Patricia Mukhim
The events unfolding at Mylliem where a dead person was not allowed to be cremated because he belonged to the indigenous faith – Seng Khasi – and because people of this faith do not have a cremation ground in that area, brings to the fore many contentious issues which require a societal discourse. Mr Toki Blah in his article in this paper has proposed a peace dialogue before things escalate. The point is that we have a Government and we also have the District Council that is elected to look into matters that impinge on tradition and culture. Should the KHADC not have stepped in to resolve the crises? What about the local MLA? Does he not represent all sections of the populace? And then you have another authority – the Syiem of Hima Mylliem whose mandate it is to resolve disputes related to land and culture. All these authorities were created for this very purpose and not to play politics or to get into the business of collecting taxes from markets and forest produce. Now the problem with the Khasi society is that we are pathetically poor at holding anyone accountable. We spend more time in gossip and outraging in private spaces then on honest conversations.
The Seng Khasi evolved out of indigenous culture and was once a very inclusive faith and a way of life and not an institutionalised religion as it is has come to be at this point of time. Perhaps the proponents of the Seng Khasi were threatened by other organised religions and felt that the best way to continue their legacy was to institutionalise and organise themselves into a religious entity with listed and faithful members just as the other religions are doing. To me this belies the very idea of an indigenous faith to which any member of the community has a right to belong to. Adherents of the Seng Khasi are known to be benign and do not preach on pulpits as others are wont to do. But that must not be construed as weakness. On the contrary it is a strength because it means that the Seng does not have to rely on paid membership for sustaining itself, the way other religions do. Indeed it takes a lot of money to sustain organised religion and its presiding elders.
An article in the web news portal – Raiot – very intuitively states that whereas in the rest of the country there is an attempt to foist Hindutva – a strident form of Hinduism- down people’s throats and to create a climate of intolerance towards other religions by banning cow slaughter etc., here in Meghalaya Christians are behaving in exactly the same way as the Hindutavadis are. Intolerance in any form is not sustainable in a democracy, more so in a country like India with its huge diversities. The fact is that every state in India too is just as diverse. In the state of Meghalaya you have adherents of different religious faiths, a plethora of cultures, languages and races. How do you enforce a single culture in this sort of disparate political ecosystem?
It is time for the people of Meghalaya to rise above sub-nationalism and ethno-centrism and embrace diversity for that is the only reality. Life itself is a sum total of diverse aspects which include gender, race, religion sexual orientation, culture, socio-economic and educational backgrounds and above all the varied experiences that people bring to the table to enrich and enhance worldviews. Even in Meghalaya, the tribals are not of one race. The Garos are Tibeto Burmans while the Khasis and Pnars are of Austro-Asiatic descent. Yet we have accepted that we are people of one state and the same matrilineal culture but with some minor differences in the way we practise that culture.
This is not to sound snobbish but when we grew up we were more diverse in our outlooks because of the composite culture in our schools. It was only after statehood in 1972 that we learnt to look at a non- Khasi, non-tribal as the insignificant other. This went on until we all joined the bogey of a chauvinistic, non-tribal rant which started in 1979. Today we have come a long way and left that sordid history behind but some who became victims of that ethnic cleansing still nurse their wounds. That period is a blot on Meghalaya’s history.
Today life has come a full circle but strangely people of one community are divided by their faiths both of which preach fellowship, forgiveness and humanity? How did this happen? Is this the karma for our sins of the past? It’s inconceivable that a people known for their ardent respect for the dead and who inevitably enumerate only the good deeds of the deceased should today deny the burial of a person based on his religious persuasion. There may be many reasons and past quarrels between the Dorbar Shnong of Mylliem and the Seng Khasi adherents which have brought things to this flashpoint, one of which is that the present cremation ground is located near a water source. But these are not immutable differences that cannot be resolved by dialogue. The people of the area (Mylliem) are of one stock. It is religion that has divided them. Should that difference be allowed to simmer and reach a flashpoint? Meanwhile, the leaders of the Seng Khasi have called a public meeting on Sunday 20, August, most possibly to sound out in a public forum the perceived persecution they are facing in their own state vis- a- vis the Mylliem episode. This is not a healthy precedent and it is a precedent of sorts for Meghalaya. Before this happens it is important for those institutions that are elected to serve every constituent in this state without fear or favour to address this thorny issue and prevent it from spilling over into a communal confrontation.
The 2018 election is approaching and with it the polarisation of political ideologies, behaviours and attitudes. There are subversive forces that would want to join issues with the Seng Khasi and escalate the present standoff in Mylliem. Politics is a once- in- five-year jamboree where unscrupulous actors would exploit every societal vulnerability to come to power. And when emotions ride, high people tend to elect their representatives not as informed voters but as emotionally and socially unintelligent citizens, who will regret their choice immediately after coming out of the polling booth and good sense prevails. Emotional intelligence is in short supply during these turbulent times when politics is mixed with a sense of vengeance to get back at the perceived wrongdoers. The worst part about democracy is when its citizens vote along religious or ethnic lines instead of weighing their choices against the candidate’s leadership potentials and his/her track record and credibility.
One can empathise with the Seng Khasi community of Mylliem and their sense of hurt and injustice and this is where healing is most needed. Is there no Christian from amongst the community there who can bring healing and forgiveness? How can people go to church while at the same time hold a grouse against their neighbours?
Here one must also critically analyse the role of the Dorbar Shnong. Has this institution lost its ability to be the arbiter and the front-runner for resolving conflicts within the Shnong? Was this not its primary purpose other than discharging civic responsibilities and engaging in the buying and selling of land etc? Are we in Meghalaya giving too much importance to an institution that has lost its moorings and is seen to be clearly taking sides in a public dispute? The problem with these archaic institutions is that they have not imbibed the value systems of yore, riddled as they are by the politics of opportunism.
And what about the religious heads? Don’t they have a role to play in such explosive situations? What’s the point of religion when all it does is create communal ghettoes? Is Christianity any better than the Hindutva brigade that it regularly castigates? It’s time for this society to take a discerning view on its future and to develop the kind of institutions that will sustain it in the long run. We have to get beyond hyperboles and chauvinism and get real. Meghalaya is no longer a conglomerate of principalities (ki hima). It is now part of a country and its citizens have, for better or for worse voted to be a democracy.