 |
Kathmandu Friday July 06, 2001 Ashadh 22, 2058.
|
Of royalty and casteism
I would like to appreciate the effort made by Ameet Dhakal to
bring up some aspects of casteism in Nepal (TKP, June 22). However, I noticed that there
were some distortions of information in his account of equating the Royal Palace with
commoners in terms of practicing casteism. If any anthropologist is investigating the
history of caste discrimination in the country, he or she would know that the royalty, in
association with Hindu high priests, had been the source of inspiration for commoners to
practice casteism in Nepal. Originally, many people, the hill tribes in particular, did
not even have any knowledge of caste hierarchy, and were not practicing caste
discrimination by their tradition. The rulers (kings and priests inclusive) were the ones
who introduced and legalised the caste structure, to the advantage of their
"divide and rule policy". Even lately, the practice of casteism has never been
lessened by Shah or Rana dynasty, but in fact, they always nurtured and practised it. Even
today, the royal family practises the crudest form of caste discrimination. They even
practice hierarchical discrimination at the "clan" level such as discriminating
between clans of Chandra Shamsher and Juddha Shamsher as in the case of Devyani Rana. Many
might not know that the Kings and Ranas used to upgrade or degrade the status of a caste
at their will. Only in the past one century, there had been at least two so-called
untouchable castes upgraded to touchables by royal decree. Therefore, Dhakal’s
proposition of commoners influencing the Royal Palace from outside of its 7 feet
wall is not true, but it is the other way round. If the royals had taken a liberal path of
considering all their subjects equal, the caste system in Nepal would not have gotten the
status of an evil in our society today.
At this point, citing an incident may be relevant. For the
coronation ceremony of the Late King Birendra in 1975, as per the age old practice, four
special priests each from four Hindu Varnas- Brahmin, Chhetriyas, Baishya and Sudra were
to be invited to perform some coronation rituals. The obvious choice from Sudra then was
Hiralal Bishwakarma (a minister in Panchayat era). However, he became a matter of debate
in the Royal Palace, because he was considered an untouchable. The Royalty and high
priests were so obsessed with casteism then that they were hesitant to follow what the
traditional rituals of the King’s coronation ceremony had called for. Finally, the
Royal Palace came to a compromise, and called in Padam Sundar Lawati (another Minister,
but not considered an untouchable) as a priest representing the Sundra Varna to perform
the rituals. It has to be seen soon who will be called in for the forthcoming coronation
of our new King.
Dr Drona P Rasali
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Canada |
