The Glorious Revolution in England, the American Revolution, and the French Revolution destroyed the doctrine of ‘Divine Right of Kings’ and rulers thereafter in the Western world have depended upon the consent of the governed for their legitimacy.
Unlike the Chinese and the Westerners, Hindus do not have a uniform tradition of spiritual or philosophical legitimacy for kings and rulers. All that the Chieftain of Gorkha had to do in the eighteenth century was assume the kingship of conquered territories, which the vanquished population had to meekly accept or be prepared to face the wrath of victorious warriors.
Solumn name SIDELINES
The ex-king has shown that his orientation is towards ‘glories’ of contested past and not the imagination of a harmonious future.
The tradition of conferring legitimacy upon kings through an elaborate rite of coronation was probably brought into Nepal much later. A king had to be ritually anointed immediately after the death of his predecessor—the crown had to have a head at all times. Pundits, priests, precepts, courtiers, aristocrats, merchants, peasants and diplomats recognized his reign only after the invocation of divine endorsement for the new realm.
When he botched the royal-military takeover, Chairman Gyanendra lost the Mandate of Heaven. Rhododendron Revolution in 2006 deligitimized the doctrine of divine right of kings. The king had been anointed, but the coronation to confer spiritual, moral and religious legitimacy upon his reign never took place. The last Shah knows that his claims even upon a ceremonial role are rather precarious, if not altogether fake.
These are difficult times for Nepal and some function for the former king would not have been out of order if he had shown his willingness to become a force of institutionalizing the gains of Rhododendron Revolution and Madhesh Uprisings. Currently the country is clearly divided into camps that stand for and against transforming the ‘nation-state’ of yore into ‘state-nation’ of future that would be based upon ideals of social democracy, republicanism, secularism, federalism and inclusion. By putting himself visibly and firmly in the regressive group, the former king has shown that his orientation is towards ‘glories’ of a contested past rather than imagination of a harmonious future. A divisive figure, no matter how highborn, deserves little honor and even less sympathy from the downtrodden.
It would be unwise to find fault with unseemly expression of kingly ambitions of a former royalty. Pollution in politics has not only become rampant but has begun to be accepted as inescapable.
PURIFICATION RITES
The Sanatana Dharma, later named Hinduism, used to be extremely tolerant of apostates. The concept of excommunication is still alien to most faiths of Hinduism family. Position of priests probably hardened after arrival of monotheist religions that believed in one god, one prophet and only one divine book. Still, there is no Hindu sinner that cannot be accepted back into the family after performing prescribed purification rites.
Modernists may sneer upon qualities of cow’s excreta, but cow-dung and cow urine are considered elements of sanctification. A university professor once confessed in private that when he admitted to have eaten beef while in the United States of America, he was made to stuff cow-dung in the mouth and wash his face with some more of it before being allowed to enter his family house.
Gold—or water in which gold has been dipped for the poor—is considered yet another agent of purification. Upon receiving gold as compensation, priests concede to take sins of the giver upon themselves. For minor transgressions, a ritual sprinkling of sun-pani is sufficient.
Words of a Brahman are sacred and pure: Brahmansya bachanam shudhham. Blessings of a Brahman is purifying by itself. Decisions of elders carry wisdom of ages and are equivalent to the words of Brahmans in their potency. Revocation of tradition in certain communities—“it has always been done so”—too needs no purification. It is enough to sanction contravention of established customs.
Repentance and promise of correction are accepted ways of claiming lost status, but if sins have been too big to be forgiven by mere mortals, devotees have to take a dip in the waters of Ganga or appease the divinity through trial by the fire of Yagyas.
Analogous to the rites of purification in religion are the ways of obtaining legitimacy in politics. The last Shah is harping upon inherent sanctity of cow-dung. For some, it’s still sacred; but there are many more even in Hindu society who equate the stuff with—well, there is no way to eschew the expression—bullshit. Metaphorically speaking, return to the status quo ante or restoration of Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 would require that masses that came out into the streets during People’s Movement II and Madhesh Uprisings of 2006 and 2007 stuff a little cow-dung into their mouths.
Return of the discredited constitution is not beyond the realm of possibility, but highly unlikely under the circumstances. With animosity against old order running high among Madheshis, Janjatis and Dalits, restoration of kingship by force may ignite the process of dissolution of the kingdom and the powers that be know the reality only too well to ignore it.
The mercantile lobby is still pretty strong, but it’s quite unlikely that they would be as ready to bankroll a military takeover as they were in 1960s or in 2005. They have discovered more responsive recipients of their munificence. Merchants may not be telling it in so many words, but it’s clear that they consider Maoist-Madheshbadi alliance government legitimate enough to bring a full budget.
CONTESTED TERRAIN
Words of neo-Brahmans—sermons of self-important intellectuals, out-of-limelight politicos and ambitious professionals—no longer matter as much as it once did; if ever it did that is. The civil society is effective only when there is near unanimity over political issues. In a fractured polity, their utility is severely constrained by past allegiances of prominent personalities. For some unexplainable reasons, the influence of civil society activists in Nepal continues to be grossly exaggerated.
The round-table could have been a forum for repentance and course correction. However, no carpenter can build political furniture accommodative enough for ambitions of politicos past their prime that continue to consider themselves wise just because they had read propaganda of Marxism, Leninism, Maoism or Mahendrism in their heydays.
Comparable to the decision of elders of the community in society is ‘political consensus’. It’s the holy grail of conflicted polities where every player wants to get it without ceding an inch of his position. Achievable only during wars and natural calamities, political consensus is pure posturing to hide partisan interests.
That leaves the tradition, which is very much on the side of present occupants. Howsoever emasculated after the death of Constituent Assembly, President Ram Baran Yadav still towers above pretensions of the former king going around holy shrines begging for divine intervention for his restoration. Legitimacy of Baburam Bhattarai may be tenuous, but nobody else can claim even an iota of it without going for a dip in the Ganga of fresh elections. Principles of continuity and doctrine of precedence make the international community recognize the present government as legitimate executive authority.
The opposition, however, has to be taken on board to hold free, fair and robust elections for new CA. For that, the old teaser is perhaps still relevant—what is to be done—more as a poser than the Leninist statement of intentions. It’s the tragedy of the times that there is no clear answer to that question.
The onus of breaking the deadlock is now on Premier Baburam Bhattarai. He can use his prerogative to reshuffle the cabinet and take whoever is to be his consensual successor as senior most member of the council of minister. Then—and only then—if he resigns, President Yadav would be within his rights to designate the person as caretaker prime minister till next elections.
Politicos petitioning president for unconstitutional interventions are holding matches to highly inflammable intentions of the Permanent Establishment. Revolutions—and counter-revolutions—are fires that spread fast and finally consume their instigators. Chairman Prachanda knows it and so does the last Shah.
cklal@hotmail.com
Related story
