Submit your Article

Contemporary global discourse is saturated with calls for multipolarity. Leaders from Beijing to Brasília, from Moscow to New Delhi invoke a new world order—one where power is shared more equitably among diverse states and regions, and the dominance of any single power is curbed. Yet, despite these slogans and shifting alliances, the reality remains more concentrated than advertised. The United States continues to act—and be treated—as the primary actor on the global stage, wielding unmatched capabilities across military, economic, technological, and institutional domains. In effect, the world is staging a multipolar play, but the US remains its lead performer—a solo show on a multipolar stage.

Consider military power. As of 2024, the United States accounted for roughly 37 percent of global military expenditures, with a defense budget exceeding $1trn (SIPRI estimate)—more than the next nine countries combined, including China and Russia. Its global military footprint includes over 750 bases across more than 80 countries, reinforcing rapid deployment capabilities and sustained influence in every major region. In contrast, China, the oft-touted peer competitor, has only one overseas military base and far less capacity for power projection.

The United States continues to dominate global affairs through unilateral decisions that often override international consensus. In Ukraine, Washington has led the global response to Russia’s action with over $75bn in aid and a sweeping sanctions regime that even neutral powers like India and Turkey have had to navigate under pressure. In the Middle East, the US carried out the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in 2020 and continues to conduct airstrikes on Iranian-linked targets in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen—frequently without international consultation. The pattern holds in Gaza, where the US has repeatedly vetoed UN ceasefire resolutions during the 2023–24 conflict, even as civilian casualties mounted and allies grew uneasy. In these arenas, global powers like China and Russia have issued condemnations, but lack the influence or institutional weight to meaningfully counterbalance American actions.

Latest examples include the US Air Force and Navy attacks on three nuclear facilities in Iran on June 22 as part of the Iran–Israel war, the US support to the Israeli war in Gaza, against Hamas who no longer poses a strategic threat to Israel, even by the standards of some 600 retired Israeli security officials, including former heads of intelligence agencies. Prior to it in December last year, amidst the Russian warnings, the US helped bring down Syria’s Assad regime—the closest Russian ally in the Middle East. Forget the eastward expansion of NATO disregarding its own assurance to Russia that it would not do so.

This solo performance extends to East Asia, where the US continues to maneuver around its “one-China” policy by deepening ties with Taiwan through arms deals, diplomatic visits, and strategic signaling—all while China, despite its rise, remains unable to prevent these moves. In Syria, the US maintains troops and control over resource-rich regions in defiance of Damascus, as Russia looks the other way and China stays diplomatically detached. India, often seen as a rising multipolar player, has largely opted for strategic silence or hedging in each of these conflicts. Across these cases, the US not only acts without deference to global opinion—it also forces others to adjust to its decisions. The result is a world that may appear multipolar in discourse, but in practice still revolves around a single actor exercising disproportionate power with little external constraint.

In economic terms, US financial primacy remains foundational. The US dollar still constitutes around 60 percent of global foreign exchange reserves and is involved in 88 percent of all currency transactions. US capital markets continue to serve as the world’s main liquidity pool, and American technology firms lead in innovation and digital infrastructure. Even US domestic legislation—such as the Inflation Reduction Act and CHIPS and Science Act—has reshaped global industrial policy by incentivizing foreign firms to align with American interests and supply chains, frequently overriding WTO norms or multilateral negotiation channels. See how the US has threatened India with additional tariffs should the latter continue buying Russian oil.

Moreover, the United States retains unmatched normative and institutional leverage. It plays a leading role in NATO, the G7, the Bretton Woods institutions, and dominates voting power in the IMF and World Bank. Even when institutions falter, the US increasingly relies on ad hoc or bilateral mechanisms to maintain influence, such as AUKUS, the Quad, and security pacts in the Indo-Pacific—sidestepping multilateral gridlock with flexible but US-centered architectures.

During his second term, President Trump has intensified the use of economic sanctions and tariffs as central pillars of his foreign policy, particularly targeting Iran and China. A “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran has been reactivated, with a primary goal of driving the country’s oil exports to zero. This has involved a significant increase in sanctions, with roughly three-quarters of new designations since January 2025 aimed at disrupting Iran's revenue streams. For instance, the Treasury Department has targeted over 115 individuals, vessels, and companies across 17 countries, including a “vast shipping empire” led by Iranian oil tycoon Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani. These sanctions have also been extended to third-party entities in China, India, and the UAE for their role in facilitating the trade of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products, such as the sanctioning of six Indian companies for engaging in over $220m in trade with Iran.

In addition to targeted sanctions, the administration has employed broad tariffs to isolate and pressure nations. The average applied US tariff rate rose from 2.5 percent to an estimated 27 percent in the first few months of the second term, the highest level in over a century. A universal 10 percent tariff was imposed on all imports, while country-specific tariffs were also used to escalate trade disputes. For example, tariffs on Chinese goods peaked at 145 percent, leading to retaliatory tariffs of 125 percent from China. The administration has also leveraged weapons supply as a foreign policy tool. While not directly providing vast amounts of military aid to Ukraine, the US has authorized weapons sales through its Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, committing approximately $960m and pressuring NATO allies to increase their defense spending to five percent of GDP by 2035. This strategy of combining economic pressure, isolation, and arms sales to allies underscores a transactional and unilateral approach to international relations.

What seems strange is the extreme selfish behaviour of the competitors, a phenomenon reflected in the Nepali expression hul ma jyan jogaaoo (stay safe in the crowd), an attitude that lets a rooster fight the jackal alone! It is not hard to see how the US woos one opponent when it is attacking the other, successfully bringing down the regime in question. Only the US knows the wheel rotates.

Thus, the international system is characterized less by balanced multipolar governance than by fragmented resistance surrounding a persistent unipolar core. The United States continues to act, and be perceived, as the system's indispensable actor, even as rhetorical coalitions challenge its dominance. The world may speak the language of multipolarity, but until that rhetoric is translated into shared institutions, joint rule-making, and collaborative enforcement, the global order remains a solo performance by the United States—backed by unmatched capability and strategic depth—on a stage filled with understudies.

The US foreign policy has evolved through key turning points. The Monroe Doctrine (1823) established US dominance in the Western Hemisphere, while the Spanish-American War (1898) shifted it from isolationism to imperialism. World War I (1917) marked the US’ entry onto the global stage, followed by World War II (1941-1945), which solidified its leadership. The Cold War (1947-1991) focused on containing communism, the collapse of the Soviet Union marking the end of a bipolar world. The Vietnam War (1955-1975) was a setback, while the Persian Gulf War (1990-1991) reaffirmed dominance. Post-9/11, the War on Terror reshaped priorities, and more recently, the US pivot to Asia (2011). Return of Donald Trump to the leadership of the US—a world power for two centuries that led a unipolar world for three decades—is sure to create ripples throughout the world.

When Donald Trump came to power in 2017 as the 45th POTUS, he was quite an outsider, lacked an organized transition team and even faced demonstrators, who shouted ‘not my president’. His first term was characterised by two impeachments by Democrats-led House and investigations Trump terms witch-hunt. After a gap of four years, Trump has returned to White House as an experienced and much organized leader. Which of his election promises will get implemented is yet too early to predict, but some hints are visible.

National interest first

So far, countries are formed on common agendas, and existence of common enemies shape national unities and alliances. What seems special is, Trump-led America is more likely to focus on the economy, reducing financial losses in the name of alliances and international cooperations. To safeguard American national interests, a Trumpian doctrine may evolve over the years, which believes in each ally spending for its security. Trumpian doctrine may emphasize the use of economic and other measures to discipline any country or region, as seen with its signals to Greenland, Canada, Panama, Mexico and Columbia. 

Two centuries past, the Monroe doctrine survives in new and wider forms. The Soviet Union’s Brezhnev Doctrine (1968) justified military intervention in socialist countries to maintain communist rule, while Japan’s Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (1930s-1940s) aimed to expand its control over East Asia. Italy’s expansionist policies under Mussolini also sought regional dominance, particularly in the Mediterranean and North Africa. India’s ‘Look East’ and ‘Act East’ policies focus on strengthening ties with Southeast Asia and countering China’s influence. Russia’s Eurasian Doctrine similarly asserts dominance over former Soviet republics, echoing the Monroe Doctrine’s regional focus. 

The US has a history of withdrawing from international institutions like UNESCO and WHO, and threatening to withdraw from conventions and protocols related to climate change, global warming and carbon emissions. For decades, economic benefits have remained a central element of US foreign policy.  Look how it played a leading role in the formation and promotion of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the World Trade Organization, shaping global trade rules and norms. But it is not difficult to understand that the US considers trade liberalism as a means, not a principle. Throughout both GATT and WTO history, the US has frequently used trade threats or sanctions to achieve its goals, such as imposing tariffs, export restrictions or launching formal complaints at the WTO. See, during trade disputes with countries like China, how the US has threatened or imposed tariffs on a wide range of goods. Trump is not an outlier in this aspect.

Foreign policy

As elsewhere, the American foreign policy has been guided by national interests. If the US made adjustments like alliance with or against Great Britain, Russia, Germany and Japan, they were based on calculated risks and benefits. Look how successfully the US has created alliances with one-time foes Germany, Japan and Italy, against the Soviets, and again attracted members of former Soviet-led Warsaw Pact in NATO, operating mainly against Russia.

American foreign policies have proved pragmatic, and their implementation sharp. As proposed by Henry Kissinger, the US normalized relations with China in the 1970s to counterbalance the Soviets, strategically isolating the Soviet Union. It was a way to gain leverage in the Vietnam War and to reshape US influence in Asia, recognizing the long-term economic and diplomatic potential of engaging China. By opening relations, the US wanted to foster global stability and influence China’s integration into the global order.

Looking at American history of u-turning foreign policies, Trump’s reluctance to wage wars and efforts to global peace are a continuity. Trump’s meeting with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un demonstrated the former’s ability in making friends of foes. The meetings took place at a time when the North’s historical friend China had consistently called for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, aligning with the United Nations Security Council sanctions on North Korea, and asked it to participate in multilateral talks such as the Six-Party Talks.

Trump initiated the process of withdrawing US forces from Afghanistan. In February 2020, the Trump administration signed the Doha Agreement with the Taliban, which outlined the conditions for the US withdrawal. On Iran, while Trump maintained a tough stance and withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, he also repeatedly suggested he was open to negotiations and even expressed a desire to meet with Iran’s leadership. His administration pushed for a new, more comprehensive agreement, but Iran rejected talks unless sanctions were lifted first. 

Trump was skeptical of military interventions, especially in the Middle East, questioning the value of US presence in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. His “America First” policy focused on reducing military footprints abroad, emphasizing diplomatic solutions over foreign entanglements and long-term military campaigns.

Prompt actions

What makes Trump’s second term special is the prompt implementation of new policies. Within 24 hours in the Oval Office, among other measures, Trump has ordered to withdraw from the WHO and the Paris Climate Agreement, to try and limit automatic birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, to deport illegal immigrants, to change the name ‘Gulf of Mexico’ to ‘Gulf of America’, to revoke an executive order signed by Biden aimed at reducing the risks from artificial intelligence and to recognize only ‘two sexes, male and female’.

Within days, deportation of illegal immigrants began. Look how Trump ordered to take tariff measures when Columbia refused to take deported migrants, and ultimately made it cooperate with the US. International adjustments were seen even before Trump assumed office. Israel-Hamas ceasefire, and change in Zelensky’s tone are some examples. Trump wasted no time in handling gender issues, simply barring transgenders from military service.

As a response to changing US policies, most of the world is likely to make relevant adjustments. We are set to bear the brunt of freezing of US funds for 90 days and expulsion of illegal Nepali immigrants. In the end, what matters is not ‘right and wrong’. It is all about success or failure. If the US under Trump makes disproportionate economic, technological and military advances, Trumpian doctrines can become a norm, in America and beyond. 

The author is a professor at Tribhuvan University

Every monsoon season, Nepal grapples with the life-giving rains turning into a potential threat, unleashing devastating floods and landslides. Overflowing rivers and streams inundate surrounding areas, causing loss of life, livestock, homes and infrastructure. Heavy rain disrupts agriculture and destroys precious topsoil, shattering lives. In the past one decade alone, over 1800 people have lost their lives due to monsoon disasters in Nepal. During that period, about 400 people have gone missing and more than 1500 people have suffered injuries. 

The recent monsoon has been particularly brutal, with reports of casualties, missing individuals and widespread damage. This year’s monsoon can affect as many as 1.8m people and four lakh households. As of 10 Aug 2024, the monsoon has claimed 170 lives since June 10 when it began. Initial reports show it has displaced over 4,279 families, inundated 384 houses, destroyed 270 homes, 102 sheds, 43 bridges, two schools and two government offices, inundating 182 houses and damaging hundreds more.

Many times, human factors have added to the losses. Look at the recent example of the Simaltal landslide mishap of July 12 night. The landslide swept two buses, and it is believed there were 65 people in the buses, of which three passengers swam to safety. While 25 bodies have been found, others remain missing. In the first place, the landslide seems to be a result of improper slope management while constructing the Mugling-Narayanghat Highway, and opening Simaltal-Bangesal-Dumre rural road on the slopes above the highway. Secondly, driving the vehicles on a rainy night under the compromised visibility added to the risks.

Settlements in the river banks adjoining roads are another major reason for heavy losses. The high losses due to the Melamchi flood of 15 June 2021 resulted not only from the climate change and associated heavy rains, but also from the fact that human settlements had extended to lower alluvial deposits. In many places, improper construction of roads over small streams and flawed sewage management systems result in inundation whenever heavy rains occur. Such was the case of the 2021 Kapan Flood, right in northern Kathmandu.

The impact goes beyond immediate losses. Displaced communities face a desperate struggle to secure food, shelter and medical care. Livelihoods are disrupted, and the psychological trauma can be long-lasting. The economic toll is significant, with destroyed infrastructure and hampered agricultural production impacting the entire nation.

Post-disaster management

In the face of such devastation, the need for a swift and coordinated response to deliver life-saving aid is paramount. One approach gaining traction is the ‘one-door policy’, where all relief efforts are channeled through a single government entity. This centralized system promises streamlined resource allocation and standardized distribution. 

Following the 2015 Gorkha earthquake, Nepal received massive humanitarian support from home and abroad. Rescue workers worked day and night to rescue the people buried under rubble of collapsed structures. Nepalis are grateful for this. We also witnessed, in the flood of donor agencies, some taking advantage of the distressed situation and engaging in improper activities. Besides, many would go to some easily accessible poor countryside, distribute aid materials, take selfies and post them on social media. This way, some areas received more than what they needed and others received too little. This prompted the government to adopt a one-door policy.

By directing all aid through a central channel, the government can ensure resources are strategically deployed toward the most critical needs. This eliminates duplication of efforts and fosters fairness in distribution. Additionally, a single point of contact enhances accountability and fosters trust with donors. However, bureaucratic hurdles can create bottlenecks, delaying aid delivery when swift action is crucial. Local NGOs, with established relationships and a deeper understanding of local nuances, can tailor aid distribution more effectively.

The one-door policy has been a source of debate in Nepal. The policy introduced in 2015 has been implemented to prevent uneven aid distribution and ensure remote areas received support. However, this centralized approach faced criticism for being slow and inefficient. Many NGOs and private entities felt hamstrung by the need for government approval, leading to delays. In the aftermath of the 2017 floods and landslides, the government again enforced the one-door policy. While the intention was to streamline efforts, critics argue it led to logistical challenges and inefficiencies. There were reports of aid being stuck in red tape while victims remained underserved.

The way forward

One-door-policy does not discourage local governments from actively coordinating rescue works and distribution of reliefs to the needy. To facilitate prompt response, domestic NGOs may be allowed to cooperate with local governments. As to the foreign governments and INGOs willing to support, we should make sure that they comply with our one-door-policy, that they do not take advantage of our calamity to create one or another form of social disharmony, that they do no harm to the self-respect of our suffering people, that they do not try to impose or promote their interests, and that they confine their support to the extent we need.

A mountainous country located in a quake-prone region, Nepal faces multiple threats of heavy rains, floods, landslides, GLOFs, droughts, famines, fires, epidemics, earthquakes and other disasters. Keeping this in view, the government has formed a high-level National Council for Disaster Risk Reduction and Management under the Prime Minister. Through a collaborative approach that marries centralized control with local expertise, Nepal can build resilience and ensure life-saving aid reaches those who need it the most.

In over seven decades of the communist rule, new norms of Chinese society and policies have evolved. Founded in 1921, the Communist Party of China (CPC) in early days was influenced by Soviet models of ethnic policy, and thus emphasized the right to self-determination for minority groups. In a similar way to Nepali Maoists’ policy of attracting diverse ethnic groups to the ‘People’s War’, the CPC sought allies against the Kuomintang during the Chinese Civil War (1927-1949). 

After getting to power, the CPC created five autonomous regions Xinjiang, Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, and Ningxia, granting the ethnic minorities a degree of self-governance. In addition, 29 autonomous prefectures were created, dedicated to different minorities. As the CPC’s grip became stable, especially during the Great Leap Forward (1958-1962) and the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), it began to promote Han Chinese cultural norms, sometimes suppressing ethnic minority languages, religions, and customs. 

With the rise of Deng Xiaoping in 1978, ethnic policies saw a shift. The CPC introduced more lenient policies, allowing the revival of ethnic cultures and traditions. Economic development programs targeted ethnic minority regions, aiming to reduce poverty and promote stability. 

If China, where over 91 percent of its population is Han, needs to address the ethnic issues to unite her 56 nationalities, a country like Nepal with 125 distinct ethnic groups and no one ethnic group as a majority, certainly needs to find common dreams to bind all of us together. 

In this context, I came across Xi Jinping’s speech “Heighten the Sense of National Identity and Improve the Party’s Work on Ethnic Affairs in the New Era”, included in his work ‘The Governance of China’ Volume IV.  

Xi emphasizes the Chinese approach to ethnic issues, strengthening law-based governance of ethnic affairs, and preventing and resolving major risks and hidden threats in ethnic affairs. He cites the policy of reform and opening up introduced in 1978, and reiterates the Chinese nation as one family and one single community and the shared identity brought forth by the 18th CPC National Congress in 2012.

Xi highlights national rejuvenation and common prosperity as common dreams. He proposes making it a major task for the new era to motivate all ethnic groups to build China into a modern socialist country. His recipe includes cultivating in all ethnic groups a growing sense of identity with the home country, the Chinese nation, and Chinese culture. He suggests upholding the equality of all ethnic groups.

In searching for a balance between ethnic autonomy and implementation of central policies, he emphasizes on supporting ethnic groups in their economic development and all-round improvement. In my opinion, this advice is transferable.

Xi upholds the management of the ethnic affairs in accordance with the law. Perhaps this can be a milestone in creating a society where all citizens are equal. On top of all these, Xi advocates safeguarding national sovereignty, security, and development interests, and encouraging, through education and guidance, all ethnic groups to carry forward the patriotic tradition and consciously safeguard the unity of the country, national security and social stability.

He proposes improving ethnic works by balancing commonality and diversity and by accommodating ethnic and regional factors, with a view of increasing commonality. He says this is the only way to manage ethnic affairs properly and efficiently and deliver concrete results.

Xi rightly points to the need of properly understanding the relationship between commonality and diversity that exist among ethnic people, and calls for promoting commonalities while also accommodating differences. In line with Chanakya, Xi advises always putting the interests of the nation first, and says ethnic identity should be subordinate and subscribe to the sense of national identity. However, he also says while ensuring the overall interests of the Chinese nation, they must ensure the specific interests of each ethnic group. He considers both Han chauvinism and regional ethnic chauvinism detrimental to the building of the Chinese nation as one community.

He suggests “to properly understand the relationship between Chinese culture and cultures of individual ethnic groups. The fine cultures of the latter constitute an integral part of the former. Chinese culture is like the trunk of a tree, while individual ethnic cultures are branches and leaves; only when the roots are deep and the trunk is strong can the branches and leaves grow well.” In China’s case, by virtue of population, the Han culture is Chinese culture. However, in Nepal a vacuum is being created as the established common culture is being attacked as alien, foreign, chauvinist, dated, conservative, and divisive.

Xi says, reform and development should serve the goals of reinforcing the sense of national identity, safeguarding unity, opposing division, improving the wellbeing of the people, and gathering extensive support so as to make our nation a strong community. This view can be applicable in dealing with Nepali ethnic issues. Let’s strongly counter the divisive plots. 

China is pushing popularization of the standard spoken and written Chinese language, known as Putonghua or Mandarin, while at the same time protecting the spoken and written languages of all ethnic groups as well as their rights to study and use their own languages. Nepal should not overlook the role a standard Nepali language plays; we should give a top priority to fixing its hijje the spellings. Nepali hijje system has received intentional and unintentional blows, some in disguise of reforms, some as results of negligence, some as a mechanical copying from foreign languages.

Nepal needs to adopt special policies to support backward areas, based on local natural resources, development conditions, and comparative strengths. We need to focus on poverty alleviation in tandem with rural revitalization, to achieve more efficient and higher-quality development of agriculture and related industry, to build the countryside into a pleasant place to live and work, and to provide farmers with a prosperous and happy life.

The author is professor of pharmacy at Tribhuvan University

Each year, the 31-day-long Swasthani Vrata begins on the day Purnima (the full moon of Pausha, the ninth month of the Nepali calendar) and ends on the Purnima of the next month (Magha). This period falls between January and February, the coldest days of a year in Nepal. The Swasthani Vratakatha, recited during this period, has 31 chapters. Reading a chapter every evening, devotees can complete the recital of the whole book within this period. Mentioned many times in the book, the following is the procedure for the Swasthani Vrata (fast) and the Puja. One should begin the Vrata on Pausha Purnima by parrying their nails a day before, take bath and cleanse oneself early morning, remain solely devoted to Sri Swasthani and also worship Lord Mahadeva each noon. Every evening, a person in a family should recite the story and others should listen to it with great devotion. At the beginning and the end of each chapter, generally each evening, the reader and the audience should offer water, flowers and fruits to the goddess with great respect. One can observe the Vrata and recite the story even if s/he is all alone, taking inanimate objects as the audience. On Magha Purnima, the concluding day of the Vrata, 108 pieces of Janai (the sacred thread), betelnut fruit, betel leaf, home-made Selroti, Akshata (rice grains), bellyflower and other flowers, barley grains, sesame seeds, sandalwood, papaya, sugarcane and various types of fruits and other items are offered. The symbol ‘Om’ is painted on a copper plate and Shivalinga installed on it, a sesame oil-fed cotton lamp lit, each of these sprinkled with waters from sacred rivers, fruits and coins are offered. Janai, Sindoor (the red vermillion powder) and other ingredients mentioned above are also offered to the goddess. Per the holy book, Lord Mahadeva has instructed devotees to worship him along with Sri Swasthani. The devotee reads some Sanskrit hymns dedicated to the goddess, thanking her for successful completion of the penance. The book has instructed giving eight of the 108 pieces of Selroti, Akshata, bellyflower, Janai (the sacred thread), betelnut fruits to the husband, the son in the absence of husband, to the son of Mit ( a very close friend bound by some oath), etc. If no one is around, these offerings should be flown into a river praying for the fulfillment of the wish s/he had in mind. The keeper of the Vrata is supposed to eat the 100 pieces of Selroti and remain awake throughout the night, meditating. Even poor people can observe the Vrata, the scripture points. It states that one can even take sand as puja materials and regard inanimate objects as their audience. The Vrata is supposed to bring good health to devotees suffering from diseases. It points how Chandrawati, a queen, who had fallen into misfortunes after disrespecting Goddess Swasthani, regained her health and fortunes. On a positive note, people breathing their last within six months beginning from Magha are considered lucky. It is believed that their soul goes to Swarga, the heaven. Scriptures point that the soul has to cross mega rivers and different tough terrains before liberation. Per scriptures, of these rivers, the river named Vaitarani is the most difficult to cross and it can be crossed only with the help of a cow. That is why a cow is gifted to the priest during rituals. The very cow is supposed to help the dead ones cross the river. In the month of Magha in particular, rainfall is quite rare. This makes seasonal rivers shrink and even dry out, making them easily crossable. The scripture has suggested chanting the glory of Sri Swathani, singing and dancing on the concluding night of the Vrata. Depending on physical health, one may just remain awake, seated and remember Sri Swasthani with deep devotion in their heart. Thus concludes the penance, but not without proper disposal of the remains of the ritual to a suitable place.

Accounts of Mahadeva borrowed from Daksha’s tirade against the latter offer glimpses of the Mongoloid culture of those days. Daksha of course dislikes everything about Mahadeva. They include a coat of ashes from the crematorium on his body, tiger hide around his waist and elephant skin, his habit of consuming cannabis and Dhaturo (thorn apple), angry red eyes and his dance, performed with utter abandon, the use of snakes as ornaments, matted hair as the crown, his company of ghosts, vampires and evil-eyed spirits, his damaru—a two-headed drum—which he plays with the right hand while holding a trident in his left and the way he walks—like a naked drunkard without shame. On the other hand, Daksha describes the guests he has invited (the Aryas) as wearing ornaments studded with gems and rubies, with the paste of sandalwood, musk pod and saffron flowers applied to their skin. They enjoy the sweet songs and the music of the Gandharvas, the dances of the nymphs (the Apsaras) and come from clean holy places. In the eyes of Daksha, Mahadeva is a wayward lunatic, a nobody, literally, whereas the four-faced Brahma and Narayana are important entities as the Creator and the Preserver, respectively. But a war between the armies of Mahadeva and Daksha proves otherwise. The war ends with the defeat of the forces of Daksha and the latter’s beheading. Upon requests from Daksha’s wife Virani and other deities, Mahadev pardons Daksha and revives him by installing on his decapitated body the head of a he-goat. The war ends up consolidating the position of Mahadeva (Shiva) as he becomes the Destroyer in the new divine power structure. Vishnu had first sided with Daksha in the ear, perhaps along ethnic lines, only to leave the battleground in the midst of the war, most probably to avoid a prolonged war with Mahadeva. The Aryan-Mongoloid cooperation was the need of the time, as exemplified through the support Mahadeva extended to the terrified deities to counter the evil-minded mighty Asuras such as the Tarakasur, the support Vishnu provided to Mahadeva in getting Satidevi and in subduing Jalandhara, who presented himself before Mahadeva’s consort Parvati in the guise of Mahadeva. Scriptures describe Mahadeva as the most kind-hearted and generous among the Trio as he readily grants wishes to his devotees, regardless of who they are—the Daityas, Danavas, the Asuras or the Humans. Manifestations of the Shaktipeethas Literally, Shakti means power and Peetha means the seat. Thus, Shaktipeethas mean centers of power, shrines where the divinities (goddesses in particular) are worshiped. The South Asian subcontinent, including Nepal, has a number of such centers of divine power. After the death of Satidevi, Mahadeva literally lost his senses and started roaming all over the world carrying her body on his back. The body would not decay and fall apart as Mahadeva was carrying it! Mahadeva not discharging his duties had the world in disarray. So, to bring Mahadeva back, Lord Vishnu, upon a request from the deities, worked out a solution. He created flies, which would cause Satidevi’s body to decay and fall. Brahma is credited with creating Shaktipeethas on the spots where the organs fell. Among these places, Guheshwori (Kathmandu) is where Satidevi’s reproductive organs fell, as per Swasthani Vratakatha. Per the scripture, her chest fell in Kamarupa, head in Varanasi, right ear in Paurandha, tongue in Kashmir, left ear in Purnagiri, nails in Chamundachal, right hand in Astachal, left hand in Ekabir, neck in Kamaroshtha and the right foot in Kailash Mountain, even as Mahadeva continued to roam around the world. This hints that our cultural spheres covered a large geographical area at that time. Mahadeva alone roamed from Kailash in the Himalayas to the shores of the Indian Ocean, Persia in the west to Bali in the southeast. According to the scripture, all of the Peethas dedicated to Brahma, Vishnu, Surya Narayana, Ganesha, and Bhairava have their unique identities. It says these divine power centers have different forms based on communities and their conventional practices. The scripture advises communities to well understand their family and community traditions, and perform rites and rituals at these centers of faith accordingly. This advice makes sense, given differences from place to place and people to people in terms of cultural, religious, spiritual practices and rituals. Such accommodative and tolerant views allow people to worship a wide range of sages, deities, icons and places.

The word ‘Swasthani’ is a combination of swa, sthana and i. In short ‘swa’ means one’s self; ‘sthana’ means location, mainly spatial and sometimes temporal or even contextual; and the suffix ‘i’ here converts a word into feminine form. Looking at the name of the book, Swasthani is addressed as ‘Sri’, a polite form of addressing an individual. ‘Sri’ has multiple meanings, including the supreme consciousness, the goddess of prosperity and wealth. The Vedas consider ‘Sri’ as Goddess Parvati, the consort of Lord Shiva. It is interesting that Goddess Parvati herself worshiped and pleased Sri Swasthani to get married to Mahadeva (Lord Shiva). The Vratakatha cites this phenomenon many times to convince the sufferers that their salvages lie in the vratas and worships dedicated to Sri Swasthani. Aryan-Mongoloid interactions The Aryans are believed to have developed Sanatana dharma, the righteous way of life, long before entering Bharatavarsha. But legends indicate that they confronted the Mongoloids, and after some interactions they recognized Shiva as Mahadeva, one of the major Trios of the Godhead. Two clues hint at Shiva being a Mongoloid. Firstly, Shiva is worshiped as Kiranteshwar Mahadeva, Kirants being a Mongoloid ethnic group. Second, the abode of Shiva is in Mount Kailash, an area from where some Mongoloids are believed to have come to Nepal. Historically, from the southern flanks of the snow-capped mountain ranges—the Hindu Kush to the Himalayas—formed interfaces where the Aryans met the Mongoloids. This is demonstrated by Dakshaprajapati’s objection to marrying off eldest daughter Satidevi to Mahadeva (Lord Shiva) as Shiva was ‘far inferior’ to other deities his daughters were married to. Not only social interactions but also deep acceptance of each other had developed between the Aryans and the Mongoloids. There was deep friendship between the Aryan Vishnu and the Mongoloid Shiva (Mahadeva). Desirous of marrying Satidevi but being rejected by her father Daksha, Mahadeva visits Vishnu’s abode (Baikuntha) and asks the latter to act as a matchmaker. Vishnu  promptly visits Daksha. Vishnu says he has come to beg for something, and he would express his desire only if the host promised to fulfill it. After Daksha’s affirmation, Vishnu expresses intent to marry Satidevi. Daksha unwillingly gives his nod, asking  Vishnu  to come with his kin and well-wishers on an auspicious day, and take Satidevi as his bride. Vishnu informs Mahadeva that the mission may succeed, although he himself had to ask for Satidevi’s hand. Vishnu instructs  Mahadeva to appear as an old hermit at the time of Kanyadana (gifting of the girl), ask for alms and threaten to curse both the giver and the receiver if Kanyadana is proceeded without giving him alms. Vishnu would then explain the auspicious moment of Kanyadana would end soon and ask Mahadeva not to spell a curse, offer the alms after the Kanyadana and invite the latter to sit with him. At that very moment, Vishnu would play a trick and make Daksha put Satidevi’s hand into Mahadeva’s. Delighted, Mahadeva follows Vishnu’s words. The plan succeeds. Daksha gets angry but relents. Satidevi unhappily accepts Mahadeva in the guise of an old hermit as husband and follows him to Kailash. When Satidevi finds out that her hubby is one of the Trios of the Godhead, she begins to spend a happy conjugal life. Meanwhile, Dakshya is still angry with Mahadeva. One day, Satidevi sees her sisters accompanied by their hubbies flying in the sky and asks Mahadeva where those deities were going. Mahadeva tells her to ignore it all. Narada the great sage visits them and informs about Daksha’s Yagya where Deities, Yakshas, Gandharvas, Kinnaras, Daityas, Daanavas, Rishis like Vashishtha and Prabhriti, Naagas, Apsara and Dashadikpaalas were invited with their spouses. Narad wants to know why the couple were not invited, though they deserved to be at the Yagya. Satidevi, accompanied by Narada, rushes to her maternal home, pays respect to her parents and seeks to know why they had snubbed her and her hubby. As Daksha insults Mahadeva with words, Satidevi jumps into Yagyakund (where ritual fire is burning) and kills herself. Narada reports the tragedy to Mahadeva. This leads to a war between Mongoloid and Aryan armies. Death and destruction at the war and Mahadev’s sorrow over the death of his consort make for an epic that is a class apart.

Today, Nepal is not only home to adherents of different religions; many Nepalis are atheist too. Even in old times, Nepal was diverse in terms of aspects like faith. In those days also, Nepal was constantly transforming, albeit slowly and naturally. In recent times, though, the demographics are changing quite fast, as a result of scientific outlook, down-to-earth materialistic social and economic relationships and our admiration of and submission to alien religions, cultures and languages, among others. Changes are so pervasive that it is sometimes very difficult to distinguish the new from the old. Historians agree that Nepal was once a confluence of two major streams of humanity–the Indo-Aryans and the Tibeto-Burmans—along with some other indigenous or roaming populations acting as contributaries. Over time, genetic mix-ups occurred also with other groups, along with new human-nature interactions in different ecological regions. Because of these mix-ups, communities considered to be of the Mongolian stock do not look exactly the same. Ditto with the Aryans from the hills and the southern plains. The Kumain Brahmins and the Purviya Brahmins have dissimilarities, too. While the two groups of Brahmins are considered to be the descendants of the same Rishis, sing the same Veda hymns, their rituals are not an exact copy of each other. While Nepal and North India have some common cultural and religious heritages, there are distinct practices that are unique to Nepal. Swasthani Bratakatha is one among them. The Sri Swasthani Bratakatha is a sacred scripture, a mini-purana if you will, where Kumara, the eldest son of Lord Shiva and Goddess Parvati, tells the story to the great sage Agastya. Kumara is another name for Skanda the great warrior, after whom there is the Skanda Purana, one of the 18 Puranas, part of the sacred literature of the Sanatan Dharma, of which Hinduism forms a part. The scripture mentions itself as part of Magha glories (Magha Mahima, the glory of the month of Magha) in the Kedarakhanda chapter of the Skanda Purana. Sri Swasthani is the local deity representing Goddess Parvati herself, addressed in the book as Sri Swasthani Mata (Mother Sri Swasthani). Vrata is a sort of religious penance, characterized by abstinence from some or all of the indulgence in food, water, sexual activity, arguments, speech, sleep, and desire. Katha means a story, here depicting the glory of Sri Swasthani. As with the Puranas and the Mahatmyas, the Swasthani devotees maintain bodily cleanliness, take minimal amounts of food considered pious, recite the Sri Swasthani Bratakatha and worship the Goddess Sri Swasthani for a month starting from the full moon called Swasthani Purnima. While one person reads out the story in the family, other people around the reader listen to the glory attentively and offer flowers, fruits, and holy water to Goddess Sri Swasthani. Devotees also flock to the Shali river in Sankhu for performing ablution and other rigorous rituals. A little bit about the nature of the Puranas, Mahatmyas and the Stotras (prayers), which are part of the ancient Sanskrit literature. Each of them sings the glory of the concerned deity, practice or tradition. The Ramayana upholds Lord Rama as the highest personality of the Godhead, Durga Saptashati sings the glory of Goddess Durga the Almighty Mother, and so on. While Brahma the Creator, Vishnu the Protector and Shiva the Destroyer are considered the Trinity, the Hindu scriptures list 10 major incarnations (including the Kalki, who, supposedly, is yet to be born) of God. The concept becomes more complicated with each reincarnation having multiple names. Vishnu alone has one thousand formal names, for example. Then each Bhakt (devotee) can give the Lord one or many names. Foes also give their choicest names to their ‘disliked’ Godhead. While showing a dislike for the Godhead in public, they may have high regards for the Godhead and even worship the latter in secret. This much about those deities, for now. In Nepali households, the recital of Shri Swasthani Vrata Katha by following prescribed rituals is believed to bring good luck, good health and prosperity in the family. Let Goddess Swasthani bless this one big family – the whole of Nepal.