaking Hindu and Muslim groups in north and east Sri Lanka as well. The presentation on site and in the museum will be carried out on a strictly non-parochial manner and in all three national languages providing the best evidence of the multi-cultural personality of this island society. It is appropriate that the history of this country is presented as a shared culture with all ethnic, religious and language groups as equal stakeholders of the historical legacy rather than alienate them from the mainstream culture which is essentially a shared one. Though this is primarily a religious site, the rationale of the site presentation is to situate Jetavana within a socio-cultural context representing its international dimension to the visitor as well. Out-reach program planned from the site is primarily geared as an information system for school children enhancing their participatory role and capacity-building through awareness programs and hands-on activities.

In order to further activate a dialogue with the past supporting conflict resolution, the Department of Archaeology, University of Peradeniya took cognizance of this situation and structured its curriculum in training the next generation of archaeologists and heritage managers in the most professional manner in reading the past devoid of any inhibitions and parochialisms.  These activities have been pushed to a higher level since 2005 when the Department undertook specific projects with UNESCO, NORAD and other international organizations primarily documenting and training school children (mainly members of the UNESCO school Clubs in Kandy) and undergraduates.

The first was the field trip undertaken to South India by 10 graduate archaeologists selected from the staff of the World Heritage sites on a program entitled Outreach Program for Shared Cultures. While funding was provided by Ford Foundation through the American Institute for Sri Lankan Studies ground facilities in South India was organized by Excellency Nakandala from the Chennai Deputy High Commissioners office. The aim of this program was to familiarize the young archaeologists on the common heritage south India and Sri Lanka shared and to negate the fallacy of considering south India as the ‘other’ region and Tamil speaking people as enemies due to activities of the LTTE.

Secondly, the publications entitled Alternative Archaeology (Jayaratne et al 2006) and Heritage (Seneviratne et al.) in 2006 coincided with two Awareness Seminars held by the Department of Archaeology with financial sponsorship from UNESCO New Delhi Regional Office,. The themes taken up for these seminars were, Cultural Connectivity Sri Lanka: Celebrating Shared Cultures and Cultural Heritage & Displacement of Cultural Property. The seminars brought together all stake holders such as undergraduates, school children, Police officers, Customs officers, Clergy, hoteliers, corporate sector members of the public and the hospitality management sector. It also undertook the task addressing some critical issues to the main stake-holders and target groups and improving their level of consciousness on the needs and modalities of conserving the heritage, especially in a multi cultural context. While the seminars and the volumes dealt with issues hitherto neglected, such as problems of identifying cultural property and Colonialism, issue on indigenous people, heritage of pre modern craft people, marine archaeological cultural property, war and the destruction of cultural property, it also informed the audience and the reader of new methodologies utilized in heritage protection through digital mapping, object ID systems, school programs and tourism planning.

Thirdly, The Kandy Heritage City Cultural Mapping Project (funded by UNESCO New Delhi) was a digital exercise recording the heritage monuments of this wonderful multi cultural city that has a shared heritage by the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Colonial cultures. This exercise involved a wide group of stake holders and it instructed them on the value of protecting the diversity and cultural plurality of this heritage city, which actually reflects the cultural reality of Sri Lankas’ shared heritage.

Fourthly, the completion of the Ethnographic Museum for Plantation Workers of Indian Origin in 2007 with NORAD funding established another resource center for cultural connectivity, revitalization and heritage preservation. This small museum depicts the history of an unprivileged and marginalized community that contributed tremendously towards the national economy of Sri Lanka. Their history not only depicts a hidden link to the cultural connectivity between India and Sri Lanka, but their culture is a testimony to shared nature of the heritage between this community and other resident communities especially in the monatne region of Sri Lanka.

Fifthly the Ola Leaf Revitalization Project (funded by UNESCO Bangkok) is again a revitalization program salvaging an important segment in the intangible heritage preserving Memory. In addition it reveals the shared nature of literary content among different cultural and religious groups in Sri Lanka and also information connecting Sri Lanka with South India and South East Asia.

Our efforts at utilizing both the tangible and the intangible heritage in conflict resolution are paying rich dividends and we are today hopeful towards positive attitudes by the next generation of professionals reading the past. For this purpose we redefined Heritage beyond its narrow spectrum definition. Heritage is to be located not as a static factor only looking at the past but its function in understanding shared cultures, cultural plurality and as a factor instructing the next generation of the true personality of the inclusive multi cultural mosaic of this island society.

In spite of recurring upheavals I am positively optimistic about the wisdom of the people in our region to rise above abysmal parochialisms and reach out to each other with sanity and understanding on cultural connectivity and our shared heritage as a point of convergence “beyond the bloody dances of death” (Bhan 2006:99). It gives us hope to know of individuals who are involved in the Foundation of SAARC Writers and Literature who have a vision Beyond Borders. Recent happenings in South Asia with special reference to the Nalanda Project, Sri Lankas efforts to name multi-religious sites as World Heritage sites – gives a glimmer of hope on the perpetuation of our shared heritage valued by the people. In this country the Lumbini project could be a potentially high value site for people to people connectivity. Yours is a country that had the courage and wisdom to initiate a dialogue with those “who so far have remained outside the periphery of mainstream political discourse…Nepal is bound to play a greater role in cultural affairs and in strengthening cultural connectivity and common historico-civilisationa links…” (Bhan 2006:102).

At the 2007 SAARC Cultural Ministers Meeting our proposal for the SAARC Heritage Center carried the following message.

“It is apparent that the region must preserve this rich culture bequeathed to us from the past in a redefined form and as a living source of cross-regional cultural connectivity sustaining the spirit of the SARRC and also blending tradition with modernity.

The convergence of the arts and crafts will represent a cross-section of South Asian culture intrinsic to each country and its internal regions. The artists and craft persons will be connected to this venue on a rotational basis. The spin off from this will be a shared gain for all SAARC countries.

Cross regional people to people cultural connectivity and environmental awareness are two major gains in this venture. Cross fertilization of inter regional arts and crafts and the revitalization of indigenous arts and crafts that are facing extinction will be another positive gain. All our countries are concerned of the impact of globalization and other market forces that are diluting the indigenous arts and crafts. This center shall not only revitalize such endangered arts and crafts, it shall play a pivotal role in the preservation of the tangible heritage (as per UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage – 1972) and the intangible heritage (as per UNESCO Convention for the safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage – 2003).

This centre could be developed as an awareness-building and capacity-building venue. The target group will be our next generation. Youth arriving here from the SAARC region as observers, apprentices and participants in the arts and crafts activity is to be seriously taken note of. As a center of dissemination of cultural knowledge it will bring together our children, the next generation of SAARC leadership, who belong to different ethnic, language, religious and cultural groups and inculcate within them the norms and values of respecting diversity, inclusiveness of our regional culture and shared aspirations eventually sustaining the spirit of the SAARC.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a moral obligation to manage the present world with wisdom for the very existence of the next generation. As much as we have borrowed the environment from the future generations it is incumbent upon us to pass down the best elements of our inherited culture to them. It is all about the transmission of wisdom and ‘appropriate knowledge’ celebrating the gift of humanity from the past to the present and the next generations.

May all beings live in peace

and enjoy the bliss of equanimity and contentment!

******

Readings & References

Anderson, Benedict

1990 Imagined Communities. New York. Verso

Bhan, Pankaj

2006 “Accelerate the Process of Peace and Cultural Connectivity” Beyond Borders Ed.

Ajit Cour.Vol.2 No.2:98-103

Blacky, Michael L.,

1990 “American Nationality and and Ethnicity in the Depicted Past”. P. Gathercole and D. Lowenthal Ed. The Politics of the Past. London. Routledge.

Gopal, S

1978 “The Fear of History”. Seminar (January 1-5)

1991 (Edited with others)

Anatomy of a Confrontation. New Delhi. Penguin

Jayaratne D.K. et al Ed.

2006 Alternative Archaeology. Archaeological Society. University of Peradeniya

Nanamoli, Bhikkhu

1972 The Life of the Buddha as it appears in the Pali Canon. Kandy. Buddhist Publication Society

Rahula, Walpola

1978 What the Buddha Taught. London. Gorden Fraser.

Seneviratne, Sudharshan

1996 “Peripheral Regions and Marginal Communities: Towards an Alternative Explanation in Early Iron Age Material and Social Formations”. R. Champakalakshmi and S. Gopal Ed. Tradition Dissent and Ideology: Essays in Honor of Romila Thapar. Delhi Oxford University Press. 264-312.

2001 “Situating History and the Historians Craft” Ethnic Studies Report. 139-145

2002 Deconstructing the Past and Reconstructing the Present: Ideology, Archaeology and Heritage Management in Post Colonial Sri Lanka. Paper presented at the Seminar on Material Culture & the History of Society: The Social Archaeology of Pre Modern Sri Lanka. Department of Archaeology, University of Peradeniya & American Institute for Sri Lankan Studies.

2003 The Philosophical and Social Role of Buddhism in South India. Chennai.

2004 Problems of Ceylon History and the Fear of History. G.C Mendis Memorial Lecture. Colombo.

2005 “Walking Through Corridors of Culture with Lakshman Kadirgamar: Reminiscing a Prince of Dignity”. The Daily News. November 17^th 2005

2005 Situating the World Heritage Sites in a Multi Cultural Island Society: The Ideology of Presenting the Sacred City of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. Paper presented at the Conference of the European Association of South Asian Archaeologists. The British Museum. London.

2005 “Knowledge Information in Multi Cultural South Asia: Redefining Education for the Next Generation”. Ethnic Studies Review (May)

2005 Platform Tasks Regaining the Next Generation of Archaeologists. Speech delivered to the Archaeology Graduates Association of the Central Cultural Fund. Anuradhapura (To be published in their research journal Welipila in 2007)

2005 “From Language to Race: Deconstructing Tamil Identity in Antiquity” International Relations in a Globalising World. Vol.1 No.1:137-160. New Delhi. Sage.

2006 Ordering the Past and Legitimating the Present: Politics of Archaeology.  Henry M. Jackson Lecture delivered at Whitman College.  Walla Walla, Washington State, USA.

2006 Region, Identity and Historical Construction. Key Note Address delivered at the Seminar on Regionality, Identity and History Writing. Roja Muthiah Research Library. Chennai.

2006 “Interactive Regional Heritage Centre for the Traditional Arts and Crafts in South Asia”. Concept paper presented at the SAARC CULTURAL MINISTERS CONFERENCE. COLOMBO 31^ST OCTOBER

2006 “Cultural Connectivity as a Third Dimension in Diplomacy”. Speech delivered at the Conference of Heads of Missions representing Sri Lanka. Colombo. 6^th October.

2006 (Ed with others)

Heritage. UNESCO (New Delhi) & Department of Archaeology. University of Peradeniya

Thapar, Romila

1977 (Ed. with Harbans Mukhia and Bipan Chandra) Communalism and the Writing of Indian History. New Delhi. People’s Publishing House.

1975 The Past and Prejudice. New Delhi. National Book Trust of India

1979 “The Image of the Barbarian in Early India” Ancient Indian Social History. Delhi. Orient Longman. 152-192

1984 From Lineage to State. Bombay. Oxford

2001 (Ed.) India another Millennium? Penguin

2004 The Future of the Indian Past. New Delhi. Institute of Social Science

Varma, V.P.

1973 Early Buddhism and its Origin. New Delhi. Munshiram

Wagle, Narendra

1990 Society at the Time of the Buddha. Bombay. Popular Prakashan

Wolf, Eric R

1982 Europe and the People without History. Berkeley. University of California Press.

Related posts:

Tags: CONFLICT RESOLUTION, HERITAGE
Posted in Monthly Theme, Prof. Sudharshan Seneviratne