By Fabian Lyngdoh
Many authors have written in a general manner about the concepts of ‘ka hok ka sot’ and ‘ka ktienhok-ktiensot’ in the Khasi thought, but I feel that their deeper meanings are still lying hidden, and therefore this article undertakes to explicate their full meanings and imports. ‘Ka Hok’ (Divine Justice) is different from ‘ka hok’ which carries the following five different meanings according to different situations: First, ka hok is seen as ‘righteousness’ in thought, feeling and behaviour guided by ‘ka tipbriew-tipblei’ (moral conscience). Second, ka hok is seen as ‘a right’. Every person and all other creatures in the cosmos have the right to exist and manifest their being as designed and allocated by God. Third, the word ‘ka hok’ is also used in the concept of ‘truth’. The general word for ‘truth’ in Khasi is ‘ka jingshisha’ but the word ‘ka hok’ carries a heavier meaning of ‘truth’. When a man agrees to what another man has spoken, he may say, “kata te ka hok,” which means, “that is the truth.” But if he disagrees to what another man has spoken, he may say, “kata te kam dei ka hok” (that is not the truth), or he may ask, “Balei mem kren ïa ka hok?” (Why don’t you speak the truth?). Fourth, ka hok may imply, ‘righteously-earned property’ (ka khih ba la kamai hok). A Khasi says, “Ngam salia ban ïap ruh ban ïada ïala ka hok (I’m ready to die to defend my righteously-earned property). Fifth, ka hok also means spiritual wealth that man should earn by fulfilling his moral and spiritual obligations so that he would have ka Hok (right) to receive the favour of ka Hok (Divine Justice) as credit to his spiritual wealth to strengthen his ‘ka rngiew’ (spiritual personality). When we put together these five meanings of ka hok we can say: “It is the truth (ka hok) that man has the right (ka hok) to earn his material wealth (ka hok), but he must earn it righteously (da ka hok) so that he may have sufficient spiritual credit (khraw ka hok) before the eyes of Ka Hok (Divine Justice). Ka Hok and responsibility go together.
‘Ka ktienhok-ktiensot’ is generally described as “the word of righteousness, or a word of honour with an implicit divine connotation, that once such a word has been given, it is believed that a violation of it would invite divine retribution.” In the context of this article, ka ktienhok-ktiensot is the word of righteousness that is guided by the dictates of ka Hok (Divine Justice), and the dictates of ‘ka Sot’ (socio-religious code) of a particular community. ‘Ka ktien-hok’ is a statement that is spoken with good conscience and sincerity from the depth of the heart according to the dictates of ka Hok. ‘Ka Sot’ is the ‘socio-religious code’ which is not similar to ‘Sat’ as in Hindu concept of ‘Sat-Chit-Ananda’, as seemed to have been misinterpreted. The equivalent of ‘Sat’ in Khasi belief is ‘Ka Hok’, and not ‘Ka Sot’. Hence, ‘ka ktien-sot’, though required to be spoken with sincerity, but it should also be in accordance with the provisions of ‘ka sot’ of the community to which the speaker belongs.
Examples would make this concept clearer. If a man says to a woman, “I love you darling; you will be with me wherever I go and wherever I live, and I will ever care for you and never leave you for the whole of my life. I am speaking from the depth of my heart that no one else but you, shall be the flesh of my flesh and the bone of my bones,” he has spoken ka ktienhok. But whether he has also spoken ka ktiensot, it depends on the socio-religious code of the community to which he and his beloved belong. If the man and his beloved belong to a patriarchal society, then he has spoken ‘ka ktienhok- ktiensot’ of love in its perfection; but if the man and woman belong to the Khasi society, the statement made is ‘ka ktienkai’ (slanderous statement). For the Khasis it is ‘ym juh sot’ (not the norm) for a man to address such a statement of love to a woman. According to the Khasi thought, a man cannot convert a woman belonging to another kur into the flesh of his flesh and the bone of his bones through marital relationship. That is called ka sang (sacrilege) among the Khasis. Moreover, according to the Khasi marriage covenant, it is the prerogative and obligation of the woman’s kur to lead and guide the husband; and it is also her responsibility to make his stay in her house comfortable and honourable, provided that the marriage brings forth ‘u khun u ksiew’ (children and grand children). It is in this context that a Khasi lover made a promise to his lady love, as in U Soso Tham’s poem, ‘U Tiew Pathaw’:
“I’ll follow you beyond earth’s bound/ No matter where you lead/
You cook in earthen pot, so what/ But in a warm dove’s cote.” (Ka Duitara Ksiar)
The formal rule in Khasi marriage is that, it is the man who offers himself for marriage to the woman. In patriarchal societies the man asks for the woman’s hand and proposes if she is willing to be his wife by asking, ‘will you marry me?’ Which means, ‘are you willing to be my wife?’ But in the Khasi society the man offers his hand to the woman and say, “nga wan kylli yngkha yngkurim”, which means, “Do you accept me as your husband?” For this reason a Khasi man is called ‘u rang-tyrwa’ (a male who offers himself).
If a Khasi says that his mother has departed and went to ‘Ka ïing U Blei’ (House of God), he might be speaking ka ktienhok, but he has not spoken ka ktiensot. To enter the House of God implies to merge in God’s divinity. The Khasis never believed that the human soul (atma) would merge into one with God (Brahma) as in Hinduism. The traditional belief of the Khasis is that a good person after death would be eating betel-nut ‘ha Dwar U Blei’ (in the portico of God) not in the House of God. God would remain the Lord Almighty forever, and the human soul would remain with separate identity forever. For the Khasis, it is sufficient for the soul to attain the highest bliss just by being able to enter into the communion of saints in the fold of ka ïawbei (ancestral mother), along with u suidnia (ancestral uncle) of the clan, and that is called or ‘Ka Dwar U Blei’. The idea that the spirits of the dead would go to eat betel-nut in the ‘House of God’, is a modern accidental interpretation, probably influenced by Christianity: “In my Father’s house there are many rooms…I am going there to prepare a place for you” (John, 14: 2-3). So, ka ktien-hok ktiensot is a statement made with good conscience according to the dictates of truth or universal morality, as well as in accordance with the provisions of the socio-religious code of the community to which the speaker belongs.
In the past people trusted each other on the strength of verbal covenants witnessed by God and other spiritual beings. But today, ka ktienhok-ktiensot as it was understood in the past can no more stand the test of time, because the traditional matrilineal system which is the core of ‘ka Sot Khasi’ has become diluted and remains only in name, much to the disadvantage of womenfolk rather than the source of their security. So in serious cases ka ktienhok-ktiensot can no more be trusted without the evidence of written documents. Land ownership is now confirmed by ‘ka dulir dupat’ (written document), transfer of properties have to be recorded in written documents; ‘ka bishar’ (judicature) can no more stand on ka ktienhok-ktiensot but on evidence of written documents, etc. So, ka ktienhok-ktiensot is now replaced by a written document as a substitute for the spiritual witnesses to the commitment made in ka ktienhok-ktiensot. The Khasi society is today within the Indian State. The purpose of the Sixth Schedule is to accommodate ‘ka Sot Khasi’ into the provisions of the Indian Constitution, and not to accommodate the Indian Constitution into the provisions of ka Sot Khasi. So, according to Khasi traditional thought, ka Sot today would also include the provisions of the Constitution. To speak ka ktienhok-ktiensot implies speaking according to the dictates of truth, according to the Khasi socio-religious code, as well as according to the provisions of the Indian Constitution. A spoken or written statement that is contrary to any of the above is not ka ktienhok-ktiensot.