By Aristotle Lyngdoh
Sustainable tradition always relies on established norms where successive improvements thereon enriches the practice of such traditions and make it relevant for every generation. In other words, sustainable tradition gradually develops in the process of refinement and emerges into an established institution without diverting from the basic principles but can be modernized to suit the individual’s needs. To further understand this concept let us consider marriage as an institution in our Khasi society. The nomenclature for a surname or a lineage from the mother side has become an established norm that rendered any attempt to change this system meaningless and ineffective to the extent that no external forces or agencies can alter or force to change its course. The fact that this tradition has remained sustainable is because the logic behind it is socially embedded even if a person has adopted new culture or has different beliefs.
There are some traditions that appear sustainable for some time but disappear and vanish unnoticed. Just as the computer and digital devices have replaced the analog system of television and typewriters, the internet and other new developments have changed the culture and tradition of communication today. They are disruptive in nature because they pose a challenge to the existing models with their new scope and features. At the initial stage these disruptive devices seem to be irrelevant to the general public, but when the usage of these devices become more user-friendly they reduce wastage including time and space are safer to use with minimum energy. They ultimately displaced other old devices permanently. For instance, the primitive role of the maternal uncle in Khasi society towards his clan is becoming a thing of the past and less significant except for reasons of maintaining a cordial relationship. But his role as a father is more important and needed for the overall development of his own family. A family without a responsible father cannot be substituted in totality by a maternal uncle. There is a drastic change in tradition here which is good for the family and well-being of children. In the past, marriage in Khasi society is about relationship building between two clans whereas today marriage is all about the individual and various others reasons.
In the same way, disruptive traditions are either beneficial or detrimental but that depends on the scope they offer and the utility they create. For example, fashion and music vis a vis local or indigenous costumes and music which we see and witness today. In the long run these disruptive traditions become sustainable traditions when the community or society chooses to adopt these cultures as they are found suitable and useful. Therefore, for customs or traditions to flourish they should suit the requirement of each and every individual otherwise a clash will ensue if imposed forcefully. Barring government employees from participating in traditional practice is ironic and will undermine the social fabric within the society because a locality community is a platform where people from all works of life should work together for the welfare of their own society, but preventing a person from holding dual profitable post is another issue otherwise this prohibition should also cover those government employees who are active officer bearers of religious organizations earning extra income in the form of honorarium.
When it come to traditional administration, the foundations and the causes of sustainability should be re-examined as to whether they are still relevant or not and what contributes to their sustainability is in fact a point to ponder. What makes our ‘Hima’ or ‘Raid’ sustainable thus far? Is it the Sixth Schedule or is there something else and more? As a point to be noted, can the Hima Mylliem sustain without ‘Iewduh’ and other local markets or without a sizable commercial land under its disposal? This may apply to other ‘Hima’ as well while lands in the borders without sizable income are like sheep without a shepherd.
Over the years our Dorbar Shnong have sustained themselves not because of any prescribed norms but mainly on public consensus and the complacency of the residents who constitute that community, towards their elders. Out of that a consensus system of self governance emerged that seems to offer convenient living and well-being in the society. But all of a sudden this state of complacency was challenged and on the verge of being displaced when faced with real confrontation as happened from the recent judicial activism. It is here that the danger of unregulated tradition lies, which led the Dorbar shnong of Pamrakmai village in East Jaintia to promulgate authoritative rules out of emotion with arbitrary justification and intruding into the personal choice of a person.
Truthfulness, freedom and liberty from exploitation are the established norms and the High Court was right when it reacted because the primary objective of the judiciary is to protect the individual from any form of deprivation and exploitation. If the Court on the contrary failed to protect and administer justice to affected individuals who approach it, then what is the point of having a judicial system? What to eat and who to marry is an individual freedom and individual personal right. No organization or institution should interfere and impose any restriction. There is no doubt that we have been confronted with disruptive developments ever since the High Court order on Headmen, but, it is also up to our leaders and elders to explore options to bring about a compatible traditional governance in the spirit of the founders of the Khasi National Dorbar when they anticipated a disruption in the system of governance once the British left the region.
The situation itself proves that our traditional system is very fickle so how can we blame the institution of justice when disruption occurs in the traditional practice? Our politicians had a chance once as legislators but failed to see that these issues are well taken care before something bad happens. Their complacent attitude and behavior while in office reflects a dearth of visionary leaders in the society. The headmen too should not stick to their old guns, but rather create a platform to solicit better options than calling rally after rally expressing displeasure and putting the public under pressure. But looking at the custodian of customary laws the District Council, how far can the elected representatives understand the perplexities of the issue or does it matter to them anyway since District council is just a political alternative that we all know? The fight to regain recognition has become a one man mission of who ever occupies the CEM’s berth and the absence of a consolidated effort clearly explains the attitude of our elected representatives. So where is the uniqueness of traditional governance here?
It is high time to reinvent our traditional practices and align it accordingly in order that a vibrant society should not be deterred from sustaining itself or to disintegrate into many sects and sub-sects. A stand-alone traditional system of governance will in no way sustain the advancement of globalization. Let’s not forget that disruptive technology plays a vital role in the development of any nation. If Start-Up India advocates for an environment with lesser rules and procedures, and the blind in China can use smart cards for metros and other utilities, then where are we in comparison to the rapid changing world?