By HH Mohrmen
Khasi-Pnar society is today at the crossroads. Whether to believe in the existence of u Nongshohnoh, ka Bih ka Taro etc. or not to believe is the million dollar question that haunts the mind of an ordinary Khasi Pnar. The reports and opinions in the vernacular papers reflect this dilemma that the general population of this community is facing.
The demand made by Ardent M. Basaiawmoit the elected legislator of the area, that the government should conduct a thorough investigation of all cases of deaths that have occurred in and around the area which have similar features (eg where the victim was stripped naked then thrown at Umiew river) akin to the alleged attempt to kill the young man from Smit on August 16, by his own uncle. The demand for an investigation of all cases akin to the recent attempt to murder is based on suspicion that there is something fishy and sinister about these cases short of establishing that these were cases of Nongshohnoh. Why is it that despite the fact that a horrendous crime was committed by a mob, yet both Lambor Malngiang (former MLA) and Basaiawmoit refuse to condemn the brutal act? Does it mean that if the investigation confirms that the previous cases of murder are attributed to Nongshohnoh then the butchering of the three persons at the Smit market would be justified?
After having lived with these myths for ages it is understandable that one would find it very difficult to do away with these stories and dismiss them as mere myths. It is commonly believed that the keeper of u Thlen are not as prevalent in the Pnar society as the Taro and the Kymbad. The Pnar believe that generally it is the Khynriam (meaning the Khasis) who believe in the Thlen which in turn compels the keeper to become Nongshohnoh (the act of killing a person in cold blood) so that the Thlen could be fed with human blood). Hence if a Pnar is angry with a Khasi he would taunt him in a derogatory manner, ‘Ka Khynriam chohnoh.’ But the Pnars are supposed to keep the Taro and Kymbad. I don’t know much about Kymbad except for the fact that I do not avoid eating food shared by families suspected to keep Kymbad but I have close connection with families alleged to be keepers of Taro. I asked these families if their ancestors ever told them that the family keeps this home deity (Blai ïung). Their answer is in the negative. They say that they only know it because people alleged that they keep the Taro in the family. Asked if there is any strange space or weird antique articles in the house which could be blamed to have connection to the evil spirit, the answer is no. They live as anybody else; their houses are as anybody else’s house and the only difference is that they are quite well-off than others in the community. In short, families suspected to keep Taro are unaware that they keep Taro but it is the people who made this allegation against families especially if they are rich. I have seen with my own eyes, how a person afflicted by the Taro was treated and how information was extracted from the patient to blame certain individuals or families for allegedly causing suffering to the patient.
On second thoughts the Smit incident leaves many questions unanswered. The first question is the role of the Dorbar Shnong, in the incident. Of course some questions are uncomfortable to ask and much more difficult to answer, but hard questions need to be asked no matter what. It is a known fact that in the rural areas the Dorbar Shnong holds much sway over the people so what prevented the Dorbar Shnong of that area of Smit from stopping the mob from committing the heinous crime in the market place. In this case, the headman is also from the Syiem family (may be second or third in line to the chieftainship) who the commoners (u khun u raiot) still hold in high esteem. How can the headman or the village Dorbar not control the mob? The other pertinent question to ask in this case is whether it is true that the Dorbar Shnong has lost its power to control and manage the village hence has also lost the confidence of the people? Or is it a case where the Dorbar Shnong is also in a dilemma whether to believe that the Nongshohnoh exists or not and that they realized when it is too late that matters had gone out of control. In any case the Dorbar Shnong has failed in its duty to prevent members of the village from being brutally murdered by a blood thirsty mob in the name of Nongshohnoh. Hence the Dorbar Shnong of Smit village has no right to demand for more powers when it cannot even make use of its existing power to control the residents of the village from taking the law in their own hands. This incident should remind the Dorbar Shnong that they are accountable not only to the villagers who elected them but to the District Council which issued them the Sanat and to the state. The Dorbar Shnong cannot simply wash its hands whenever things go out of hand and exclaim helplessly that they can do nothing to quell the mob.
There have been many instances where Dorbar Shnong on catching a person suspected to have committed a crime conducts a Kangaroo court and extends punitive action against the suspect (like asking him to walk around the village shouting, ‘I am a thief,’ etc) and everybody thinks that this is alright. Some would still think that community beating (bom shnong) of the thief or trouble maker is alright. How can anybody be punished when the Dorbar Shnong is not even able to give the person a fair trial? The Dorbar Shnong should not be allowed to conduct any kind of trial because justice cannot be expected when there is no room for free and fair trial. The Dorbar Shnong should therefore refrain from conducting any kind of trial but should immediately hand over those who are involved in any kind of crime to the concerned authorities because they neither have policing nor judicial powers or the expertise to conduct any trial in a free and fair manner.
In the aftermath of the attack on the alleged Nongshongnoh at Mawlangbna, the Directorate of Art and Culture, Government of Meghalaya conducted a seminar on the issue of superstition. One of the speakers who went gung-ho against superstition was a lecturer from certain university. Funnily when I chanced to look at her arms I saw that she was wearing an amulet in one of her arms. It is often very difficult not to believe in charms and the powers beyond comprehension but as for the myth of Nongshohnoh, ka Taro et al, one should try to interpret them in the light of reason and look at them as stories that one can learn important lessons from in life. The myth of Taro, Nongshohnoh etc are dead but if they are to live in the minds of the modern Khasi Pnar they should remain as tales from whence one can draw insights and wisdom. Like all myth and legends the Thlen and its offshoot the Nongshohnoh should be consigned to the pages of the story books of the Hynñiewtrep people because that is where it rightly belongs.