Oped»
Born again Hindus
- CROSSROADS
APR 06 -
Secular Nepal is witnessing a resurgence of Hindu revivalism. There are three main components of this rising religious consciousness: one, Indian Babas’ and Hindu nationalists’ nostalgia for Nepal as a Hindu state; two, Nepali royalists’ dream to resurrect the gone Hindu monarchy; and, three, in the face of Nepal no longer being an official Hindu state to safeguard Hindu interests, the resurgence of Hindu ritualism in the form of Puran narration and performances and the proliferation of Bhajan Mandalis in the villages and towns of Nepal. While much has been and can be said about the vested interests of the first two — that they are motivated by Indian Babas’ and Hindu nationalists’ frustration with the Nehruvian legacy of secularism in India; the loosening grip of the upper caste minority over the lower caste majority because of electoral victories of the lower caste politicians in many states in the name of caste; increasing inroads into Indian society of consumerism; Maoism; aggressive Christian missionary organisations; growing anti-India, anti-Hindu belligerence of Islamic fundamentalist elements in Pakistan’s government as well as in society; and, not the least, the right-wing, reactionary intentions of Nepali monarchists to see their lost political power restored with the restoration of the crown by fanning Hindu passions — it is the cultural resurgence of fund-raising Puran explication and spread of Bhajan Mandalis that has intrigued me as a cultural phenomenon in secular Nepal.
In my village, too, this zeal for bhajans and temples has created a sensation. My village in eastern Morang is an ethnically mixed community of Muslims, Rajbanshis, and old and new settlers from the hills who have been living in harmony with each group’s cultural and ethnic prejudices intact. Among the Rajbanshis, various Vaishnavite cults had more or less replaced both the old style Madhesi Hindu ritualism and old style animism of the Ojhas. In the ever evolving form of religious and spiritual practice, Dev Chand Rajbanshi, a hardworking elder of the village, donated a piece of land by the oldest Peepul tree in the middle of the village for a Shiva temple to be built. Initially, the inspiration to donate the land by the Peepul had come from Dev Chand’s devotion to one of the Pranami gurus but it had no less been coaxed out by the newly formed village Bhajan Mandali comprised of new Nepali-speaking settlers.
In the past few years, the Bhajan Mandali has become active and prominent. The well-organised members would dance and sing Nepali bhajans door to door to spread virtue and make people happy. This was a new form of religious performance in place of the old Madhesi forms in which well-to-do Rajbanshis invited the mixed-language performances of Krishna Leela, Mahabharat and Ramayana from the Nepal-India border areas and, at times, revived and organised their own local “Bidyapat” dance and singing on festive occasions. In its zeal to raise funds for the temple, the Mandali formed a committee comprised exclusively of people from within its own group, excluding the Rajbanshis as well as the old settlers from the hills. They then organised a Puran explication and invited one of the brilliant female Puran narrators of eastern Nepal and her group of performers.
For the first three days, nobody save the Bhajan Mandali members came to listen. The narrator and her performers were mystified by this non-existent turnout. They couldn’t explain why their proven popularity elsewhere had failed to attract crowds. Then the narrator, veteran of such events that she was, understood the monopolising tendency of the Bhajan Mandali and exclusion of both the Rajbanshis and the old settlers. She apologised to the villagers, asked the Bhajan Mandali to dismantle the old committee and form a new multiethnic committee and successfully carried on with her performances and fund-raising for the temple.
The Bhajan Mandali hasn’t yet learned the lesson. They now want to cut down the oldest Peepul tree and sell its wood to finance the temple construction. But the Rajbanshis oppose the move. Dev Chand is outraged at the fact that these people from the hills cut down all the forest and now they want to destroy the Peepul. Villagers say that the Peepul was planted more than a hundred years ago by one of the first Rajbanshis and so the tree carries within it the history of the village. Cutting it would mean wiping out the history of the village. But the Bhajan Mandali does not care about the Peepul; it has little feeling about the history of the Rajbanshi village. The Peepul is like any other tree whose leafy branches they cut down to feed their goats and cows or put to use in some other way.
Elsewhere in Nepal also, there seems to be a contestation going on between old, vernacular and born-again Hindus. Old vernacular Hindus would take religion as what it is — a private or public performance of offerings to facilitate a relationship between God and the self, family and society. It contains a plethora of gurus, Babas, cults, paths, gods and goddesses. It is accommodative, amorphous, pluralist, flexible and multicultural. This is the beauty of Hinduism that many another religions lack. It is quiet and personal rather than loud and demonstrative; meditative and ritualistic rather than loudspeaker-noisy, disturbing people’s sleep during the night; it lets people of other faiths be who they are rather than impose itself on them in the name of the nation, monotheism and superior belief. It even overrides caste by challenging Brahmanism.
As long as born-again Hindus confine themselves to their own and their fellow Hindus’ spiritual, physical and public well-being and salvation through yoga, meditation, and ritual performances, they should be welcome. If they challenge old Hindu orthodoxies — such as caste-ism, untouchability, the dowry system, coercive arranged marriages, female subordination — they ought to be praised. For if the Hindu past initiated and enforced such social abuses, the Hindu present has the duty and responsibility to abolish them. But if the agenda of this resurgence is to reestablish high caste hegemony, take control of the state and reimpose monoethnic, monoculural programmes and structures, then they ought to be opposed by any means possible.
When the Babas, gurus, priests, Hindu nationalists and Nepali political leaders speak of Nepal as a Hindu state, why don’t they first speak against Brahminism’s outrages, such as the caste system, untouchability, female subordination and so on? To oppose Hindu nationalism and overarching Hindu ambition to reestablish Nepal as a Hindu state is to oppose with equal vehemence Islamic or Christian fundamentalism wherever they may occur. Religion remains valuable as a spiritual, cultural and social practice when it enriches one’s personal, familial and social life. It becomes counterproductive when it becomes political and tries to dominate people of other faiths; dehumanises them by denigrating them as lesser or lost mortals; and embarks on nationalist agendas. So, let’s celebrate the pluralist, tolerant, flexible, accommodative, dynamic aspects of Hinduism and reject its rigid, caste-ist, nationalist and reactionary resurgence.
Posted on: 2010-04-07 07:36
Headlines
Advertisements
