Development Nepal

Development and Stability

 Article

Hindu Politics: What Does It Tell Us about Religion in Nepal?

January 14, 2006

-Chudamani Basnet

Contact: cbasnet@gmail.com

 

This time around Hindu politics has come to the fore in Nepal’s political turmoil. But little has been said about effects of Hindu politics on the people’s beliefs and religious commitment. If one were to believe in tourist brochures and speeches made by a few self-proclaimed “Hindu leaders,” Nepal definitely would deserve a title of a Hindu “Mecca.” It is worth noting that many people still believe that the medieval Europe was largely “religious” in nature. But recent historical inquiries point out that this was not the case; people’s participation and their commitment in religious affairs were not the norm during the medieval period. In the absence of any systematic study on the lived-Hinduism in Nepal, the medieval Europe metaphor could make a fitting comparison. State sponsored imageries of the cow and the king could be too deceptive to rely on.

It is not hard to see that Nepal’s Hinduism is reeling under an extreme strain. The decennial census reports are indicative. From census year 1961 to 1981, Nepal’s Hindu population grew steadily, but since 1981, the number of people identifying themselves with the “Hindu” group has decreased by about 9 percent. The ethnic movement in the 1990s is an obvious suspect in this process. But let’s not forget that the story of taming a cat during the ancestor worship ritual (Shraddha) is well circulated among the educated high caste Hindus in Nepal. Nor is it hard to guess that many of the “great” features of Hinduism (as we practice it) are taken by the educated class as instances of shame rather than pride. Surprisingly, we do not hear much cry on this staggering decrease in the Hindu population, and on questions about Hindu beliefs in Nepal. This is especially so because the Hindu religion has been promoted as one of the pillars of the “Nepali nation.” It is my contention that the decreasing attraction toward the Hindu religion in Nepal has to do with the stagnation of Hinduism rather than the attractiveness of other religions. The big question is: How and why is this taking place?

To answer this question, we need a two-tier analysis. The first is the historical relationship between the Hindu religion and the Nepali state. The Nepali state’s ceaseless effort to carve a “Hindu nation” out of Nepal’s diverse populace is not new. King Prithvi Narayan Shah, the founder of “modern” Nepal, defined his “hard-earned” nation as a real Hindu country [Asali Hindostan]. Many argue that King P. N. Shah was defining the Nepali nation against the advancing British colonizers as well as the Muslim Moguls in the eighteenth century India. During the decades following P. N. Shah’s declaration, the Nepali state actively pursued a carrot-and-stick policy to coerce or allure the people into following Hinduism. The religious debate reached its zenith during the drafting of the new constitution in 1990. The then president of the World Hindu Federation threatened that he would fast unto death as protest if the constitution drafting committee did not declare Nepal a “Hindu state.” Strange though it might seem, even Nepal’s “royal army” joined the fray demanding that the constitution drafting committee declare Nepal a Hindu state. Finally, Hindu forces prevailed over the emerging “liberal” elites.

During the 1990s, Hindu politics did not make much news. But the dramatic rise of King Gyanendra to the throne has given a new life to Nepal’s Hindu politics. Perhaps because of the unusual circumstances under which he came to assume the throne, King Gyanendra, knowingly or unknowingly, not only shows missionary fervor in his “religious” behavior, but also he seems to be wholeheartedly patronizing Hindu politics in Nepal. It is not surprising then that King Gyanendra assumed the title of the “world Hindu leader” (Hindu Samrat). A government attorney, who furnished “Hindu King” as the “evidence” of King Gyanendra’s legitimacy and rights to rule the country to the country’s Supreme Court (SC), has been recently “promoted” to the post of a SC judge. In the current politically charged situation, an aristocrat, a King’s close relative and a former army general has become a “Hindu leader.” This is particularly interesting as it reflects a new political dynamism going on in the country. Note that the Hindu leadership is moving away from the Bahuns, the traditional natural leaders, to the aristocrats. Despite all foul cries about “Indian intervention” and India’s political threats to Nepal, India’s Hindu zealots are more than welcomed in Nepal’s palace corridors.

Not only the state machinery, but also Nepal’s private media are party to this tradition. The “independent” private media in democracy has been supporting the Nepali state like an obedient kid. Newspapers and magazines often report “conversion” efforts with missionary zeal. The narrative played out by Nepal’s media over and over is faultlessly same: “Rich Christians” visit the “poor” Nepalis, and deceive them into following an “unholy” Christian religion. “Christian missionary activities” supposedly threaten the “Nepali nation.” Surprisingly, the media narratives put the “Islam threat” in a different order (rather than the usual Christian conversion threat). In short, Nepal’s now influential private media has supported the Nepali state faultlessly over the past several years. But why did this massive state investment on Hinduism NOT result in a healthy Hindu religion?

             To understand this little secret, we need a market analogy. What explain the present state of affairs in the Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation (RNAC) or Nepal Oil Corporation (NOC)? I believe that nobody would give it a second thought to declare that it is the state “intervention” or “protection” that has been ruining these corporations for decades. Some people might find it unbelievable or even outrageous, but the fact is that religious organizations behave much like business firms. State protection makes religious producers lazy, and due to the lack of competition, they are likely to offer sordid goods or inferior religious products and services. Further, insisting on “one religion” policy means that consumers are forced to buy inferior goods and services – like NOC distributed adulterated petrol or a Nepal Telecom mobile. It is my view that the NOC or the RNAC correctly depicts the situation of the present day Hinduism in Nepal.

             Nepal’s current neo-Hindu zealots want to monopolize Nepal’s religious market, and sell sordid goods in the name of the “great” tradition. In retrospect, Nepal’s Hinduism is “strange” in comparison to major world religions. Many might doubt if Hinduism as practiced in Nepal qualify for a Western academic definition of a “religion.” I suppose that the family and the kinship are the fundamental and de facto social organizations at least among high caste Hindus (One might observe, for example, a bit different picture among Kathmandu’s Newar Buddhist Hindus). How do the current Hindu leaders confront the Hindu diversity or a Hindu “mess,” one might add? The obvious answer is that the current Hindu “leaders” or organizations never have confronted the Nepali society. Ask Bharat Keshari Sing: What does it mean to be a Hindu or how the organization which he leads relates to Hinduism as practiced by the people of Nepal?” I am sure that you will be disappointed. Nepal’s Hindu leaders (with minor exceptions who played some role in their individual capacities) have never felt the need for social missions or connectedness to the every day life of the people. Instead, these lazy entrepreneurs want to run Hindu organizations like the RNAC or the NOC - state funds and protection. How it could deliver!

             Rajneesh follower Swami Ananda Arun or the Monokranti leader Bikashananda perhaps tells us a different story. Some time ago, I asked Swami Ananda Arun: Why are Rejneesh followers increasing in Nepal so rapidly? He gave his answer in two words to my full satisfaction – “hard work.” Any entrepreneur knows that hard work pays. Swami Arun did not go to the government asking for protection or funds. Indeed, he faced a lot of hurdles from the authorities. With the political change of 1990 which liberalized Nepal’s religious market to some extent, Swami Arun went out to the people. A firm believer in “hard work,” he confronted questions raised by his critiques. Many might disagree on Rajneesh’s teachings or Arun’s beliefs, but Nepal’s “Hindu leaders” who are used to living on state subsidy and protection can learn a lot from him. An even better example could be Vice-Chairman Dr. Tulsi Giri, who converted to one of the Christian “sects” a few years ago. He should be able to tell our Hindu leaders what it means going out to the people and confronting them face to face. Dr. Giri perhaps would tell them that he did not sell out his soul to Christian missionaries for money; nor would he say that he was “brainwashed” by a “cunning” missionary.

State intervention in religion is beneficial only for lazy entrepreneurs. Studies show that state monopoly on religion does not help in the long run. For example, religious participation and commitment in the United States is much higher than Western Europe. Why? The United States practices a strong church-state separation; Europe, in contrast, practices “religious monopoly;” religious organizations in Europe still depend upon state subsidies. As a result, the overall rate of participation and commitment in religion in Western Europe is lower in comparison to the United States. Moreover, controlling religious market and offering monopoly to a single religion encourage a religious “black market.” The recent visit of Dr. Sun Myung Moon in Nepal and the subsequent revelation that many of the participants knew “nothing” about Dr. Moon only shows how religion enters from the “back door” and how a religious “black market” flourishes in a state controlled religious economy.

Finally, the long held belief that religion (and superstition) will disappear with the advancement of science and modernity has proven wrong at least in many developed countries including the United States. In Nepal, thousands have already visited the “Budhha boy,” the meditating 14-year old boy in a deep forest in Bara district. It appears that there is no letting up in the people’s curiosity to understand the “mystery of their existence.” Religion is here to stay. But it is worth noting that lazy entrepreneurs who seek state intervention to protect their monopoly can not do justice to a living religion. Nepal’s Hinduism needs reinvigoration; only a competitive religious market can offer room for such reinvigoration. The unholy alliance between the Nepali state and the Hindu religion only harms the prospect of a healthy Hindu religion. The continuity of this alliance could mean a lesser Hinduism and of course, a contaminated politics.

 

Note: Theoretical perspectives in this article are drawn primarily from Rodney Stark, Stephen Warner, Roger Finke and Laurence R. Iannacone. Contact: cbasnet@gmail.com