Editing Nepal (section)

=== Secularism, Ethnicity, and Buddhism after 1990 ===

The first ''jana andolan'' (people's movement) of 1990 ended the ''panchayat'' system under King Birendra, the Maoist insurgency lasted from 1996 to 2006, a second ''jana andolan'' in April 2006 led to the proclamation of a secular state on 18 May 2006, and the Constituent Assembly declared a secular republic in May 2008.<ref>Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", paras. [1], [26].</ref> Torri reports, at second hand from Letizia, that the campaign for secularism emerged in the 1990s from a movement launched by Theravada monks with the support of Janajati activists; no monk is named, and Torri does not link the campaign to Ashwaghosh.<ref>Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", para. [27], citing Letizia (2016), p. 42.</ref> Letizia describes how late in the Panchayat period young Newar activists formed the Yuba Bauddha Samuha, which sought Janajati recruits for a "secular, that is, non-Hindu" constitution and held meetings in Theravada viharas; when the 1990 constitution still called Nepal a Hindu state, the activists judged the campaign a failure.<ref>Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", p. 292 and n. 24; Gellner, David N., Sondra L. Hausner, & Chiara Letizia (Eds.) (2016). ''Religion, Secularism, and Ethnicity in Contemporary Nepal''. Oxford University Press, pp. 42–45.</ref> By "secularism" many groups meant primarily the equal recognition of religions and an end to the primacy of Hinduism, and not the separation of religion from the state.<ref>Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", p. 292 and n. 24; Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", para. [26].</ref> The Maoist leadership also envisaged a secular Nepal as part of its program of "new democracy."<ref>Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", n. 14.</ref> The 2015 Constitution calls Nepal "secular," but the explanatory note glosses the word as protection of religion and culture practiced from ancient times, which Letizia reads, according to Torri, as evoking ''sanatan dharma''.<ref>Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", paras. [33]–[34], citing Letizia (2016), p. 69; Gellner, Hausner, & Letizia (2016), ''Religion, Secularism, and Ethnicity in Contemporary Nepal'', pp. 5–6.</ref>

==== Janajati Buddhism ====

After 1990 ethnic activists campaigned against Brahmin domination, and the federation of indigenous nationalities (founded as NEFEN, renamed NEFIN in 2003) became the main organization of the Janajatis, who make up about a third of the population.<ref>Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", pp. 294–300; Torri (2019), "Religious Identities and the Struggle for Secularism", paras. [6]–[10].</ref> Buddhism supplied some of them with a way of opposing Hindu hegemony. The first international Magar conference in 1998 declared Buddhism the Magars' religion, and after a campaign by activists about a quarter of Magars declared themselves Buddhist in the 2001 census, although, as Letizia notes, the Magars and Tharus had no Buddhist tradition of their own.<ref>Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", pp. 294–300 and nn. 37–38. Rival activists favored a "Religion of Nature" (n. 38).</ref> Buddhist awareness camps, a new class of lay Buddhist ritual specialists (Magar ''uapas'' and Tharu pandits) who replace the Brahmin in life-cycle rituals, and the Himalayan Buddhist Education Foundation (founded 1995 with Taiwanese funds) supported the turn; Letizia argues that by 2008 ethnic activism had given way to moral teaching and personal responsibility.<ref>Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", pp. 289–294, 300–311; LeVine and Gellner (2005), ''Rebuilding Buddhism'', pp. 234–236.</ref> The Maoist insurgency brought the camps to a halt in 2001, and they have only slowly restarted.<ref>LeVine and Gellner (2005), ''Rebuilding Buddhism'', pp. 139, 235; Letizia (2014), "Buddhist Activism, New Sanghas, and the Politics of Belonging", p. 293.</ref>

==== Maoists and Buddhists ====

The only source in hand that pairs Buddhism with Maoist politics in Nepal is Steinmann's ethnography of Buddhist Tamangs in the eastern hills.<ref>Steinmann, Brigitte (2016). "Confrontations between Maoists and Buddhists in Nepal". In: Gellner, David N., Sondra L. Hausner, & Chiara Letizia (Eds.), ''Religion, Secularism, and Ethnicity in Contemporary Nepal'': 353–402. Oxford University Press, pp. 353–354, 357.</ref> She reports that in the 1980s Tamang villagers called themselves communists while revering the Hindu king, that from the 1990s young people read Buddhism as protest against Hindu supremacy, and that a few marginal, self-educated urban Tamang intellectuals aligned Marxism with a modernist Buddhism.<ref>Steinmann (2016), "Confrontations between Maoists and Buddhists in Nepal", pp. 353–354, 357.</ref> According to her, the Maoists did not seek to destroy monasteries, and they aimed to open places of worship to untouchables, although a Tamang lama was tortured by Maoist relatives.<ref>Steinmann (2016), "Confrontations between Maoists and Buddhists in Nepal", pp. 370–371, 376–377.</ref> Steinmann also reports that all parties courted the "Buddhist vote"; that Lharkyal Lama sat in the Constituent Assembly for the CPN-UML after 2008, briefly became a minister, and was elected on the Maoist proportional list in 2013; and that the monk Bhikkhu Ananda, trained in Sri Lanka, became a Maoist member of the Assembly.<ref>Steinmann (2016), "Confrontations between Maoists and Buddhists in Nepal", pp. 377–378 (citing the ''Nepali Times'' for Bhikkhu Ananda).</ref> Her own interpretation, which is contested, is that Nepali Maoism was a Brahmin-led project of modernization and a "third wave" of Hinduization from above.<ref>Steinmann (2016), "Confrontations between Maoists and Buddhists in Nepal", pp. 367–368, 372. This is Steinmann's interpretation, not a settled finding.</ref>