Editor,
With due respect to H H Mohrmen’s opinion, I would like to inform him that my articles are not intended to instigate a war of feelings but to appeal to truth and reason. The definition of religion given in my articles is not according to the Khasi academics or philosophers, but according to the belief and practice of the local sohblei and sohsla; not according to the Hindu philosophers but according to the belief and practice of the common pundits; not according to the Christian philosophers but according to the belief and practice of the common priests, pastors and faithful, etc.
And the purpose of my articles is not to discourage the activities of the Seng Khasi and Seiñ Raj as his article “Everything evolves including religion” (ST, January 15, 2015), seems to suggest, but rather to encourage them to go ahead with the responsibility of providing spiritual and moral guidance to ‘ki kur ki kha’ (fellow tribesmen) who have not adopted any new religion. I had also suggested that since almost all the clans have lost their institutional character as established by the ancestors, and the practice of ka niam-kur has become practically burdensome and hence, almost discarded, the believers of the indigenous faith need a new form of institution other than the kur, to institutionalize the faith and the group into a distinguishable identity.
The Seng Khasi or Seiñ Raj could very well take up that responsibility as a modern form of Khasi religious institution. But the central point of my discussion is not about the legitimacy of the Seng Khasi or Seiñ Raj, but about the legitimacy of the religious faiths of all the Khasis in whatever religion they profess to worship God. If in the community religions, some clans’ members choose to worship Durga, Kali, Biskorom, Bisory, Chandi, Lakhmi, Mahadev, Ram, Lakhon, Ganesh, Shiva-Linga, Baribhai Saribhai (local name for destructive aspect of Shiva) etc., who are Hindu deities, and call that ‘niam-tre’ or ‘niam-tynrai’, then the worship of Jesus Christ, or Allah or Buddha by some other members of the clans can also be called ‘niam-tre’ or ‘niam-tynrai’ since they have adopted the new religions with the sanction of God and with the approval of the respective Ïawbei and Suidnia of their clans? If a man or woman adopts Hinduism, Islam or Christianity as his or her religion, and if that is against the tradition, then it is his or her kur, and not the dorbar raid or dorbar hima, or any arbitrary organisation, that has the authority to ostracise and relegate such a person to a secondary status of a ‘Khasi-kylla’. According to Khasi tradition, every kur has the freedom to choose its own ways of worshipping God.
It is provided in the Khasi socio-religious code that a clan or any organisation has the right to seek God’s permission to introduce reforms in their religious faith and worship. Our elders instructed that since the traditional clan religion has become imperfect because ‘ba la khyllait u kñi, khyllait u ma, la sah khyllung la sah khynnah’ (uncles of previous generation have passed away without the opportunity to instruct the uncles of the new generation on matters of religion), it is dangerous to continue with the old religious practices because ‘ba ioh wan pynban ka lait-kylla’ (serious errors in religious rites might be committed causing displeasure to God as well as to ka Ïawbei and u Suidnia). So the clans can adopt any religion of their choice, but it is not advisable for them ‘ban sahlum sahkhlaw’(to be without any religion at all, or to have no belief and faith in God). That is true Khasi tradition. So for the peace and unity of the tribe, whatever religion we may belong to, let us uphold the Khasi tradition of truthfulness, tolerance and accommodation.
Yours etc.,
Fabian Lyngdoh
Via email
The unsung hero
Editor,
I would like to bring to the notice of the readers that on 21st Jan, 2015, a major incident on G.S. Road was averted because of an alert mind. At around 7:30 pm that day, petrol was leaking from a motorbike which was parked opposite the parking lot of Hotel Centre Point. The owner of a shop, M/s R N Mukherjee and Sons had the presence of mind to immediately inform a policeman from the traffic department so that the latter could take necessary action. Had the shop owner (R.N Mukherjee and Sons) not Letters to the Editor must have the full name, address and contact number of the writer, even if they are sent by email. Only letters with the requisite details will be published. taken that action there could have been a fire hazard which could have caused extensive damage. What if someone had thrown a still burning stub of cigarette or bidi ‘ or for that matter a glowing splinter in that area. Thus because of an alert mind a possible accident was averted. M/s R.N Mukherjee and Sons performed a public duty which many passers-by who saw the petrol leakage did nothing. The shop owner is actually an unsung hero.
Yours etc.
Pratham Sharma