Epistemological Crisis in Nepal

Pushp Kamal Subedi University of Exeter, UK

The present Nepal is in the state of crisis at all. How to define the term "crisis". It might have various definitions. According to Oxford Advanced Learning Dictionary, "crisis" is defined "as a time of great difficulty or danger or when an important decision must be made, e.g. in an illness, somebody’s life, history etc." I think Nepal has suffered from economic crisis, social-life-structure crisis (caste/ethnic inequality), and historical development of political crisis. Here I wish to explore the term "crisis" in terms of Hindu system.

As Harka Bahadur Gurung notes, the peopling of the Himalaya was the outcome of successive waves of migration of Mongoloids (the Kiranti) from the east and Caucasoids (the Khasa) from the west. In the hills, Mongoloid tribals generally occupy the temperate zone and sub-tropical zone by Caucasoid castes. In addition, the Khas of western Nepal and Parbatiya are Caucasoid people living in the middle hills. The Tarai also has some tribals (Tharu, Dhanukh, Dhimal, Gangai, Rajbansi, Satar, and Jhanger), but they have been overwhelmed by Caucasoid castes spilling over from the Gangetic plain.

Nepal is a country of numerous caste/ethnic societies and has different cultural traditions. So the people of the Himalaya are socially segmented along lines of caste, sub-caste and ethnic and sub-ethnic categories. The caste system is fundamentally rooted in the Hindu religion. The ethnic system has been rooted mainly in mutually exclusive origin myths, historical mutual seclusion, and the state’s intervention in redefining and recreating individual, household, and more collective ethnic belongingness.

Crisis in Caste System

One important question emerges here the caste system set up by Manu is in "epistemological crisis". I mean the present-day situation in relation to caste structure is not in existence as per Manu rule. Hindus believe that all men in the world are divided into four castes. This theory of four classes is based on the law of Manu, is known as the Varna system. Varna refers to the four scriptually sanctioned status groups of Hinduism, the Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (rulers or warriors), Vaishyas (traders or herdsmen) and Shudras (servants). One possible translation of Varna is therefore "estates" in the sense of three status groups of Medieval Europe, the clergy, nobility and peasantry.

Practically the so-called Hindu society has divided into two groups. One is purity and other impurity. So Hindu rule has been affected by epistemological crisis.

To justify this statement let me allow explaining "What is epistemological crisis?" As Alasdair MacIntyre suggests more generally that all traditions are characterised by a recurrent developmental trajectory across three phases: i. in periods of stability, authority, texts, and beliefs have not yet been put to question; ii. eventually, however, inadequacies are identified but not remedies; iii. finally, reformulations are identified. He refers to that period in which practitioners grapple with their tradition’s inadequacies as one of "epistemological crisis".

Dumont developed the theory of caste, which was one of the pioneering works in the sociological literature. As he pointed out the two oppositions form the ideological basis of caste.

Firstly, he divides the four categories of Vernas into two: purity (the block of first three viz., Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas whose members are ‘twice born’ in the sense that they participate in initiation, second birth in the religious life in general) and impurity (Shudras) at the opposite pole of the caste system. Dumont’s theory has been criticized (see Quigley). But in the real ground his theory does employ to the social institutions in Nepal, because touchable Brahman, Kshatriyas, Visaya are at one pole and untouchable at the other, in practice. But anthropologists and pro-ethnic intellectuals avoid this reality, they are trying to define their own position what Manu has explained. Within touchable groups intercaste marriage is more or less acceptable but until now the marriage practice between touchable and untouchable is not socially accepted. From these points of view, Hindu system is in the midst of its own epistemological crisis.

At last I limit my discussion to the range of political anarchism found in Nepalese agrarian society. I have no command of the literature on historical development of political crisis and embrace any excuse for not confronting some of the excruciatingly complex political system found here.

Nepal is one of the least-developed countries in the world, with an economy already in serious difficulties. The level of economy reforms remains very low as a whole. It is caused by fragmentariness of national economy, presence of semi-feudal survival or anachronism, the insufficient of financial resources and skilled workers (manpower) and the improper management towards the skilled workers. In 1983, Blaikie and his group showed Nepal is in a state of crisis, fundamentally rooted in a failure of productive organization associated with its economic and political underdevelopment. Now the political situation has been changed but the rest of things are same as before 1991. In addition, there are frequent famines, process of erosion, ecological decline, deforestation caused by political motivation. For example, the percentage of deforestation was high at the time of referendum in 1981 and followed by the period of Interim Government in 1991.

Nepal is neither fully incorporated as a colony, nor genuinely isolated, it was created as a periphery of Imperial India-as a buffer state to be kept in artificial traditionalism yet used for imperial purposes; this situation was maintained after Indian independence. Nepal was suffered and continues to suffer the political economy as a semi-colony of India.

The political history of Nepal has been suffered from conspiracy. When contemporary ruler enforced Bhimsen Thapa to committed suicide himself in prison, then the seed of plot was planted in Nepalese politics. Indeed politics is the political pathway of group-domination over others in the name of people and country. If we look at the rest of history we find many peoples were killed in between power and politics. For example, around the beginning of the seventh century a junior member of the royal dynasty of Makwanpur was able to replace the Ghale tribe in support of another tribe Dura. At that time both sides killed many peoples.

King Mahendra and B. P. Koirala had philosophical crisis. As a result, King Mahendra was able to impose his dictatorship and the country had been ruined over 30 years. The difference between King Mahendra and B. P. Koirala was who would be a dictatorship either under the kingship or in the name of multiparty system. Now present leaderships have same problem.

It is unlikely to justify the accident happened in Nepal on 1st June 2001 is the cumulative outcome of power struggle within royal family, but so-called eyewitnesses and evidence has proved that son killed his parent and siblings including other relatives because of having marriage dispute. But this carnage has created a new crisis in the history of royal family that would eventually lead to some more crises there.

Received through email: Chief editor

Headline | Letter | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past