A Foundational Identity for a Modern Republic: Affirming Nepal as a Sanatan Civilization in its Constitutional Framework

Abstract

This article argues that Nepal’s most durable national identity is best understood as a Sanatan civilizational continuum, a descriptive, inclusive canopy that has historically integrated Hindu and Buddhist lifeworlds, shared sacred geography, festivals, and layered local traditions, rather than a narrow sectarian label. It contends that modern constitutional instability has been intensified by identity confusion, especially when “secularism” is imported as a rigid ideological template instead of being grounded in Nepal’s lived pluralism and indigenous governance ethics. Drawing on Nepal’s demographic realities and civilizational institutions, the article proposes a constitutional pathway that affirms cultural continuity while guaranteeing equal citizenship, freedom of conscience, and non-discrimination for all communities. It emphasizes that the practical aim is not to privilege one faith, but to prevent constitutional design from severing the country’s historical “moral ecology”, including syncretic public culture, heritage stewardship, and community trust systems, thereby reducing polarization and improving legitimacy. The central claim is that Nepal can avoid the trajectory of chronic contestation by pairing civilizational self-recognition with modern rights-based constitutionalism: a state that protects heritage and social cohesion while remaining accountable, plural, and protective of every individual’s liberty and dignity.

The Quest for an Enduring Constitutional Bedrock

Lasting political stability cannot be achieved through provisional instruments of law alone, particularly when they are disconnected from the perennial substance of national identity. Recurring instability suggests that the pursuit of a perfect governance structure remains an exercise in futility if it is not constructed upon the philosophical bedrock upon which any viable political edifice must be constructed. This article advances a central thesis: that recognizing and affirming Nepal’s deep-rooted, pluralistic Sanatan civilization provides the necessary and historically authentic foundation for a resilient, unified, and modern constitutional order. This paper will first define the civilizational term, then present the empirical evidence across four domains (people, places, time, language), and finally derive the constitutional implications from that evidence.

The purpose of this analysis is to articulate the extensive evidence for Nepal’s inherent Sanatan character and to argue that its constitutional recognition is not an act of exclusion but a descriptive affirmation of a lived reality. This affirmation is fully compatible with the principles of equal citizenship, freedom of conscience, and inclusive, modern governance. To build this case, it is essential to first precisely define what “Sanatan” signifies in the specific, historical context of Nepal.

Defining the Sanatan Civilization: A Canopy of Inclusion, Not a Monolithic Creed

For policymakers and constitutional architects, a precise definition of “Sanatan” is of paramount strategic importance. In the Nepali context, the term does not refer to a narrow, monolithic religious doctrine but to a broad and accommodating civilizational framework. This distinction is crucial, as it shifts the conversation from sectarianism to cultural identity. Sanatan Dharma, translated as the “Perpetual Duty” or “Eternal Way,” functions as a comprehensive cultural superstructure that has, for millennia, incorporated diverse faiths—including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Kirati traditions—under a single, unifying canopy.

This pluralistic civilization is bound not by rigid dogma but by a shared set of core ethics. These ethics bind difference into everyday cooperation and social harmony. They include:

Dharma: The principle of righteous duty, ethical conduct, and cosmic order.
Ahimsa: The commitment to non-violence and compassion for all living beings.
Dana: The practice of generosity, charity, and selfless giving.
Maitri: The cultivation of loving-kindness, goodwill, and friendship.
Seva: The ethic of selfless service to community and society.

The primary evidence of Sanatan inclusivity is the profound and harmonious historical syncretism between Hinduism and Buddhism in Nepal. During pivotal eras like the Malla period, the Newar civilization achieved a brilliant fusion of the core tenets of the Vedas with the wisdom of the Tripitaka. The prevailing cultural narrative treated the two traditions not as antithetical religious systems, but rather as two robust extensions of the same eternal, underlying spiritual philosophy. This is demonstrated by the integration of Hindu deities like Shiva and Vishnu into the Buddhist Vajrayana pantheon as protective figures such as Bhairav and Vajrayogini, who are worshipped by adherents of both faiths. This practical unity is embodied in the landscape itself, where a Shiva-lingam is commonly found near a stupa and devotees routinely offer reverence at both shrines. As political fragmentation occurred elsewhere in the subcontinent, Nepal’s geography functioned as a sanctuary, leading scholars to designate it Asal Hindustan (the genuine, pure land of Hindus), underscoring its role as a secure custodian of Sanatan traditions. This philosophical foundation provides the context for understanding the tangible evidence of this identity in Nepal’s society today.

The Four Pillars of Evidence: Manifestations of a Lived Sanatan Reality

The claim that Nepal is a Sanatan civilization is not an abstract theory but an empirical reality, observable in the daily lives of its people. This reality is built upon four foundational pillars: the People, their sacred Places, their measurement of Time, and their Languages. Together, these pillars demonstrate that the Sanatan identity is a pervasive, continuous, and lived experience for the vast majority of Nepalis, forming the very fabric of the nation.

The People: Belief, Practice, and Routine Coexistence

The beliefs and practices of the Nepali people overwhelmingly affirm a Sanatan identity. The 2021 census indicates that over 81% of the population adheres to Hinduism and over 8% to Buddhism, a statistic that reflects not a religious divide but a unified cultural ecosystem. This unity is lived through the widespread observance of life-cycle rites, daily household worship, monastic offerings, and seasonal fasts that create a shared grammar of duty and compassion. The most preeminent symbol of this syncretic reality is the Living Goddess, the Kumari. Selected from a Newar Buddhist lineage, she is worshipped by the entire nation as the living embodiment of the Hindu goddess Durga, underscoring the deep coalescence of these traditions at the heart of Nepal’s civic and spiritual life.

The Places: A Continuous Sacred Geography

Nepal’s sacred geography and urban forms embody a unified Sanatan civilization. The nation is a continuous fabric of shared pilgrimage sites, including Pashupati, Swayambhu, Bauddha, Changu Narayan, Muktinath, Janaki Mandir, Baraha Kshetra, and Manakamana, which draw devotees from multiple traditions. Civic life is shaped by an intricate network of innumerable patis (rest houses), bahals (monastic courtyards), chautaras (platforms), ghats (river steps), and hiti (water spouts). These structures are not separate from daily life; they link worship to markets, charity to craft, and courtyards to communities, creating what can be described as a Hindu-Buddhist civilizational city.

Time: The Festivals as a Shared Public Calendar

Public time and the national calendar in Nepal are structured by a shared festival cycle that reinforces a collective Sanatan identity. Key national festivals such as Dashain, Tihar, Indra Jatra, Gai Jatra, Buddha Jayanti, Lhosar variants, Teej, Mani Rimdu, and Bhoto Jatra transform public spaces into sanctuaries and annually reset social bonds. These events are not private religious observances but massive public affirmations of a shared heritage. They are proof that civilizational time remains a commons, uniting the nation in a rhythm of celebration, remembrance, and renewal.

Language: Plural Tongues with a Shared Moral Grammar

Nepal’s remarkable linguistic diversity, with dozens of mother tongues such as Nepali, Maithili, Nepal Bhasa, and Tamang, performs rather than dilutes its Sanatan identity, expressing a singular civilizational ethos through a chorus of different voices. While the scripts and sounds are many, these languages carry a shared civilizational grammar rooted in common ethics of duty, generosity, truthfulness, and friendship. This underlying moral vocabulary allows for unity within diversity.

This overwhelming evidence, manifested in the lives of the people and the very landscape they inhabit, points toward a clear constitutional imperative.

The Constitutional Imperative: Why Recognition Matters

Having established the empirical reality of Nepal’s Sanatan civilization, the discussion must turn to the constitutional logic for its formal recognition. The choice facing the nation is between a constitution that is descriptively accurate to its cultural bedrock and one that embraces a potentially destabilizing ambiguity. There are three compelling reasons to formally adopt the term “Sanatan” in the constitutional framework:

Accuracy: The term “Sanatan” is historically and culturally the most accurate descriptor for the social compact and ethical stream that has always defined Nepal. It names the lived reality and inheritance of the nation, rather than imposing an external or artificial label.
Inclusivity: In the Nepali context, Sanatan has never been a single-sect doctrine but has always functioned as a welcoming canopy for multiple traditions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Kirati faiths. Its formal recognition thus affirms this inherent, time-tested pluralism.
Stability: Adopting imported, elastic labels like “Secular” risks turning a majority into a suspect class and a civilizational inheritance into a partisan slogan. Naming the real, lived inheritance provides a stable foundation that avoids perennial word-wars and centers the constitution on lived practice rather than on contested theory.

Recognizing this identity is the first step; the critical second step is to define the inviolable rights that must accompany it, ensuring that this affirmation is a source of unity, not exclusion.

Affirmation without Exclusion: Non-Derogable Rights in a Sanatan Republic

Affirming Nepal as a Sanatan civilization is a descriptive act, not a prescriptive one. It identifies the cultural foundation of the state; it does not grant privilege or impose penalty based on creed. These rights are not just compatible with a Sanatan identity; they are the essential constitutional guardrails that prevent a descriptive identity from ever becoming a prescriptive or coercive state ideology. To ensure this principle is upheld, this recognition must be anchored to an unwavering and explicit commitment to modern, universal human rights. The following three non-derogable commitments must form the baseline for individual liberty in a Sanatan Republic:

Equal Citizenship and Equal Protection: Every person, regardless of faith, tradition, or lack thereof, is an equal citizen under the law, entitled to the full and equal protection of the state.
Freedom of Conscience and Worship: The absolute freedom of belief, worship, peaceful assembly, and cultural expression must be guaranteed for all individuals and communities. This includes the fundamental right to refrain from belief.
Open and Accountable Civic Institutions: Governance must be guided by public reason. Public institutions—including schools, courts, and state budgets—must remain open, transparent, and accountable to all citizens, without preference or prejudice.

With these fundamental rights secured as the bedrock of the republic, the Sanatan identity provides a coherent framework for building a forward-looking, modern, and dynamic model of governance.

Modernization without Amnesia: A Forward-Looking Vision for Governance

Recognizing Nepal’s Sanatan identity is not an act of nostalgia but a strategic foundation for building a confident and modern state. This approach enables “modernization without amnesia,” where progress is pursued without severing the nation from its cultural roots. This vision can be translated into a practical policy blueprint for governance:

Stewardship of Living Heritage: Protect sacred landscapes and modernize the management of temples, guthis (community trusts), and festival routes through transparent endowments, ensuring they remain accessible and vibrant for future generations.
Many Tongues, One Civic Home: Honor all mother tongues as national treasures while promoting Nepali as a common working language. Invest in multilingual education to ensure children can thrive economically while remaining connected to their cultural heritage.
Public Time, Public Space: Plan cities around festival routes and squares; preserve rest houses and water spouts; fund inclusive celebration logistics.
Power as Service (Rajadharma): Uphold the timeless Sanatan ethic that authority exists to serve, not to extract. This means a commitment to clean institutions, open budgets, independent audits, and swift, impartial courts.
Earth as Sacred Trust: Align economic growth with environmental stewardship, recognizing the nation’s mountains, rivers, and forests as a sacred trust that must be preserved with climate and seismic resilience in mind.
Knowledge and Work: Foster well-rounded citizens by integrating modern technical education (STEM) with the civilizational arts. Create thriving markets and ensure fair wages for artisans, pairing traditional skills with contemporary opportunities.

Having outlined this forward-looking vision, a robust proposal must also demonstrate its intellectual resilience by anticipating and refuting potential objections.

Anticipating and Addressing Objections

A robust constitutional proposal must proactively counter likely criticisms. The following table addresses the most probable objections to affirming Nepal’s Sanatan framework, offering scholarly rebuttals grounded in the evidence presented.

Objection	Scholarly Rebuttal
“Does naming a Sanatan identity threaten minorities?”	Inclusion is the core principle. In Nepal, the Sanatan framework has historically encompassed and provided a home for Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and Kirati traditions. The proposed constitutional model is explicitly anchored to a non-derogable rights baseline that guarantees every individual’s liberty, equality, and freedom of conscience.
“Isn’t this a form of nostalgia that is incompatible with modernity?”	The proposal is fundamentally forward-looking. It is a program of modernization without amnesia, advocating for digitized guthi ledgers, modern seismic codes for pagodas, bilingual education, and fair market access for artisans. It seeks to integrate timeless values with modern tools and institutions, not retreat into the past.
“Why not use a neutral word like ‘Secular’ instead?”	Genuine neutrality and pluralism have already been practiced for centuries under the Sanatan canopy. Replacing this accurate, lived term with an ambiguous and politically elastic import risks generating semantic battles and identity anxiety without improving protections for any group. It is more stable to name what is real.

With these common objections addressed, the argument for a Sanatan constitutional identity stands on a secure and persuasive footing, allowing for a final synthesis of the evidence and its implications for Nepal’s shared future.

Naming the River for a Shared Future

In conclusion, Nepal became a Sanatan civilization not by decree but by the way its people live. This identity is an organic, undeniable reality confirmed by a supermajority practicing its traditions; by a sacred urbanism where temples and monasteries shape the public commons; by a civic calendar braided with shared festivals; and by a chorus of languages expressing a single moral grammar. To say Nepal is—and will remain—a Sanatan civilization is to name the river that has long carried everyone here. It is an act of descriptive truth-telling that provides the most stable and authentic foundation for a modern republic that is both confident in its heritage and generous to all its citizens.

The nation will be modern without amnesia and faithful without fear. The citizens will keep the eternal in the everyday—lamp and laptop, pagoda and seismic code, guthi ledger and digital cadastre, artisan skill and fair wage. Nepal will educate in science and the civilizational arts, welcome the world, and stand confident in ourselves. On this truth, the citizen will initiate a new constitutional order: a free, plural, and flourishing Nepal—Sanatan at its core, generous to all who call it home.

Presentation: https://youtu.be/v0sQolRMEks

Podcast: https://youtu.be/rq1VMZKC924

References for further reading

Government of Nepal, The Constitution of Nepal 2015 (2072) (Kathmandu: Government of Nepal), esp. Article 4 (definition of “secular”).
Chiara Letizia, “Secularism and Statebuilding in Nepal,” Accord (Conciliation Resources), discussing Article 4’s definition of secularism and post-2006 debates.
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), Government of Nepal, Religion in Nepal (National Population and Housing Census 2021 thematic report).
UNESCO World Heritage Centre, “Kathmandu Valley” (World Heritage List, No. 121), describing the monument zones and the historical fusion/coexistence of Hinduism and Buddhism in the Valley.
John Whelpton, A History of Nepal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Mary Shepherd Slusser, Nepal Mandala: A Cultural Study of the Kathmandu Valley, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982).
David N. Gellner, The Anthropology of Buddhism and Hinduism: Weberian Themes (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2001).
Gérard Toffin, Newar Society: City, Village, and Periphery (Lalitpur, Nepal: Social Science Baha/Himal Books, 2007).
Isabella Tree, “A House for the Living Goddess: On the Dual Identity of the Kumari Chen in Kathmandu,” South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 37, no. 1 (2014): 156–178.
S. R. Subedi, “A Case of the Guthi System in Nepal,” Heritage 4, no. 2 (2024). (MDPI)
Gavin D. Flood, An Introduction to Hinduism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)
Patrick Olivelle, Dharma: Studies in Its Semantic, Cultural and Religious History (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2009). (Google Books)
United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), Article 18 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion). (United Nations)
United Nations, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), Article 18 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion). (OHCHR)
Oxford Bibliographies, “Hinduism in Nepal,” for scholarly framing of Nepal’s historical self-understandings (including “asal Hindustan”) and modern debates.

*****