Rabi Ray, former Speaker of
Lok Sabha, on Tibet
(Speech at the International Convention on Tibet
and Peace in South Asia, New Delhi, 12-14
August, 1989)
I want to make some remarks before I deal with the subject. I
was hearing the learned discourses of my distinguished friends
since yesterday and I want to make a revelation that during the
freedom struggle of independence, as far as I know, I cannot
recall a single communist leader of China, including Mao Tse
Tung or any other leader [who] uttered anything in support of
the freedom movement of India. Although the fact remains that
it fell to the lot of reactionary Chang Kai Shek who came all the
way to India in the Second World War and joined with President
Roosevelt, the then President of the United States of America,
to support the freedom movement of India. I had to reveal this
to tell you that at no point of time the present communist
leaders of China or their predecessor, the father of cultural
revolution in China, Mao Tse Tung, had supported the freedom
movement of India.
Another point I want to tell you is that there is a misconception
in India and outside India that those illustrious sons of India –
whom in his message His Holiness the Dalai Lama has praised
because they supported the freedom movement of Tibet, the
late Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Dr Rammanohar Lohia, Jayaprakash
Narayan and Rajagopalachari – there is a misconception spread
by the media, the electronic media and not printed media, that
Mr. Nehru who acquiesced in the baby murder of Tibet in 1949
is a forward looking Prime Minister, a forward looking politician,
whereas Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Dr Rajendra Prasad, Dr
Rammanohar Lohia, Rajagopalachari, since they supported the
freedom movement of Tibet they were backward looking. I think
you will all agree with me when I say that on the point of freedom
movement in Tibet, Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru was backward looking
and Dr Rajendra Prasad, Dr Rammanohar Lohia and Mr.
71
Vallabhbhai Patel were forward looking. I have no doubt in my
mind and I wish you also not to have any doubt in your mind.
Because if you do not take care, and if you do not take precaution
we will fall a prey to this misconception spread by the electronic
media and the apologists for the powers that be.
I would like to tell you that when Chou En Lai, (I think he
must have visited India during the ‘Hindi-Chini, Bhai-Bhai’
movement at least twice) he, of all persons, contacted a person
from Nagaland and told him that you are a Mongolian, we have
common relations with you. And I may tell you who are present
here, do not believe in these myths of Mongolian, Aryan, Asian,
etc. We don’t want to fall prey to these misconceptions and we
will do a yeoman service to Tibet if we do not believe in these
misconceptions.
Because may I tell you that in the ancient texts there is a
word ‘Jambudvipa’ and that includes Thailand, Laos, Cambodia,
Vietnam, Burma, Malaya, Tibet and of course, Himalayan Bhutan
and Sikkim. They have absolutely nothing to do with the tribes
of China – the Hans and Manchus – and they have so much
cultural relationship with us Indians, and we unwittingly, without
going into the facts of history, without knowing how the
documentation has taken place and researches been made, claim
that these are myths. If we fall a prey to these illusions then we
lose sight of the freedom movement of Tibet. We should take
care because I want to tell you that so far as cultural relationship
between India and Tibet is concerned, we believe that this
relationship is based on seven counts: 1. language, 2. script, 3.
way of life, 4. religion, 5. history, 6. land contours and 7. people.
On these seven counts, we must know and we must conclude
that relationship between Tibet and India is age-old and no
artificial barriers can deflect us from keeping this relationship
with Tibet.
Another thing I want to tell the Chinese is that the name
‘Asia’ in the Indo-Aryan languages derives its word not from
Chinese or any other language but from the Indian word Ushas,
the land of morning sun or the eastern land. Our ancestors at
one point of time were great enough to give areas now populated
by the Chinese the name ‘Asia.’
In so far as the relationship between China and India is
72
concerned, these names and nomenclatures have a great place.
Because Chinese told us that Mt. Everest is an English word
that does not mean that because the nomenclature is in English
that it does not belong to Nepal or India. But the local name in
Nepal is ‘Sagarmatha’. Unfortunately, we use these
nomenclatures and fall a prey to these machinations of the
Chinese people who say that this word, this nomenclature, is in
English.
I must tell you that so far as cultural relationship between
India and Tibet is concerned there is a great poet Kalidas who
in his Kumar Sambhava writes in Sanskrit:
Asty uttarasyam disi devatatma himalayo nama
nagadhirajah/ purvaparau toyanidhi vagahy
asthitah iva manadandah.
The poet Kalidas calls Himalayas the king of mountains and
soul of direction and describes it as seated between the eastern
and western oceans as though measuring the world. I challenge
the Chinese people if they can give a single quotation from
their ancient texts about the Himalayas, and then you will agree
with me when I say that we will not claim anything on Tibet if
any Chinese scholar can give a quotation half as beautiful from
their ancient literature. Because so far as the cultural heritage
and cultural precedents are concerned, we have enough proof
to show that cultural relationship between India and Tibet is
deep rooted and no artificial barrier can separate us from Tibet.
Lastly, I want to tell you that the first Indian, the first crusader
for the rights of Tibetans, is, I think, late Dr. Rammanohar Lohia,
who, in the key days of 1949, at a press conference in London,
said that Chinese people by occupying Tibet have committed
‘baby murder’ and Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru’s Government of India
had acquiesced in it. At that particular point of time Mr. Krishna
Menon was High Commissioner in London and he must have
told Pandit Nehru here and a campaign was started of vilification
of Dr. Lohia at that point of time. We all here owe a deep debt
of gratitude to the first Indian crusader for the rights of the
people of Tibet.
73
I must conclude my speech by quoting from Dr Rammanohar
Lohia’s speech and I think that is the apt quotation that I want
to give you which will prod you to think about the freedom of
Tibet. He says: “I hope that a strong and peaceful people of
India will one day be able to persuade a strong and peaceful
people of China to recognise the independence of Tibet, …”