Transition from Indic to Post-Indic in South East Asia-1

[brihaspati]

Opening this thread on ramana ji's pointer that we have started discussing the transition from Hindu and Buddhist influences in South East Asia, to the advent of Islamic-Arabic and later European and Christian missionary activities or influences.

The whole process is rather hazy in historical records, and few clear conclusions can be drawn. Modern reconstructions are obviously affected by claims and narrative reshaping over the last two hundred years. I think we should try to gather all possible references we may come across that is relevant to this transition.

I feel that we should not limit our references to only the transition point proper - which might be difficult to identify anyway. We also need to understand how the society in both the islands as well as the adjunct mainland was influenced prior to the transition to grasp why and in which direction the transition proceeded. This may lead us back to comparison of issues of navigation across the pacific, ship-raft technology, of the Polynesians too - as that itself could be part of a eastward migration and colonization drive where India could have played a part. Such moves may have had stages by which the Indonesian islands were populated over the last 3000 years, and could throw important light on settlement characteristics relevant for later transitions.

ramana ji, or mods, can you please shift the relevant posts from the OT thread to here?

[brihaspati]

A curiosity: the khmer homeland according to the surviving traditions of the Khmer was somewhere further north-east from present Kampuchea, and they were already "Hindu" before they swept south-west under their first "emperor". This area would be the mountainous region towards the south-east of China closer to Vietnam - but still very much in the Chinese zone of influence. Did Indic influence - even in pre-Buddhist phase - reach up through that route? There are elements in Japanese shinto rituals that are very close to earlier Indic forms.

[Agnimitra]

Brihaspati ji,

In Korea also, the name dynastic 'Kim' is borne by a majority of the population. Their claim is that their lineage was born from a Korean king and a princess from Ayodhya in India. A few years back a Korean delegation arrived in Ayodhya to commemorate that.

Here are some links:

A Princess from Ayodhya

India's early contacts with Korea date back more than 2000 years. Two thousand years ago, a 16 year old princess from Ayodhya, accompanied by her brother, sailed from India for Korea. We only know her by her Korean name, Huh Wang-Ock. There she wed King Kim Suro, founder of the ancient Korean kingdom of Karack. The King himself received her upon her arrival, and later built a temple at the place where they had first met. She is said to have died at the grand old age of 189. Her story is narrated in the ancient Korean history books, "Samkuksaki" and "Samkukyusa".

Her tomb is located in Kimhae and there is a stone pagoda in front of the tomb. The pagoda is built with stones, which the princess is said to have brought with her from Ayodhya. They have engravings and red patterns. They are believed to have a mysterious power to calm stormy seas. The Kimhae kingdom's influence is still felt in modern-day South Korea. Kimhae Kims and Kimhae Huhs trace their origins to this ancient kingdom and Korea's current President Kim Dae Jung and Prime Minister Jong Pil Kim are Kimhae Kims.

In February, 2000, Kimhae Mayor Song Eun-Bok led a delegation to Ayodhya. The delegation proposed to develop Ayodhya as a sister city of Kimhae and there are plans to set up a memorial for Queen Huh. Note: Ayodhya is the modern Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh. It was the capital of the kingdom of Lord Ram, the seventh incarnation of Lord Vishnu.

References: Times of India. 15 May 2000, India Abroad 14 May 2000.

In the northern Indian city of Ayodhya, a visiting Korean delegation has inaugurated a memorial to their royal ancestor, Queen Huh. More than a-hundred historians and government representatives, including the North Korean ambassador to India, unveiled the memorial on the west bank of the River Saryu. Korean historians believe that Queen Huh was a princess of an ancient kingdom in Ayodhya. She went to Korea some two-thousand years ago and started the Karak dynasty by marrying a local king, Suro. Today, the historians say, Queen Huh's descendants number more than six-million, including the South Korean president - Kim Dae Jung. According to a history book written in the 11th century in Korean language, ¡°The History of Three Kingdoms¡±, the India-Korea relationship started in 48 AD when a princess from Ayodhya, Queen Hur Hwang-ho went to Korea and married King Suro Kim.

And last year:
Korean relative of Kings of Ayodhya goes on evidence hunting

[Murugan]

May I suggest a book which can help in the thread discussion

Ashoka
By Charles Allen

(The book has its own misunderstandings because of author's biases as it is written with a Britsh mindset, still a good read about Ashok and about spread of Buddhism and how India was re-introduced to her pre-islamic past. It is a painstaking work, though sometimes it looks like Sir William Jones's biography)

[ramana]

With the recent emphasis on Indo-Pacific time to revive this thread.

[ramana]

In 2019 had the good fortune to visit Thailand and Cambodia and observe the temples, customs, and culture at close hand. The early temples were Hindu-based at Angkor Wat. Around the 12th century we see the Buddhist takeover of the Hindu temples.

Early kings were Shiavaites and then Vaishnavites and led to Buddhism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angkor_Wat

The initial design and construction of the temple took place in the first half of the 12th century, during the reign of Suryavarman II (ruled 1113 – c. 1150). Breaking from the Shaiva tradition of previous kings, Angkor Wat was instead dedicated to Vishnu. It was built as the king's state temple and capital city. As neither the foundation stela nor any contemporary inscriptions referring to the temple have been found, its original name is unknown, but it may have been known as "Varah Vishnu-lok" after the presiding deity. Work seems to have ended shortly after the king's death, leaving some of the bas-relief decoration unfinished.[18] The term Vrah Viṣṇuloka or Parama Viṣṇuloka literally means "The king who has gone to the supreme world of Vishnu", which refer to Suryavarman II posthumously and intend to venerate his glory and memory.[14]

In 1177, approximately 27 years after the death of Suryavarman II, Angkor was sacked by the Chams, the traditional enemies of the Khmer.[19] Thereafter the empire was restored by a new king, Jayavarman VII, who established a new capital and state temple (Angkor Thom and the Bayon respectively), which was dedicated to Buddhism, because the King believes that the Hindu God had failed him,a few kilometres to the north. Therefore, Angkor Wat was also gradually converted into a Buddhist site and many Hindu sculptures were replaced by Buddhist Art.[20]

Towards the end of the 12th century, Angkor Wat gradually transformed from a Hindu centre of worship to Buddhism, which continues to the present day.[4] Angkor Wat is unusual among the Angkor temples in that although it was largely neglected after the 16th century it was never completely abandoned.[21] Fourteen inscriptions, dated from the 17th century, discovered in the Angkor area testify to Japanese Buddhist pilgrims that had established small settlements alongside Khmer locals.[22] At that time, the temple was thought by the Japanese visitors as the famed Jetavana garden of the Buddha, which originally located in the kingdom of Magadha, India.[23] The best-known inscription tells of Ukondayu Kazufusa, who celebrated the Khmer New Year at Angkor Wat in 1632.[24]

[ramana]

A few wiki articles:

Indosphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indosphere

Greater India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_India



Hinduism in South East Asia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_ ... heast_Asia

Buddhism in South East Asia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_ ... heast_Asia

[ramana]

Unlocked and up.

[VKumar]

Buddhism in the Orient? Japan, Korea, China, Mongolia?

[ramana]

I would like to start this thread to collect and discuss Indic links to East Asia from ancient times to modern. For instance, we know that Hindu and Buddhist pilgrims went out to East Asia from South India in about 200 BC. And the links helped develop and enrich civilizations in ancient East Asia. We know about Bodhidharma who founded self-defense techniques in Shaolin. We read about Koundinya who founded the Kingdom of Annam in modern Vietnam. Even now Indians are called Kaligns in Indonesia.
With the advent of European colonization, this traffic got off and Nehru was a continuation.

Fernand Bradule in his third volume writes India is like a pendulum that swings East to West with a time period of centuries. Around the 7th century, the pendulum swung to West Asia. Earlier from 200 BC to 400AD it swung Eastwards

in 1992 P.V. Narasimha Rao was the first PM to envisage the Look East policy and in 2014 Narendra Modi was the first to implement the "Act East" policy.

Now ASEAN is a vibrant outreach for India.
Thanks for your participation.

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look_East_policy_(India)



2) Looking at NaMo Foreign Policy:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 21-00363-8

[RoyG]

There is a fundamental question which underlies this thread. What enabled Indian culture and stories to spread throughout Asia and not Europe?

It will give us a good foundation as to how the other linkages like linguistic, economic, political etc. were built.

[ramana]

Let us not get sidetracked.

A series of references from Wikipedia:

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... heast_Asia



2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_I ... _East_Asia

Has ample references. In particular
Cœdès, George (1968), Walter F. Vella (ed.), The Indianized States of Southeast Asia, trans.Susan Brown Cowing, University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0-8248-0368-1

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_ ... heast_Asia

4) Arts of SouthEast Asia Syllabus:

https://web.archive.org/web/20060906140 ... llabus.pdf

[rahulm]

I just returned from a month long trip to Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The Indic civilisational connect is obvious and stares one in the face.

From my travels, it appears, the people of Cambodia and Lao have a greater awareness and appreciation of their Indic civilisational connects. Vietnam not so much.

Besides the obvious Angkor Wat, in Laos I sat in Buddhist temples in Luang Prabang and chatted with the monks on the meaning of "Buddha Sharanam Gacchami" and the full prayer (which I know). It was quite a connection through civilisational time. Hard to describe.

I could pick up some Sanskrit words - distorted by passage of time, distance and localisation.

The connect is also evident in Thailand and Myanmar which I have also travelled through. I traveled through Myanmar north south.

In Cambodia my host (Airbnb) referred to me as "my Indian brother" with genuine warmth and affection. He cooked dinner for me every night even though that was not part of the deal.

Prambanan in Indonesia, a UNESCO site, has the second largest Hindu temple in SE Asia after Angkor War.

My feeling is these countries will be happy if India takes a more active policy and approach to increase engagement on a civilisational basis. I thin M is pushing in that direction.

Not related to SE Asia but still civilisational - I have travelled through Egypt and Morocco north - south and random people were happy to connect and chat calling me Al-Hindi, Al-Hindi and brother you are one of us. Quite amazing.So westward is also worth looking at.

[ramana]

I have a Chinese friend of Myanmar origin who reminisced about the Indian connections. He loved chevdo and Khow Sway!
Same with Indonesian friends.

[ramana]

I would like us to post book links etc to build the knowledge base.

[ricky_v]

i think RoyG has a good point, though the discussion can be taken to other threads if the admin so wishes, otherwise the post might seem ot.

it has always been considered that India generally starts from the kabul valley, nobody expounds much on where it ends... does it end at the end of today's geographical realities? a unified south asia? cambodia? philipinnes? australia with its inhabitants of peoples most closely related to the Koli, Munda, Veddoid of the subcontinent? the answer is thus dependent on the philosophical outlook of the person.

Why did India's outlook spread so much in the east and south east and not north, north-west, I believe the answer to be the steppes. Every civilisation has this dual mode, a heir and a spare if you will, one of cosmopolitan bearing and linked with other localities of this bearing with chiefly trade to grow and expand and absorb and spread. The other belongs to the nomads / pastoralists, not a neat division of contemporary urban and rural. Interactions between the two groups forms the core of the civilisational outlook, but while the cosmopolitan group interacts and morphs with other "alien" thought processes at a faster rate, the nomadic core can be seen as crystallised if seen over a long period of time. It is this group that is necessary for a civilisational revival after a fallout, cultural or nuclear. The nomadic group is not necessarily limited to 1 nation's boundaries.

Looking from a heartland approach, the steppe, the only one that matters, has long been home to tribes of 3 competing philosophy:
turkic
iranic-hellenestic
hordes out of china with "more or less" similar outlook, the hunas, sakas, kushanas, (the 2 might be iranic-hellenestic), tokharas, xiognu and mongol.

Some of these nomad groups had cosmopolitan counterparts, others did not, but the important thing is that they had some form of animism, kinship, and most importantly distance. SEA has no such recourse for distance, their nomad group could never become fossilised as space was limited, and the growth-serving cosmopolitan needed all space that was available. With no fallout option available, the cosmo group absorbed and morphed and such philosophies were sown into the very ground. Similar thing happened with the bedouin arabic and the to a smaller extent with the osmosis of hellenesm into the iranic strata, which is why shia or sunni islam can never actually die, their fallout group is too spread-out in heathy numbers.

If you look at china, their nomad group is borrowed from the mongols after kublai khan, because the entirety of their citizenry were rooted peasants, though they have offshoots all across SEA, but they are rooted cosmos as well, and having been brought up in such environs, the origin of their thought is suspect in the eventuality of fallout. So, china deals with it by being opaque and firewalling its cosmo group so as to not contaminate their thought patterns.

[ramana]

ricky_v, Jaswant Singh in his autobiography writes that Indian influence starts in the west from the Syrian Desert to the Plain of Jars in Laos in the east. Somehow you don't see Indic influences cross the Syrian desert nor the Plain of Jars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_of_Jars

I will post his quote.

[ramana]

An analysis of Look East Vs Act East policies of India

https://www.jkpi.org/comparing-indias-l ... -policies/

COMPARING INDIA’S LOOK EAST AND ACT EAST POLICIES
Anamitra Banerjee

The Look East Policy was launched in the year 1992 by Indian Prime Minister PV Narsimha Rao, a year after the disintegration of the USSR (Soviet Union) in 1991. The Dissolution of the USSR ended the Cold War. India was heavily dependent on the Soviet Union. After its fall, India faced an economic crisis. Therefore, it turned towards the countries of South East Asia. India saw the immense scope of economic growth in South East Asia and also noticed that Japan and China emerged as key entities in the region. This policy was continued even after the reign of PV Narsimha Rao (1991-96). It was successfully enforced by Atal Bihari Vajpayee (1998-2004) and Manmohan Singh (2004-2014).

The Look East Policy had four broad objectives ever since it was initiated:

• Regional Economic Integration,
  Reform and Liberalization
  Sustained Economic Growth
  Development of North-East India.

Since the early 1990s, India started focusing on economic cooperation with the East and Southeast Asian countries. This geographical shift in focus area was primarily due to the success of the East Asian economies, especially the Asian Tigers. The Look East Policy had two phases, the first being on the trade and investment process, and the second phase expanded the geographical focus to Australia and East Asia.

The Look East Policy also focuses on sub-regional cooperation:

BIMSTEC –
It was launched on the 6th of June 1997. Being a sector-driven grouping, cooperation within BIMSTEC had initially focused on six sectors in 1997 (trade, technology, energy, transport, tourism, and fisheries) and expanded in 2008 to incorporate agriculture, public health, poverty alleviation, counter-terrorism, environment, culture, people-to-people contact, and climate change.

Mekong Ganga Cooperation –
The Mekong-Ganga Cooperation (MGC) is an initiative by six countries – India and five ASEAN countries, namely, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam for cooperation in tourism, culture, education, as well as transport and communications. It is named after the Mekong River and River Ganga (both of which are civilizational rivers).

Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Regional Economic Forum (BCIM)
Also known as the Kunming Initiative, the BCIM was formed in 1999 to promote trade and economic development in the sub-region stretching from southwest China to eastern India (‘Kunming to Kolkata’) via Myanmar, India’s northeast region (NER), and Bangladesh.

Free Trade Area (India-ASEAN)
It was signed in October 2003. Economic co-operation activities under the AIFTA are now being undertaken on agriculture, fisheries, and forestry; services; mining and energy; science and technology; transport and infrastructure; manufacturing; human resource development; and other sectors such as handicrafts, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and intellectual property rights.

Apart from the above, the Look East Policy has enabled India to become a sectoral dialogue partner with ASEAN in 1992. India is also a member of the ARF (ASEAN Regional Forum) since 1996. Other Projects that have boosted India’s Look East Policy are the Trans Asian Highway from Singapore to Istanbul (via India), Trans Asian Railway from Delhi to Hanoi (Vietnam), and a Trans-National Gas Pipeline between Myanmar, Bangladesh, and India.

Challenges to the Look East Policy-

Another important element of the Look East Policy was the development of India’s the North Eastern States. The North-East Indian Region shares its border with Myanmar and Bangladesh both being the gateway to South East Asia. However, certain challenges are faced by the “Look East Policy”, especially in the North East:

The state of Manipur in particular within the North-Eastern region is badly affected by the “Golden Triangle” where drug addiction is spreading like wildfire. the number of drug addicts has risen from just 600 in 1988 to 31,000 in 1996 and 40,000 in 2002. In recent years, the Chinese expansionist economy has drawn India’s neighbors into its economic arena. Myanmar’s trade with China has grown more rapidly than that with India. Trade Between Bangladesh and China is more than the trade between India and Bangladesh. This is a serious challenge faced by the Look East Policy.

The second Challenge facing the Look East Policy is that India has very limited success in handling ethno-nationalist movements such as the Bodo Front in upper Assam. Secondly, the northeast is also home to scores of ethnic rebellions. Myanmar’s Rakhine State and Kachin State are battlegrounds for the Karen people and the Tatmadaw (Myanmar Military Forces). In such a situation the Indian Projects (such as the Kaladan Multi-Modal Project) may get stagnated or be destroyed.

The Third Challenge comes from the Siliguri Corridor in West Bengal. This place is also termed Chicken’s Neck. It joins the North Eastern Region to mainland India. The main problem that persists here is elements of LWE (Left Wing Extremism) and the Gorkhaland Rebel Movement towards the Sikkim and Darjeeling zones. Siliguri region is often faced with strikes and “bandhs”. The Naga Insurgency will also prove to be a hindrance in the projects as the former head hunters demand autonomy from the Indian mainland.

Support from Bangladesh is of extreme importance. As long as Bangladesh promotes friendly relations and encourages connectivity, the projects under the Look East Policy will be fulfilled and completed.

THE ACT EAST POLICY

The Act East Policy launched in November 2014, is considered to be an upgrade of the Look East Policy. It was unveiled by Hon’ble Prime Minister of India Shri Narendra Modi at the 12th ASEAN Summit in Myanmar. It was enforced by the NDA Government who came to power in the year 2014. The Act East Policy is focused on the 4C’s which are Culture, Commerce, Connectivity, and Capacity Building.

Initiatives under the Act East Policy-

Agartala-Akhaura Rail Project –
This will be the first rail link from the North Eastern Region to Bangladesh. This railway link will connect Gangasagar in Bangladesh to Nischintapur in India and from Nischintapur to Agartala Railway Station. The Ministry of Development of the North East will pay for a 5.47 km track on the Indian Side whereas the remaining rail track in Bangladesh will be financed by the Ministry of External Affairs.

Asian Trilateral Highway-
This Highway starts from India and goes to Thailand via Myanmar. This will connect Moreh (India) to Bagan (Myanmar) and Mae Sot (Thailand). This project will boost trade and commerce in the India ASEAN Free Trade Area. This highway is 3660kms long and recently, Bangladesh has expressed its interest in the project.

Kaladan Multi-Modal Transport Project-
This project connects Sittwe Port in Myanmar to India’s Myanmar Border. This has been created to ensure a multi-modal platform for cargo shipments from the eastern ports to Myanmar and the Northeastern parts of the country through Myanmar. It shall open sea routes and promote Economic Development in the North Eastern States. The project will reduce the need to transport from the volatile narrow Siliguri Corridor (Chicken’s Neck).

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Program (RCEP)-
It is a free trade agreement between 10 members of ASEAN and five FTA partners (Australia, New Zealand, China, Japan, and South Korea). Although India is an FTA partner of ASEAN it withdrew from the RCEP in 2019 stating that it would negatively impact Indian citizens

Challenges to Act East Policy –

The first challenge to the Act East Policy comes from religion. Most of the ASEAN countries practice Islam, Buddhism, and Christianity. Due to “Hindu Majoritarianism” the civil society in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia have been affected. Secondly, due to inter-religious tensions, the Indian “Buddhist Diplomacy” has failed to garner support

The third challenge comes from the Covid-19. India had suffered a lot and was the worst hit during the pandemic. In Contrast, China being the epicenter of the Covid-19 pandemic handled the situation very effectively. There are instances of pro-Chinese sentiment among the Chinese communities in the ASEAN Region.

WHY IS THE ACT EAST POLICY MORE EFFECTIVE THAN THE LOOK EAST POLICY?

Economic Aspect

The Act East Policy was launched at a time when India’s economy was much better than that of the Look East Policy in 1991. The Act East Policy had a much greater focus on defense cooperation whereas this was the lacking factor in the Look East Policy. Also, the development of the North Eastern Region of India was the heavy focus of the Act East Policy. Under the Act East Policy, North East is considered as a gateway to Southeast Asian Countries. In the Look, East Policy North East India was in focus but efforts were minimal when compared to the Act East Policy.

Geopolitical Aspect

The Act East had a much strategical concept. India had formed relations not just with South East Asia but towards countries like South Korea and Japan who funded these infrastructural projects. Moreover, this policy was comparatively benevolent geopolitically for India. There was a greater focus on the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) Nations like Australia, Japan, the USA, and India herself. Relationships and strategic partnerships were forged with the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam to check the dominance of China. The dominance of China was countered at two oceans: South China Seas and the Indian Ocean.

Cultural Aspect

When examined from the lenses of Soft Power diplomacy, The Act East Policy gave more importance to cultural, religious, linguistic exchanges. For example, the civilizational and cultural links date back several thousand years (from prehistoric times) Indian Merchants brought Hinduism and Buddhism to the region. Hindu Kingdoms were found in Sumatra, Bali, and the Philippines. The Hindu Temple Angkor Wat in Cambodia, Barabudar temple in Java bear the testimony.

The focus of the Look East Policy was only limited to that of trade and investment. Whereas the Act East Policy is focused not only just economic cooperation but also had a security dimension. The Look East Policy had developed relations only with the Southeast Asia Countries. The Act East Policy also gave attention to the East Asian Countries as well.

Investment Aspect

Under the Act East Policy, countries like South Korea and Japan had made various investments in India. For example, The Japanese investments in India include The Bullet Train, pharmaceuticals, telecom, smart cities, chemicals, etc. Japan and India have institutionalized 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue. Japan has also agreed to support Indian initiatives such as Digital India, Skill India, and Make in India. South Korea on the other hand has a huge presence in India particularly in the automobile sector (Hyundai) and in the electronics sector (Samsung and LG) as well. South Korean FDI to India has steadily increased in recent years, reaching US$ 5.71 billion by the end of 2018.

The Look East and Act East Policy have benefitted and improved the stance and position of India externally. India under both policies has achieved considerable success be it geopolitically, internally, externally. However, each policy comes with its pros and cons. This needs to be addressed before formulating and implementing any new venture or step. Despite the best motives and intentions of the Look and Act East Policy, India’s image and standing have suffered. Therefore, Indian Diplomacy and diplomats must take a fresh look and modify the existing policies and make them tailor-made to suit India’s interests domestically as well as internationally.

The Act East Policy is much more effective and comprehensive than the Look East Policy. This does not mean that the Look East Policy should be neglected. Behind the success and foundational base of the Act East Policy was the Look East Policy.

[disha]

Totally awesome thread. We can start collecting the links prior to the eclipse of knowledge of those links due to colonial empire.

It is the Indian civilization that is the leitmotif of the Asian thought. This thread will bring that out.

[sanjaykumar]

Just met a Laotian 40 year old woman. She was wearing a red mauli and also rudraksh on her wrist.

She was wearing the mauli on the left wrist. I did not know that females wear it on the left until I looked it up.

[krithivas]

Personal note (hope it is OK) - I used to work extensively with Samsung and LG engineers during late 90's and early 2000's. A Samsung engineer used to tell me how people with the last name "Kim" were descendants of an Indian princess (that a Korean king had married). They had a special affection for Indians due to this civilizational link. Hope we can build on it especially to thwart the mischief of the Church in Korea.

[RoyG]

Ramana,

The point of my question isn’t to sidetrack but to get others to critically think and not simply cut and paste articles and data points which has become fashionable in the forum.

Indian thought colonized all of Asia because it did not see human beings as separate from nature. In other words the world itself was experienced as an order and that order needed to be preserved to prevent its disintegration. Contrast this with the semitic culture which sees the world as chaotic with an underlying order (gods law) which needed to be uncovered.

This is the reason why we still have an intact extended family unit and never produced an institution Ike the Church. This is something that we as Asians share. This is also the reason why in just a few hundred years without an army or wealth, Hindu/Buddhist thought was able to help Asia advance working through local culture and traditions. It tried to preserve order at the most basic unit by breaking the ignorance that we are separate from nature (awakening). This is the access that our lore gave to others. Spread of knowledge was the key.

Now we are at a crossroads. Merely regurgitating ancient links won’t be enough to safeguard our Indian-ness. We need to figure out why all of Asia stopped working through its own psychologies to solve real world problems. Was it merely colonization which is responsible or something deeper?

Why did China and Cambodia have a cultural revolution (epistemicide) despite being deeply connected with Indian culture and thinking? Is it possible to bring about another linkage project based on a shared cognition?

[ramana]

I just returned from a month long trip to Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The Indic civilisational connect is obvious and stares one in the face.

From my travels, it appears, the people of Cambodia and Lao have a greater awareness and appreciation of their Indic civilisational connects. Vietnam not so much.

Besides the obvious Angkor Wat, in Laos I sat in Buddhist temples in Luang Prabang and chatted with the monks on the meaning of "Buddha Sharanam Gacchami" and the full prayer (which I know). It was quite a connection through civilisational time. Hard to describe.

I could pick up some Sanskrit words - distorted by passage of time, distance and localisation.

The connect is also evident in Thailand and Myanmar which I have also travelled through. I traveled through Myanmar north south.

In Cambodia my host (Airbnb) referred to me as "my Indian brother" with genuine warmth and affection. He cooked dinner for me every night even though that was not part of the deal.

Prambanan in Indonesia, a UNESCO site, has the second largest Hindu temple in SE Asia after Angkor War.

My feeling is these countries will be happy if India takes a more active policy and approach to increase engagement on a civilisational basis. I thin M is pushing in that direction.

Not related to SE Asia but still civilisational - I have travelled through Egypt and Morocco north - south and random people were happy to connect and chat calling me Al-Hindi, Al-Hindi and brother you are one of us. Quite amazing.So westward is also worth looking at.

Please read the work of George Coedes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C%C5%93d%C3%A8s

[ramana]

God and King : The Devaraja Cult in South Asian Art & Architecture
Author: Sengupta, Arputha Rani (Ed.)
Year: 2005

ISBN : 8189233262

Main Features »
George Cédes and Ananda Coomaraswamy made astute observations on the cult of deified royalty in South Asia for the first time. The cult of devaraja or God King was the Cambodian state religion, while it may have originated in Java under the great Shrivijaya Empire at a time when it exercised some control over Cambodia and Siam. Of the thirteen temples attributed to the Khmer Kings in Cambodia six were certainly dedicated, between the ninth and eleventh centuries, to the royal linga. A seventh, Angkor Wat, became the mausoleum of its founder Suryavarman II. And, finally, Bayon, built at the end of the twelfth century was installed with an image of Jayabuddha, named after Jayavarman VII. The focus of the new cult instituted by Jayavarman II was a deity known in Khmer language as 'the master of the world who is the king', the equivalent in Sanskrit being devaraja. The Cambodian version is similar to the Hindu cult of the World Ruler, the Chakravartin.
In Asia the king did become god, and all power, religious and secular, was centered in him. The task of tracing the Devaraja Cult is simplified in a series of Temple Mountains where the consecrated image is associated by its name with the kingly founder, thus revealing ‘several devaraja’ in a flourishing cult. In the cult, a unique image created in a particular era was passed on to the successor. The hypothesis of a single devaraja venerated as a deity throughout the centuries ought to raise some difficulties. The devaraja cult in India as elsewhere in Asia is unique when considered as a philosophical and religious conception that coincides with the veneration of ancestors and guardians of the soil. It seems that the originality of the devaraja cult lay in the integration of the personal cult of the king into a system in which the deification of the eternal principle of royalty was adopted to ensure stability, peace and prosperity. On 27th and 28th March, 2001 distinguished scholars gathered in The National Museum, New Delhi, to discuss the influence of the royal cult in Asian art and architecture, which merits greater attention. The proceedings is published in this volume with eleven colour plates. It is hoped to be a befitting tribute to Dr. Grace Mac Cann Morley, who encouraged advancement of knowledge in order to place the material culture of India in its historical and cultural context.

IN PS-1 movie there is a dance at Kadambur by a proto-devaraja. Looks like the concept is from Tamil Nadu that went to Srivijaya which had a long fight with the Cholas. Dont know how authentic Maniratnam was in the movie but he did add elements of TN culture.

[SSridhar]

Remnants of curry dating back 1,800 years found on stone tools in Southeast Asia is oldest outside India - SCMP
Forget references India and Pakistan (huh?), the article is interesting.

An international team has uncovered the oldest evidence of curry outside India and shown the historical significance of the journey its spice ingredients took to get there.

The dish – known for its earthy, spicy taste, originally from South Asia and now popular around the globe – was probably brought to the Vietnamese table more than 1,800 years ago thanks to maritime trade networks, researchers from Australia, Vietnam and China have found.

By analysing stone grinding tools unearthed at an archaeological site in southern Vietnam, they detected traces of turmeric, ginger, clove, nutmeg and cinnamon, among other spices that remain key ingredients of today’s curry recipes, the team reported in Science Advances last week.

“Our study suggests that curries were most likely introduced to Southeast Asia by migrants during the period of early trade contact via the Indian Ocean,” said the study’s first author, Weiwei Wang, a PhD candidate at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra.

“Given these spices originated from various different locations, it’s clear people were undertaking long-distance journeys for trade purposes,” Wang said in a statement on the university’s website on Saturday.

The history of curry began more than 4,000 years ago in India and Pakistan. Archaeological excavations in India have found remains of turmeric, ginger, aubergine and mango attached to human teeth and in cooking pots, according to Wang and her colleagues.

However, it is not clear how curry started to reach the rest of the world. Historians have long known about a maritime trade route running between Asia and Europe during the same era as the land-based Silk Road, but their knowledge relied mainly on written records rather than physical evidence.

One of the reasons that Indo-China Sea is the only correct name.

Between 2017 and 2019, a series of unique stone tools were found at the archaeological complex known as Óc Eo, which is believed to have been a major port city in the Kingdom of Funan from the 1st through to the 7th centuries AD.

The tools ranged from grinding slabs to pestles and mortars, and were apparently used for pounding and grinding spices into powders and for releasing their flavours.

Originally, the researchers were not focused on curry but hoped to learn how those tools worked and what they might reveal about the ancient spice trade, wrote Wang and co-author Hsiao-chun Hung, also from ANU, in a separate article for the Australia-based website The Conversation.

After extracting hundreds of starch grains – tiny structures in plant cells that can be preserved for a long time – stuck on the surface of the tools, the researchers identified eight culinary spices: turmeric, ginger, fingerroot, sand ginger, galangal, clove, nutmeg and cinnamon.

While the microscopic remains were dominated by ginger plants, the researchers found some components originated from outside Vietnam. For instance, cinnamon originates in Sri Lanka and nutmeg is native to the Banda Islands in eastern Indonesia, according to the researchers.

“Our research is the first to confirm, in a very tangible way, that spices were valuable commodities exchanged on the global trading network nearly 2,000 years ago,” Wang and Hung wrote in The Conversation article.

“If you’ve ever prepared curry from scratch, you’ll know it’s not simple. It involves a range of unique spices and the use of grinding tools. It’s interesting to note that nearly 2,000 years ago, individuals living outside India had a strong desire to savour the flavours of curry,” they wrote.

“Also fascinating is the fact that the curry recipe used in Vietnam today has not deviated significantly from the ancient Óc Eo period … It goes to show that a good recipe will stand the test of time.”

In their paper, the researchers implied that the grinding tools were probably imported from India, too, but some scholars were sceptical.

“To assume that people in Southeast Asia couldn’t figure out how to basically crush their food with these stones is a huge leap,” Tom Hoogervorst, a linguist and archaeologist at the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies, told the Scientific American, which reported on the research.

Next up, the team planned to compare their findings with larger plant remains unearthed from the site, said the co-authors, which also included researchers from the Centre for Archaeology at the Southern Institute for Social Sciences in Ho Chi Minh City and the department of history at Sun Yat-sen University in Zhuhai, southern China.

The team said it would also analyse remarkably well preserved plant seeds excavated from the site and look for other spice plants to better understand when and how each type of spice or plant started to be traded globally.

Funan 65 BCE to 600 CE, was Hindu. Oc Eo, mentioned above, was a bustling port in Funan connecting India on the West with China on the East. Traders waited here for favourable winds to go either side. Funan laid the Hinduization of the rest of South East Asia.

The Chinese did not venture out on high seas most of the time, except for brief periods like during the Song Dynasty or briefly during the Ming Dynasty. The traders came to their ports unlike Indian sailors going out for at least two thousand years from Pala, Kalinga, Pallava, Tamil to Malabar, Marathas & Kutchis.

[Kati]

Ramana Saar, how can I communicate with you privately? I have a bridge to sell you.

[rahulm]

How [Buddhist] statues looted from a Cambodian field wound up in the National Gallery of Australia

[Haresh]

Personal note (hope it is OK) - I used to work extensively with Samsung and LG engineers during late 90's and early 2000's. A Samsung engineer used to tell me how people with the last name "Kim" were descendants of an Indian princess (that a Korean king had married). They had a special affection for Indians due to this civilizational link. Hope we can build on it especially to thwart the mischief of the Church in Korea.

Where I live in London, there are quite a few Koreans. They do seem to have a soft spot for Indians. Even though most are Evangelical xtians.

I also have to deal with a woman from Thailand, she loves all things Indian (including me)

Just a quick Google & I found this.

https://www.indiatimes.com/explainers/n ... 04542.html

https://www.google.com/search?q=kim+sur ... e&ie=UTF-8

[ramana]

Not just trading, India provided security for the shipping lanes all through Indian ocean to Malacca Straits. Chola Kingdom is one of the truly global kingdom in India. They were controlling the whole of southern peninsula's trading routes, Ports of Musiri, Thondi, Puhar and Trincomalee(Worlds largest natural deep sea port, till Sidney(Australia) came into picture) were under their control. Even though Musiri was under Chera king's, they were suzerain to Chola empire during that time. The customs and trade revenue from these ships were far higher than their domestic revenue, that was a truly golden period for India. During their initial days, the ships needs to take two stops to go to China and far-east from West, hence its mandatory for all the ships to make a stop in their territory and in Malacca straits of Sumatra (Indonesia). Later when the ship technology developed, the ships has a choice of stopping either in India or in Sumatra. The then Sumatran King of Srivijaya involved in unscrupulous trade practice of blocking the Malacca strait and forcing the ships to stop in Sumatra. This angered the chola kings and they conducted a brilliant Military campaign of sailing their navy 2000 miles away and captured Sumatra and continued their supremacy. In terms of military campaign, that was un paralleled. Current EAM and their family originated from this area and every one in this area know this history. The Chola's were trading right from Alexandria (Rome) in the west to China/Korean Peninsula in the east, almost entire known civilizations of that time.

[ramana]

Also, Koulatunga Chola revived the Chola sea route dominance and conquered parts of Malaya.
To me, after Rajaraj he is the Chola to admire.