What’s in a Janai?
The businessman priest at the Pashupatinath temple in Houston sells the “sacred” thread Janai for $5. He buys the thread in bulk from Amazon, never having the credible confirmation whether the threads are prepared according to Hindu scriptures. His priority is profit maximization rather than promotion of religious values. And he wins the confidence of his customers by confessing his deceptive dealing and laying a persuasive argument:
“It is only when people of Hindu faith put on the thread that it becomes sacred. If a person of a different faith dons the thread it is no more sacred. Therefore, it is the person, not the process of production of the thread that makes the thread sacred.”
At a glance, Janai is no different to any other thread of three white strings tied up in a loop which when assembled horizontally, has diameter enough to fit an adult standing upright. Only when an individual of Hindu faith who has performed the rite of passage of Bratabandha dons the thread diagonally across his chest, the thread is considered a Janai. Without the rite of passage, a person would be wearing a mere thread.
In popular writings and practices, the very rite of passage is only performed by the Hindu caste identity of Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya. In India, where the purist Brahminical perspectives are still accepted by the society, the rite of passage is exclusive to the Brahmin caste. The purist Brahmins who accept the thread assume a holier-than-thou attitude in the Indian Hindu society, flaunting the thread as a symbol of religious superiority. Janai-donning Brahmins’ purist perspectives have certainly helped promote menstruating women, people of other castes among other identities as impure. However, to judge the tradition significance of Janai in Nepal on the basis of what Indian Hindus associate the thread with is an example of red herring that radical progressives in Nepal slip into effortlessly. The same progressives might find themselves doubting whether Indian Hindu festival Dussehra is exactly same to Nepali festival of Dashain. Where are the Jamaras?
The radical progressive thought on Janai as a symbol of oppression relies on three main avenues. First, the thread creates religious, gender, and caste distinction. Second, the Brahmins capitalize on the existence of this distinction to claim their religious superiority. Finally, the brahmins delusional by this superiority start characterizing people of different identities under different circumstances as inferior.
The distinction of Janai-donning and non Janai-donning populace is often used by purist Brahmins to exert their superiority. The radical progressives use this distinction to argue how the Hindu scriptures have created a divide and contributed to various practices of caste-based and gender-based discrimination. However, the Hindu scriptures have not particularly created this divide. It is evident from the religious practices of Nepali society that people outside of the Brahmin identity can easily perform the rite of Bartbandha and accept a Janai. However, even in Nepali society, the people belonging to the Sudra identity are distinctive from the other identities as they do not perform Bartabandha. But the Hindu religion has not particularly created this divide. According to Sushruta Samhita, an ancient Sanskrit scripture on ayurvedic medicine dating back to the 6th century BCE, even the people belonging to the Sudra identity in Hindu society are suggested to perform Bartabandha. Similarly, the case of Janai creating a divide between genders could be challenged with the existence of Brahmavadini women who also fashion a three-stringed white thread across their chest. The intersectional identity of such women who are generally Brahmins must spark unrest in the radical progressives. Some of them will even produce the nonsensical argument that Janai as a distinction between religions creates oppression. Ask these sham progressives to hide away their crosses.
It would be difficult to deny that the Brahmins in Indian societies have not capitalized on the Janai to assert their purity and the associated superiority. In a typical Indian Hindu setting, only Brahmins are eligible to perform the rite of passage and wield a Janai. When they do assert their purity and superiority based on the exclusive eligibility to don the Janai, Brahmins are effectively claiming that people from other Hindu caste or other religions are inferior to them. However, the distinction between Janai-donning and Janai-rejecting populace is different in the case of Nepal. As mentioned earlier, people belonging to Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya castes according to the Hindu caste system are eligible for the rite of passage. Instead of promoting Brahmin superiority, the rite promotes equality among these castes in the system that are divided religiously. More importantly, this practice alienates the people from Sudra identity from the Hindu system and creates an inferiority complex for them. The result is that people from all the three castes start discriminating against the fourth one, increasing the extremity of traditions which vilify with this particular identity. Riding on this slippery slope, many woke progressives claim that this dynamic has subjected people belonging to the Sudra identity, who are Hindus, to a religious ban from entering Hindu temples. Similar practice is popular in India as well. However, the significance of Janai, Brahmin status and Hinduvta is different in context of India. In general, Hinduism is not just a general doctrine to live life, rather a complex of individual practices. However, over the last few decades one purist interpretation of the doctrine with a singular perspective of practices has taken the central stage in India. Nepal has been historically different in this context.
(After writing so far, I realized the main argument here is that Hinduism is a complex of individual practices. Any interpretation of practices that is popularly accepted forms the norm for each isolated individual practices. One of such practice is the rite Bratabandha and the acceptance of a thread. In Nepal, it is popularly accepted amongst newer generation Hindus that neither a Bratabandha nor a Janai need to be observed strictly according to religious scriptures. To claim that a Janai is a symbol of oppression is to discourage the very few boys in Nepal who decide to continue the tradition. There is nothing particularly wrong about this. However, if this claim is based on a century old piece of law, it does not reflect its current status. The very radical progressives that cancel the Janai would only focus on the current perception of various historical figures to judge their actions. It would be outright hypocritic of these wokes to not analyze the concept of Janai in the present context. I will attempt to discuss such an idea next time when I finally find focus.)
