The Indian Gorkha Identity: Origin, Assertion and Challenges

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” – George Orwell

While reading a pro right-leaning magazine Swarajya, I came across this quote of George Orwell and Prithivi Narayan Shah prompted in my mind. No doubt Shah is greatly revered by many as the great unifier of Nepal but many also call him a ruthless tyrant and imperialist. Nepal celebrates National Unity Day on Jan 11 to commemorate the late king on his birth anniversary. Opposing this, several ethnic organisations have vehemently protested especially in Kirtipur. During his kingship in mid 18th century, Shah dreamt of creating a nation that would speak one language (Khas), follow one religion (Hindu) and celebrate one type of festival (Hindu festivals). Prithivi Narayan’s Nepali festivals were constructed and was political in nature as they were all instituted by the King. If we go into the nuances, the vision of the architect would be much clearer. Both culture and religion were carefully interwoven in the festivals, military and every aspect of civic life. The Brahmanical order was institutionalized. It further created a deep root of caste system. The idea of cultural and religious nationalism was the bedrock of Shah’s Nepal. In the process of religious-cultural imposition, many non-khas and non-Hindus like Newars, Tamangs, Gurungs, Limbus, etc. conformed to the state’s new Hindu order. As a result, it brought a cultural overhaul and indigenous ethnic identities suffered.

In the identity matrix, one identity can dominate the other based on the environment and on how one chooses to identify. A person or a community can possess different identities both at an individual level or at a community level. Therefore, identity being a plural concept is either self-constructed or constructed by others. Two major races of the Himalayan belt, Caucasoid Khasas and the Tibeto-Burmese Kiratas forms the Gorkha ethnic identity. Khasas include Bahun, Chettri, Thakuri, Kami, Gaine, Damai and Sarki. Tibeto-Burmese Kiratas include Rai, Limbu, Newar, Lepcha, Mangar, Tamang, Sherpa, Gurung, Yolmo, Yakha, etc. Rai and Limbu are together known as Kirats. The communities within the Indian Gorkhas have different ethnic backgrounds. For eg, Limbu, Newar, Lepcha, Tamang (Murmi), Damai, Mangar, sherpa, etc. However, in pan-Indian level these ethnic groups (limbu, Newar, etc) tend to identify themselves as Gorkha which is a conscious effort for an easier identification in a big country like India. The obvious reasons being economic, political, social, environmental (regional) and legal. Thus from popular discourse, Gorkha ethnic identity in Indian context can be characterized by multiple attributes like Nepali language, Colonial past, Gorkha regiment, historical experiences, customs, traditions, region, food habits (selroti, kinema, gundruk, thukpa, momo, taama, etc), music (nepali song, tamang selo), etc. The traditional Gorkhay topi and traditional knife (Khukuri) further gives our visual identity.

Before the advent of Prithivi Narayan Shah in 1769, Darjeeling and Dooars were parts of Sikkim and Bhutan respectively. These parts of today’s North Bengal along with some parts of Himachal and Uttaranchal (Kumaon & Garhwal) were parts of Nepal from 1769-1814. All theses conquered areas were later ceded to Sikkim and British East India company respectively after treaty of Sugaulee 1814 carrying some of the social baggage of Prithivi Narayan’s Nepal.

Among many factors that led to the construction of the Indian Gorkha identity, these three are possibly the most influential one –

Three Primary Foundations Of The Indian Gorkha Identity:

1. Assam and Darjeeling: A new horizon (Colonial past)
   At 1860s due to the rapid growth of tea plantation, construction of Darjeeling town and other commercial activities led to an intense demand of labour and the British allowed the labour movement from Nepal. Assam having a significant Gorkha population was never ruled by Sikkim, Bhutan and Nepal unlike North Bengal. In 1826, the British annexed Assam and brought large number of Gorkha soldiers. It was followed by the labour demand in the Assamese coal mines and the oil fields. The vast track of lands along the Brahmaputra and greenery forests also attracted many Gorkhas as grazier which was encouraged by the British after the Wasteland Rules of 1838 for generating grazing tax.

   

   In the Darjeeling region, the Hindu caste system of Nepal was considerably diluted as larger section of the Gorkha community were either plantation workers or manual labourers who were engaged in the construction of the Darjeeling railway tracks and the town itself. In the new system, controlled by the British, it created a large section of labour class which had less to do with Nepal’s caste hierarchy. On the contrary, Nepal’s legal code Muluki Ain (MA) in 1854 under Rana regime had deeply divided the society. It codified and fixed the status of all castes and ethnic communities. Anne Kukuczka in “Negotiating Ethnic Identity in the Himalaya” (page 10-11) writes, “the main distinction was between Tagadhari, “wearers of the holy cord” who formed the elite of society and included Chettris, Bahuns, Thakuris and several Newar castes, and Matwali, the various alcohol consuming Jat. The Matwali were further divided into non-enslavable (mangar, limbu, rai, gurung) impure but touchable and enslavable alcohol drinkers (tamang, bhotias, sherpa, yolmo) and untouchable Jat.” While in Darjeeling under the British, it was only the administrative oppression whereas in Nepal it was administrative as well as social oppression of Rana regime over the matwali jatis. Therefore, Darjeeling was more liberating, comparatively freer and without any social shackles. It may be a reason why in the year 1901, large number of Rai, Tamang, Limbu, Mangar, Gurung, Kami and other oppressed caste were in good numbers in Darjeeling.

   The identity of a Matwali jati (as per Nepal’s legal code) was constructed (imposed) by Rana regime whereas Indian Gorkha identity is more like a self-constructed identity.

   

2. Nepali Language
   Nepal’s state official language, Nepali was rarely spoken by the indigenous communities as most of the indigenous people lived in the region dominated by their own tribe. Kirats were in majority in parts of north-eastern Nepal, Tamangs in the northern bordering region of Kathmandu with Tibet, Bhotia-Sherpa in Mustang, northwestern and parts of northeastern regions, Newars in Kathmandu valley, Gurungs in the Gandaki region and so on. At the regional level, the tribes had preserved their languages to an extent. The burn of language imposition was felt by Newari language after Kathmundu became the capital of unified Nepal. Giuseppe Tucci in “Nepal: Discovery of Malla” (page 137) writes, “the tension between the Newari and the Gurkhas increased, even the use of the Newari language was banned and the Gurkhali language was made obligatory.”The Tamangs were also severely hit by the imposition as they were indigenous of the region closer to katmandu. There were instances when Tamangs revolted twice against the regime. The Mangars and Gurungs obliged to the state order. However, in Darjeeling, since people from all the communities started working and living together in the same locality that enhanced the usage of the Nepali language among the different tribal groups. (page 4). In the early twentieth century, Nepali language flourished in Darjeeling as it was a paradise for dissenters. The dissenting writings were written in Darjeeling against the brutal Rana regime as they did not allow any criticism in Nepal. Up until independence, one of the unifying factors of the Indian Gorkha populace was the Nepali/Khas language. Some may argue it as a silver-lining of Prithivi Narayan’s cultural imposition and may even praise him for this positive outcome but going by the same logic, Indians should be thanking the British for gifting democracy after 200 years of imperial atrocities. Therefore such argument falls flat as there can be no justification in heroising a ruthless tyrant.
3. Gorkha Regiment
   Quoting Prithvi Narayan Shah’s Dibya Upadesh, “In their own companies enlist Khas, Magars, Gurungs, and Thakuris, and only these four jaats. Let these four jaats only serve in the military, and in time of war all will be strong and the enemy and heaven itself will tremble.”  Eden Vansittart in his book “The Gurkha”, (page 94) has given a list of menial classes. Among them are the Damai, Kamara, Kami, Kasai (Newar), Pipa and Sarki. The Pipa was the Kalasi (porter). The menial classes were not allowed to join arm force as soldiers. In 1854, the 34 years old de facto ruler of Nepal, Maharaja Janga Badhur Rana proclaimed the Muluki Ain (National code of Nepal) which prevented Tamang ethnic group from joining British-Indian Army and any Government Jobs in Nepal, except as Pipas (porter). However, there was no such rampant caste discrimination in Indian army which was legal, right at the recruitment level in Nepali Arm force. Therefore certain degree of equality among all the communities also came from Gorkha regiment of the Indian army after independence. Bidhan Golay in “Rethinking Gorkha Identity” (page 11) writes, “By 1864, the British government issued a charter providing for the Gorkha Regiment to buy land for settlement stations at Dharmasala, Dehradun, Almora, Gorakhpur, Shillong, etc. In Darjeeling, the Gorkha Recruitment Depot was opened in 1890″.Since then the Arm force became one of the greatest source of employment for the Indian Gorkhas. Thus the construction/self-construction of the Indian Gorkha identity began during the mid 19th century. Large number of Gorkhas from Darjeeling, Dooars, Assam and other parts of India were inducted in Indian arm force. They were called Gorkha and not Nepali considering the army background. In Nepal the word Gorkha has no distinct ethnic connotation. Therefore it is the Indian Nepalese who have embraced the Gorkha ethnic identity in letter and spirit.

Assertion Of Gorkha Ethnic Identity For Legal And Political Space:

Until early twentieth century, the Indian Nepalese from Darjeeling, Dooars, Assam, Kumaon, Garhwal and across India never felt an urgency in identifying themselves as members of a bigger community. A common identity for identification in a big country like India without being leveled as an outsider. The first elite political group, Hillmen’s Association in 1907 which forwarded the memorandum for a separate administrative unit to the murle Minto reform had no “Gorkha” word attached to it. The Gorkha word were only used in military to address the personnel of the Gorkha regiment. Akhil Bharatiya Gorkha league was the first political party to incorporate the Gorkha word in 1943. The growing need for a greater political identity during 1980s pushed the then leaders to affirm a common identifying term and so identifying as “Gorkha” became increasingly more popular among the Indian Nepalese. After July 1986, it was further intensified due to the large-scale eviction of Gorkhas from Meghalaya. India Today reports, while the Meghalaya Govt was clearing a Nepali graveyard to erect sheds for 2500 Nepali refugees, Professor Manikumar Subba asks, “Is it not as though we are being taken alive to a graveyard?”.

Later, with the formation of Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council in 1988 and Gorkhaland Territorial Administration in 2012 further reaffirmed the Gorkha identity in legal and political space. The late supremo of GNLF, Mr Subash Ghising advocated for the use of the word Gorkha/Gorkhali. In 1992, during the recognition of Nepali language under eighth schedule of Indian constitution, Ghising insisted that Nepali language be called Gorkhali language. ( https://www.nepalilanguage.org/success-stories/nepali-an-official-language-of-india ) The army background of Ghising may be the reason for him to strongly favour the Gorkha word. On 23rd Aug 1988, ministry of Home Affairs, GOI published the gazette notification No. 26011/6/88-ICI recognising the Indian citizenship of the Gorkhas. The MoHA in the notification used the word “Gorkha” and not Indian-Nepalese.

Origin Of The Word Gorkha:
The origin to the word Gorkha has many theories:

⦁ In Nepali,‘ Kharka’ means ‘Grass Land’. This land which today is called Gorkha was believed to be like meadow in Ancient period. Thus it was named Kharka and later the term Kharka got modified to Garkha and Garkha changed to Gorkha. Before the Shah ruler conquered the Gurkha principality, it was ruled by a Khadka king. Therefore ‘kharka’ which means grassland in Nepali, resembles with Khadka caste of then ruler.
⦁ A Tibeto- Burman word ‘Garkha’ means cluster of villages. It is significantly relevant because the indigenous tribes of Nepal are Tibeto-Burman.
⦁ In Sanskrit Scripture, ‘Go-rakkha’ means the protection of cow. Go-rakkha (sanskrit) got distorted to Gorkha (pali).
⦁ Deepika Ghataraj in her journal, titled “Identity formation and identity crisis” (page 4) refers a renowned Nepali writer, Suryabikram Gyawali who had traced the origin of word Gorkha to khas word “garkha” meaning revenue area.
⦁ Nilamber Chhetri in his journal, “Interrogating Gorkha as a martial race”, (page 3) writes, “Many scholars give diverse explanations for the origin of the name Gorkha, however in contemporary times most agree to the fact that the name Gorkha came from a principality located in Nepal.”

On 23rd September 1559, Drabya Shah (ancestor of Prithivi Narayan Shah), a Rajput descendant attacked the khadka raj of Gurkha and its surrounding in Nepal. (Page 25) He then established the first Gorkha Kingdom with the help of khas (Chetris), Mangars, Gurungs and Thakuris. Though Kami, Sarki and Damai belong to Khas community, they were not allowed to join the army. During unification, the army of this Gorkha kingdom was popularly known as the Gorkha army. This is how the Gorkha as a martial race can be traced as far as the history is concerned as Nilamber Chhetri suggests. Gorkha word coming from a principality offers us a perspective on how far we can relate to the events that are free of contention and historical distortion. The principality version of origin of word Gorkha not only seems to be authentic but also appears to be authentic.

Contemporary Offshoots Of The Repressive Rana Regime

In 2019, it is not difficult to encounter a hindutva element having affinity to the mukhya of Gorkhanath pit, Adityanath. Some of his followers in Darjeeling often takes pride in this gau rakshak theory of Gorkha probably to re-establish the religious hegemony or to gain some patronage by toeing his line. These are no one but one of the editors of the Darjeeling chronicles, a local right leaning page who staunchly favours the BJP and handful of their trolls.

At times, when the state comes to your kitchen and the enforcement agencies don’t concretely differentiate the meat of cow, ox and buffalo but categorizes all as beef then the overtones set by such regressive mythical definition (gaurakshak) for more inclusive Gorkhas can become toxic. Promoting such idea is a sheer attempt to break the communal harmony and othering of those who do not fit into that sectarian definition. It is the same narrative of khas dominated Rana regime that created a society by othering the Bhote-Tamang community as the beef eaters. Nepal’s Hindu social order then had challenged, threatened, humiliated, castigated and persecuted those who in a way had different social practices and were a practicing Buddhists. The social media interaction gives us an insight on the offshoot of such hegemony that is growing in the forces even in Darjeeling after the rise of divisive figures like UP CM Adityanath. Such narrative is a danger to the fabric of the inclusive Gorkha community.

The Gaurakshak theory has failed to establish facts as the primitive exponents of such theory, the Royal family of Nepal were themselves in a cauldron of myth. DNA article, “Royal curse comes true in Nepal” explains how the myths of Godman led to the establishment and eventual downfall of the Shah dynasty.  No person in this modern world is obliged to follow a dogmatic thought-process enforced by a monarch. Also, the Nepalese Hindu worships cow as goddess Laxmi that brings down the Gorkha ethnic identity just to a religious identity. The gaurakshak narrative appears to create a religious hegemony and supremacy of one religion over the other. This theory inflicts a religious connotation to the composite Gorkha culture in which different people practices different religion. Gau-raskshak as some may claim to be is a religious identity whereas Gorkha is an ethnic identity. Gorkhas are not gaurakshaks as religion can never define a Gorkha.

Conclusion:

An ethnic identity is not a monolith. It is not a fixed categorization, but rather a fluid and dynamic understanding of self and ethnic background. It evolves according to the changing boundaries, change in common idea of descent, variation in faith within the communities and changing power structure. The instrumentalist approach of understanding the ethnic identities focuses on the analysis of power structure in the society. The Brahminical order which continues to influence the social norms ought to be smashed. In democracy, we decide our future. So we must also decide how our coming generation remembers us as a community. The developing perspective with shift in cultural thinking, Darjeeling has been a place of cultural renaissance. The Queen of Hills led the Nepali bhasa andolan and reached its success on 1st September 1992. Indian Gorkha identity resonated immensely among the Indian Nepalese after the Gorkhaland agitation of 1980s, 2007 and 2017 in Darjeeling. Thus Darjeeling has been an epicenter in the formation of the Indian Gorkha identity.

There is a need for a discourse that empowers every Indian Gorkha rather than a dividing one. An inclusive discourse free from food habits, dress code and religion.