13/10/2025
The Mulbekh Maitreya and the Civilisational Grammar of Himalayan Buddhism: From Kashmir to Bamiyan [Prof Satish Ganjoo]
Introduction: The colossal rock-carved image of Maitreya Buddha at Mulbekh in Ladakh is far more than a devotional statue. It is a civilisational archive, a silent yet eloquent witness to the dialogue between Kashmir, Ladakh and Tibet. Carved in the 7th-8th centuries CE, the Mulbekh colossus embodies syncretism, geopolitics and spiritual aspiration. To comprehend its deeper significance, one must not only situate it in the continuum of Indo-Tibetan relations but also compare it with other monumental expressions of Buddhist art, most notably the Bamiyan Buddhas of Afghanistan.
I. Kashmir as the Cultural Fountainhead: From the 7th century onwards, Kashmir was the intellectual and artistic nucleus of North Indian Buddhism. Its monasteries, universities and ateliers transmitted both ideas and artistic idioms to Central Asia and Tibet. Masters such as Śāntarakṣita and Padmasambhava, trained in Kashmir, became the heralds of Buddhism in Tibet. The Mulbekh Maitreya bears unmistakable Kashmiri traits -- the ornate crown, the syncretic Shaivite-Bodhisattva features and the refined humanism of its expression. In its very stone, it carries the signature of Kashmiri genius.
II. Ladakh as the Buffer and Mediator: Ladakh, straddling the caravan arteries of the Indus corridor, was never a passive recipient of culture. It functioned as a buffer and mediator, absorbing Kashmiri artistry and Tibetan religiosity, then localising both in its landscape. The Mulbekh Maitreya thus emerges as a Ladakhi sentinel, guarding the ancient route from Kashmir to Tibet. Its location was deliberate: the road itself became sanctified, its travellers reminded of the protective presence of the Buddha-to-come.
III. Tibet and the Struggle for Cultural Hegemony: From the 8th century, the rising Tibetan empire sought both political and cultural dominance over Ladakh. Yet Mulbekh resists complete Tibetanisation. While Tibetan ritual practices entered Ladakh, the icon itself retained Kashmiri idioms. This duality illustrates Ladakh’s precarious but creative position -- caught between Tibetan suzerainty and Kashmiri inspiration; and, fashioning its own synthesis in stone.
IV. Mulbekh and Bamiyan: A Comparative Semiotics
1. Landscape as Sacred Theatre: The Bamiyan Buddhas, carved in the 6th century, transformed the Bamiyan Valley into a sacred amphitheatre along the Silk Route. The Mulbekh Maitreya, though smaller, performs a similar function: it sacralises the Leh-Kargil route, not by sheer scale but by strategic placement. Both turn geography itself into theatre for the sacred.
2. Iconographic Syncretism: Bamiyan reflects Greco-Buddhist syncretism, blending Hellenistic drapery with Indian iconography. Mulbekh embodies Kashmiri syncretism, fusing Bodhisattva grace with Shaivite ornamentation. Both reveal Buddhism’s genius for absorbing local idioms into universal imagery.
3. Political Messaging: Bamiyan projected the cosmopolitan power of Kushan and Hephthalite elites, Mulbekh asserted Ladakh’s spiritual autonomy amidst Tibetan and Kashmiri rivalries. Both are political icons masquerading as religious art, using stone to naturalise authority.
4. Destinies of Stone: Bamiyan was annihilated in 2001, a global wound inflicted by iconoclasm. Mulbekh survived -- protected by remoteness, reverence and continuity. Thus, Bamiyan symbolises rupture, Mulbekh symbolises resilience. Together, they narrate Buddhism’s contested history across Asia.
V. The Dogra Annexation and Colonial Gaze: The Dogra conquest of Ladakh in 1834 and the subsequent British suzerainty reframed monuments like Mulbekh within the colonial archive. For European explorers, it was an ethnographic curiosity, a relic of “Tibetan Buddhism.” Yet this narrow framing obscured its Indo-Kashmiri origins and political symbolism. The 1850 photograph thus preserves the monument visually but strips it of context, an irony typical of colonial documentation.
VI. Symbolism in the Contemporary Geopolitical Order -- In the 21st century, Mulbekh has acquired renewed significance:
-- As a marker of Ladakh’s Buddhist identity within the Indian polity after its separation from Jammu & Kashmir in 2019.
-- As a civilisational link to Kashmir, reaffirming that Ladakh’s roots extend into India rather than being subsumed under Tibet alone.
-- As a counter-narrative to Bamiyan’s loss, demonstrating survival where destruction once triumphed.
Conclusion: Stone as Memory, Dialogue and Resistance
The Mulbekh Maitreya, when compared with the Bamiyan Buddhas and contextualised alongside Ajanta and Ellora, reveals the shifting cartography of Buddhist monumentalism across Asia.
Ajanta (2nd century BCE - 6th century CE): These cave frescoes and sculptures in western India represent the interiorisation of the sacred. Here, the emphasis was on monastic meditation spaces, inward-looking devotion and artistic narration of the Jātakas. The caves sanctify the mountain from within, turning stone into a cosmic womb of enlightenment.
Bamiyan (6th century CE): The colossal Buddhas of Afghanistan embody the exteriorisation of the sacred. They were not introspective meditation halls but monumental declarations, visible to caravans across the Silk Route. Bamiyan proclaimed Buddhism’s universal reach and cosmopolitan confidence, blending Hellenistic, Iranian and Indian aesthetics.
Mulbekh (7th-8th century CE): Standing between Ajanta’s interior and Bamiyan’s exterior, Mulbekh represents a transitional synthesis. It is not a hidden cave but neither a full valley-temple complex. It is a sentinel in stone, carved on a strategic cliff to sanctify movement rather than seclusion. Its iconography fuses Kashmiri and Shaivite motifs with Tibetan sensibilities, making it a dialogic monument of cultural negotiation.
Thus, Ajanta, Bamiyan and Mulbekh form a triangular narrative of Buddhist art:
-- Ajanta speaks of meditation and narrative interiority;
-- Bamiyan proclaims monumentality and universal visibility;
-- Mulbekh embodies strategic survival and cultural resilience.
In destiny, too, the three diverge. Ajanta was abandoned but rediscovered, Bamiyan was annihilated, Mulbekh endures. Together, they dramatise the three fates of civilisational memory —rediscovery, destruction and continuity.
The Mulbekh Maitreya, therefore, is not merely a local Ladakhi relic. It is part of a pan-Asian Buddhist grammar -- linking the caves of Deccan India to the cliffs of Bamiyan and the caravan roads of Ladakh. It stands as a living archive of survival, a stone that still speaks, rebutting silence and reminding us that the Himalayas are not barren frontiers but storied landscapes of eternal dialogue.
