Cultural vandalism

In the wake of the Godhra outrage, Hindutva mobs indulge in the wanton destruction of cultural monuments across Gujarat.

THE Nazi mass murderer Herman Goering, it is said, would undo the buttons of his gun holster every time he heard the word "culture". With their passion for simplicity, the Hindutva mobs have shown that they would rather reach for the sledge-hammer every time they see a symbol of humanity's common cultural heritage.

Within a day of the Godhra outrage of February 27, the mobs that have held Gujarat in thrall for over two months, destroyed the tomb of Wali Mohammad Wali, alias Wali Gujarati, in Ahmedabad. The administration that has connived while hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands have become refugees living in dread of the next visit of the vengeful mob, then showed a rare appreciation of its civic responsibilities. Even as the protests began over the wanton destruction of a cultural landmark, it paved over the spot where Wali's tomb had stood. It was obviously working on the belief that effacing every bit of evidence of a cultural monument would obliterate all the rich traditions that it stood as a reminder of.

Today a slight unevenness and discolouration in the road that runs adjacent to the Ahmedabad Police Headquarters is the only surviving vestige of a man who is acknowledged by all with a knowledge of Indian culture as one of the founders of modern Urdu poetry. Known to have been born in Aurangabad in 1667, Wali was referred to during most of his brief lifespan as Wali Dakkhani, or Wali Aurangabadi. He had a passion for traversing the country and his visit to Delhi in 1700 and his encounters there are believed to have been instrumental in the evolution of the Urdu ghazal as an art form.

A frequent visitor to Gujarat, Wali wrote with great affection of its urban centres, particularly Surat. He died during one such visit in Ahmedabad in 1707 and was buried there. The people of Gujarat, then living in more enlightened times, proudly laid claim to his legacy by bestowing on him the title Wali Gujarati.

Even today, Wali remains a cultural influence in the State. The ghazal exponent Purushottam Upadhyay recounted in a recent interview to mark the release of an album of songs: "Wali Dakkhani was a great Sufi saint and an authority on Urdu. He made the first Urdu dictionary in Gujarat. His mazaar is in Ahmedabad (and) this place is the Mecca of all the new shairs."

Early November every year, Vadodara hosts a solemn and sublime musical event. With prominent musicians from near and far participating and civic leaders and members of the erstwhile ruling dynasty in attendance, the city hosts a tribute to Ustad Faiyaz Khan on his death anniversary.

On April 4 this year, Faiyaz Khan's tomb in Vadodara was attacked and wreathed in burning tyres. Extensive damage was inflicted on the facade of the structure commemorating the man who was in 1912 declared by the erstwhile ruling dynasty as the greatest singer in the realm.

As Susheela Mishra has recounted in her book, "The Great Masters of Hindustani Music", Faiyaz Khan's musical lineage is supposed to go back to Tansen himself. "Genius, musical ancestry and training combined to give us this wonderful artiste - one of the most reputed and respected exponents of Hindustani classical music in recent times," she comments.

Although renowned as a performer and practising teacher, Faiyaz Khan was also associated with the academic efforts of Pandit Vishnu Narain Bhatkhande and others to revive and systematise classical Indian musical forms during the first half of the 20th century. As nationalist India began the rediscovery of its cultural heritage, Faiyaz Khan set new canons of musical interpretation and appreciation. Susheela Mishra quotes these eloquent words of tribute by a discerning critic when he died in 1950: "He was the last of the race of giants. The like of him will not be born again. He was a gift - a national asset. As time widens the gulf between the noble dead and the hopeful living, he stands out as a beacon, a bulwark of genius and tradition, whose inspiration will not be wasted even on the most cynical of us."

This critic obviously was innocent of the depths of depravity that have been plumbed by the Hindutva mobs in their recent rampage. Yet these two are by no means the only instances of the wanton destruction of cultural monuments in Gujarat. The mosque of Malik Asin (Asas, Imadul Mulk) in Ahmedabad, built in the reign of Sultan Mahmud Begada (1458 to 1511), has been destroyed. As the Indian History Congress has pointed out, this protected monument built in stone, was destroyed within hours in an operation involving the use of bulldozers. At around the same time, the mosque of Muhafiz Khan in Ahmedabad was damaged.

Communalism Combat, the Mumbai-based campaign group, has through a network of activists and sympathisers, put together a list of no fewer than 230 shrines - tombs and mosques - that were destroyed in Gujarat in the space of less than 72 hours since the Godhra atrocity. Religious seminaries and schools have also borne the fury of the mobs, with the epicentre of the destruction being naturally enough Ahmedabad city and district.

Since the Second World War, the global community has been uneasily aware that genocidal attacks are inevitably accompanied by deliberate efforts to efface their collective cultural heritage. Concurrent with the evolution of the laws of war and the humanitarian code of the Geneva Convention, the United Nations and other multilateral forums have also sought to put in place a series of conventions on safeguarding "cultural property". Even the old nomenclature of "property" has been almost completely supplanted by the broader term "heritage", in recognition of the universally shared aspects of culture.

The Hague Convention of 1954 (or the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict) laid down the basic principle that the "preservation of cultural heritage is of great importance for all peoples of the world". It then held that "damage to cultural property belonging to any people whatsoever means damage to the cultural heritage of all mankind". The Hague Convention is supplemented by two protocols, the most recent of them adopted in 1999.

In 1972, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) adopted a more broad-ranging convention, applicable at all times and not merely in the specific context of war. While upholding the universal values of the Hague Convention, it identified "cultural heritage" as being, among other things, "monuments, architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science." Every member-state of UNESCO, it held, recognised that "the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage situated on its territory... belongs primarily to that state."

More recent times have brought in an effort to institute punitive measures for the destruction of cultural heritage. At its General Conference in 2001, UNESCO adopted a resolution that sought to define the circumstances under which an act could be construed as a "crime against the common heritage of humanity". It reiterated the need for all member-states to accede to and observe the various conventions evolved over the years. And it authorised the Director-General of the organisation to formulate for the next session of the General Conference, a "Draft Declaration" which would define the circumstances under which the international community could determine that the "Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage" has taken place.

The Central government, which bears the principal responsibility for the observance of international treaties and conventions, is in obvious and flagrant default of the minimal norms of civilised conduct expected by the world. And the Narendra Modi government in Gujarat, quite apart from its crimes against the living, stands indicted for the most heinous attacks on the common cultural heritage of humanity.

The artistic community in India has reacted with revulsion to the events in Gujarat. "We are all shocked," said the eminent classical singer Shubha Mudgal at a recent public meeting in Delhi. "Everybody who studies music knows what Faiyaz Khan means to the country and its culture."

In a statement released on the occasion, the sarod maestro Amjad Ali Khan, president of the Ustad Hafiz Ali Khan Memorial Trust, described himself as "saddened and shocked" at the attack on the tomb of Faiyaz Khan, "one of the country's pioneers in the world of vocal music". And Malti Gilani of the Bade Ghulam Ali Khan Yaadgar Sabha decried the manner in which "violent elements" were "destroying monuments of the great artistes who dedicated their lives to the preservation of our composite culture and the performing arts".

The Indian History Congress has in a communication to the Archaeological Survey of India and the Government of India decried the wanton destruction of cultural heritage and urged that accountability be fixed. The ASI, it has said, bears the responsibility for restoring these monuments and ensuring their protection against acts of sectarian violence.