The Khukri and the Saffron Flag: Reframing Gorkha Bravery for the Hindu Kingdom

Much scholarly literature has discussed the normalization of violence in the context of postcolonial South Asia, highlighting the strategies by which militant Hindutva promotes communal riots. A key element of this discourse is a narrative that attributes the perceived subjugation of Hindus by Muslim and British rulers to historical moments of insufficient martial commitment. Consequently, contemporary Hindu nationalist movements have sought to reframe their historical legacies, emphasizing themes of military strength, religious empowerment, and national pride.

In Nepal, the monarchy historically aligned itself with a brahmanical version of Hindu orthodoxy to legitimize its rule. Following Prithvi Narayan Shah’s conquest of the Kathmandu Valley in the 18th century, a trend towards the forced hinduization of the Buddhist and shamanic ethnicities of the hills was particularly evident during the period of the Rana regime in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In the Panchayat era (1961–1990) the ideological ties between the ideal of Nepal as the last Hindu kingdom of the world and Hindu nationalist groups such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) emerged quite prominently, leading to an increased influence of Hindu nationalist voices that opposed secular reforms.

One of the key figures of the Hindu nationalist discourse in Nepal was Yogī Naraharināth (1913/15–2003), the mahant of the Nāth maṭh in Kathmandu, committed to the project of preserving Nepal as a Hindu monarchy, modeled on a Vedic dharma that he regarded as the primordial religion of the Himalayan region. Naraharinath played a significant role in the Gorkha agitations of the 1960s, a conservative uprising against the Nepali Congress government of B. P. Koirala, which sought to implement democratic and secular reforms. These protests, which escalated into violence, led to King Mahendra dismissing Koirala’s government and reinstating absolute monarchical rule under the Panchayat system.

This paper explores Naraharinath’s religious rhetoric in relation to his Hindu nationalist project. It examines: (1) his historical reinterpretation of Prithvi Narayan Shah as an anti-colonial ruler; (2) his reframing of the Gorkhas as freedom fighters and symbols of Hindu martial valor; and (3) his understanding of Nepalese identity as Hindu orthodoxy, particularly through the symbolism of go-rakṣa (cow protection). In this perspective, Nepal offers a counterpoint to India in the discourse of Hindu nationalism: never subjugated by the British, the “only Hindu kingdom of the world” projected an image of pride and military strength as the last stronghold of brahmanical orthodoxy in a secularized world.

A key element of Naraharinath’s Hindu nationalist vision was his reformulation of the figure of Prithvi Narayan Shah (1723-1775), the king credited with unifying Nepal through military conquest. Naraharinath’s passages on Prithvi Narayan Shah in his book Jaya Gorkhā (“Hail Gorkha!”) clearly show a revisionist effort at work: the king (historically interested in expanding his territory) is here recast as a warrior with a divine mission: defending the Hindu dharma against the mlecchas (a derogatory term for foreigners, particularly the Muslims and the British). Central to this reinterpretation is the role of Gorakhnath, the legendary Nāth yogi, whom Naraharinath presents as a protector of the Gorkha people, constructing therefore a narrative in which Nepal’s unification is an anticolonial maneuver to protect Hindu civilization– a vision that echoes broader Hindutva discourses that frame history as a continuous battle between Hindus and foreign aggressors. In Naraharinath’s version of events, Prithvi Narayan Shah’s victories are not just military successes but dharma-vijaya (religious conquests), aimed at safeguarding Nepal as a Hindu stronghold. This reinterpretation parallels the broader strategy of Hindu nationalist movements in India, which seek to cast historical rulers (such as, for example, the Maratha Shivaji) as defenders of Hindu identity. It highlights, however, Nepal's unique success against the mlecchas.

In Hindu nationalist discourse military strength is often equated with religious devotion, and Naraharinath also applies this logic to the Gorkhas, Nepal’s famed warrior class. While, historically, the Gorkhas served the British Empire, particularly during the 1857 Indian Rebellion (where they fought on the British side against the insurgents), Naraharinath’s Jaya Gorkhā re-interprets them as freedom fighters and champions of Hindu pride, with the khukri, the traditional Gorkha weapon, becoming a symbol of Hindu militancy. By emphasizing the Gorkhas’ martial prowess, Naraharinath, on the one side, aligns their history with the nationalist movements of South Asia, portraying them as part of a larger Hindu resistance against foreign rule, on the other, he centers the ideal of martial bravery as essential to the identity of Nepal, positioning the country, therefore, as a paradigmatic example of Hindu valor. 

Cow protection also plays a central role in Naraharinath’s vision of Hindu dharma. In Jaya Gorkhā, the cow becomes a symbol of Hindu purity, and the kingdom’s ban on cow-slaughter consolidates the defense of brahmanical orthodoxy as pivotal to Nepalese identity. In doing so, he highlights the friction between Nepal’s strict laws and the secular practices of post-Independence India—a discourse that resonates with the broader Hindutva agenda, which often weaponizes cow protection to justify violence against Muslims and lower-caste groups in India. In the local context of the Himalayan kingdom, calls for go-rakṣā also reflect the political tension between the brahmanical agenda supported by Naraharinath and the demands for cultural recognition and democratic representation advanced by the Buddhist and shamanic religious groups of Nepal that do not regard the cow as sacred.

Nepal’s history of semi-colonialism has been harnessed and revisited by Hindu nationalist movements to position the country as the last stronghold of Hindu kingship, pride, and orthodoxy. Naraharinath’s rhetoric constructs a vision of Nepal in which the defense of Hinduism is a political and military project, entailing a constant battle against external and internal threats. Unlike India, where the historical imaginary of Hindutva militant groups highlights the colonial moment as emblematic of Hindu civilization’s fall from grace, Nepal’s nationalist discourse—at least until the fall of the monarchy—was centered around themes of invincible military strength and continued religious sovereignty, an example of the adaptability of Hindu nationalist rhetoric to different local contexts.