may almost speak of “wrestling in India” rather than Indian wrestling as
such. Thus the term kushti,which means “wrestling,” denotes both a very
local form of the art as well as a more global phenomenon. Kushti is com-
posed of three primary dimensions: daw, pech,and pantra(moves, counter-
moves, and stance), and there is almost direct congruence between the
“daws” known as multani, dhobi pat, and kalajangh,for example, and the
corresponding freestyle moves known as arm drag, front hip throw, and
fireman carry. Even so, what is significantly different about wrestling in In-
dia is that wrestlers sometimes wrestle in earth pits, sometimes engage in
bouts that last for half an hour or more, sometimes wear distinctive briefs,
and under some circumstances can employ moves that amount to hitting or
kicking an opponent and/or throwing him by holding and pulling on his
briefs. Sometimes a bout is decided when one contestant’s shoulders touch
the earth, and sometimes the rules of a tournament are set by those who
organize it—but at other times and under other circumstances wrestlers in
India wrestle according to strict and clearly defined international guide-
lines, rules, and regulations. The radical contingency of this is all funda-
mentally important, since wrestlers in India often consider themselves to be
simply wrestlers—capable of competing equally on the earth of a freshly
plowed village field or on expensive “rubber” mats at the National Insti-
tute of Sports in Patiala. In other words, there is an important sense in
which the transnational form of freestyle wrestling makes Indian wrestling
into wrestling in India. The history of this process can be directly linked to
the formalization of rules and the structured organization of tournaments
throughout India during the twentieth century.
It is important to realize, however, that this history is not one in which
freestyle wrestling in India has emerged out of—and then has diverged
away from, and become something different than—traditional Indian
wrestling. The point is that wrestling in India, at any given time, but par-
ticularly in the twentieth century, undermines the pretense of Indian
wrestling understood as a distinctive, culture-specific, martial art. Con-
sider, for instance, what might appear to be uniquely Indian about Indian
wrestling—the intense and comprehensive regimen of jor(Hindi; training),
khurak (diet), and vyayam (exercise); the principle of brahmacharya
(celibacy) as a prerequisite to training; the rich symbolic meaning of the
akhara(gymnasium); the competitive dynamics of dangals(tournaments);
the significance of royal patronage; the idealized structure of the guru-chela
(master-disciple) relationship; and, in more general terms, the kind of em-
bodied person known as a pahalwan,who is completely devoted to his
guru, spends all his time wrestling, and who, among other things, idealizes
the practice of celibacy; the consumption of huge amounts of milk, butter,
and almonds; and the daily performance of thousands upon thousands of720 Wrestling and Grappling: India