Window
Seat | Mrinal Chatterjee | 9.1.22
One Asia
From
the times of ancient Greek period Asia was viewed as one land, alien and fit to
be won because of its riches. In fact China
and India alternated in being the largest economies in the world from 1 to 1800
CE. China was a major economic power and attracted many to the east, and
for many the legendary wealth and prosperity of the ancient culture of India
personified Asia, attracting European commerce, exploration and
colonialism. The accidental discovery of a trans-Atlantic route from Europe to
America by Columbus while in search for a route to India demonstrates this deep
fascination. The Silk-Road, connecting East Asia and Southeast Asia with East Africa, West Asia and
Southern Europe became the main east–west
trading route in the Asian hinterlands while the Straits of Malacca stood
as a major sea route.
It was from the
18th century that Europe emerged as a great economic and
subsequently military and political power thanks to the development of modern
science and technology, industrial revolution and an aspirational surge. Many
prefer to term nineteenth century as that of the Imperial Century of Great
Britain and twentieth century is marked as the century of United State of
America. Twenty-first century, many opine is the century of Asia as Asian
countries have developed economically and politically and they are on a growth
trajectory. The phrase Asian Century arose in the mid to late
1980s, and is attributed to a 1988 meeting with People's Republic of China
(PRC) leader Deng Xiaoping and Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Prior to this,
it made an appearance in a 1985 US Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations hearing. It has been subsequently reaffirmed by several
Asian political leaders, and is now a popularly used term in the media.
The
idea of Asia as a united spiritual entity has been credited to Swami
Vivekananda (12 January
1863- 4 July 1902).
Japanese art historian and
philosopher Okakura Kakuzo (14 February 1863- 2 September 1913), who became an ardent follower of Swami
Vivekananda nurtured the idea
of the Asian consciousness. After the bereavement of Swami Vivekananda, Okakura
met Rabindranath Tagore (7
May 1861 - 7 August 1941). Tagore soon
became an ardent enthusiast for the Asian consciousness. In fact Tagore became
one of the most creative exponents of an Asian Universalism through his
philosophic rendering of the concept.
 |
| A postage stamp on Swami Videkananda from Malaysia |
Swami Vivekananda’s
concept of ‘one Asia’ was not based on political or economic power or prowess.
It was based on spirituality. In his discourses Swami Vivekananda spoke
extensively on Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact he posited Buddhism as a logical
extension of Hinduism. Since both the religion emerged from South Asia- he
tried to posit the combined Hinduism and Buddhism as the soul of Asian
consciousness. Both these religions were based on knowledge (gyan),
Faith (bhakti) and Renunciation (sannyas, withdrawal).
His ideas were picked up by Japanese art
historian and philosopher Okakura Kakuzo. He attempted to posit Asian
unity by saying ‘Asia is one’. In his book on Asian artistic and cultural
history, The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of
Japan he wrote about the spiritual unity throughout Asia, which
distinguishes it from the West:
Asia is one. The Himalayas divide,
only to accentuate, two mighty civilisations, the Chinese with its communism of
Confucius, and the Indian with its individualism of the Vedas. But not even the
snowy barriers can interrupt for one moment that broad expanse of love for the
Ultimate and Universal, which is the common thought-inheritance of every
Asiatic race, enabling them to produce all the great religions of the world,
and distinguishing them from those maritime peoples of the Mediterranean and
the Baltic, who love to dwell on the Particular, and to search out the means,
not the end, of life.
After
the bereavement of Swami Vivekananda, Okakura met Rabindranath Tagore. Tagore
soon became an ardent enthusiast for the Asian Consciousness. Rabindranath’s concept of Asian unity was, however, based on philosophy.
Why should we record history?
Of late there has been lot of
discussion regarding the need for rewriting history- from Indian perspective.
My take on this subject is: we need to record history. For two primary reasons:
a.
We must remember the
contribution of persons and accord them due space in our history. As a society
it is our duty. The nation which forgets the contribution of persons in its
making and development are doomed to slide into abyss.
b.
We need to record history or else myth will take over. Myth
is malleable. Recorded history is not. We need to record facts with its ups and
downs, dimples and warts to record an authentic history.
However,
I want to flag two issues in this context- two trends that we must be aware of
and guard against.
a.
Deification (the action of making someone or
something into a god): It may lead to
hagiography- adulatory
and idealized biography.
b.
Ethnocentricism (evaluation of other cultures
according to preconceptions originating in the standards and customs of one's
own culture): Ethnocentrism is the term anthropologists use to
describe the opinion that one’s own way of life is natural or correct. Some
would simply call it cultural ignorance. In extreme cases, a group of
individuals may see another cultures way of life and consider it wrong, because
of this, the group may try to convert the other group to their own ways of
living. This might lead to conflict.
Tailpiece: Gurugyan
Whenever the brain and the
heart fight, it’s always the liver that suffers.
++
Journalist turned media academician
Mrinal Chatterjee lives in Dhenkanal, Odisha. He also writes fiction and plays.
mrinalchatterjeeiimc@gmail.com
This column is published every Sunday in Gangtok based English daily Sikki8m Express and www.prameyanews.com
No comments:
Post a Comment