Editor,
The news report: High Court seeks meetings on shared crematoria for Hindus and indigenous Khasi, Jaintia people dated (ST October 26, 2024) is a preposterous and highly offensive suggestion on the part of the High Court. We the believers and followers of the indigenous faith have sets of beliefs and rituals that are unique and distinctive. In fact, the rites and rituals followed by the Niamtre and those of the Seng Khasi are not the same. The roots of our beliefs may be on the same line of thought but our practices are different. Hence at the Lumthangbriew in Jaiaw we have one crematorium for the dead belonging to Niamtre and the other for the Niam Khasi.
I quote from the news report: “The court said although the indigenous Khasi and Jaintia people cremate their dead following more or less the same procedure as the Hindus.” I take great offence in the words, “more or less.” The dictionary meaning of more or less is ‘mostly’, ‘nearly’ or ‘approximately’ which means that they are not exactly the same or identical and vary to a certain degree. I don’t think anybody – and I can vouch for my Pnar and Khasi fellow believers of the indigenous faith that we will not and cannot accept the Court’s suggestion. I wonder if the Hindus will also agree to that. However, even if they do agree and see no problem in this I am sure they will at least be sensitive to the sentiments of the Pnar and Khasi believers of the indigenous faith and perceive the suggestion as ridiculous and outrageous. Granted that we have been respectful of one another’s beliefs and do showcase solidarity especially during festivals of both the faiths, this does not mean that we amalgamate in a way that will make us less distinctive and wipe ourselves off our faith and religion.
The other suggestions of separate timings of cremation as well as segregation of areas for the performance of religious rites are not only absurd but do not arise. I therefore urge the leaders of Sein Raij and Seng Khasi to take up this matter with all seriousness and fight tooth and nail to not allow this debilitating change to see the light of day. Respect and tolerance in a secular country like ours must be promoted but distinctiveness and inimitability and a sense of belonging and identity must not be relinquished or surrendered. I also request the honourable High Court to kindly refrain from hurting the sentiments of the people of varied faiths as India is a secular country.
Yours etc.,
Jenniefer Dkhar,
Via email
High time for Dorbar Shnong to have legal status
Editor
The special article “The Rangbah Shnong’ and his pursuit for an identity” by Aristotle Lyngdoh (ST 28th October 2024) made interesting reading. The contents are concise and excellent. It is observed that the Dorbar Shnong headed by a Rangbah Shnong functions without any rule book and therefore the author has rightly stated that, “his status needs to be clearly defined in the Statue book.” It is a fact as the author puts it, “in a democratic set up, unless the institution of people’s dorbar or council is given due cognition and linkages to constitutional provisions”, the Rangbah Shnong has no identity. Aristotle Lyngdoh has rightly called for everyone to ponder on this. We should not lose sight that the unique feature of Indian governance is the Panchayati Raj system. Enshrined in the Constitution’s 73rd and 74th Amendments, it empowers local self-governance at the grassroots level. In the case of the ‘Dorbar Shnong’ such an empowerment is absent and hence the Rangbah Shnong and the Dorbar Shnong stand to lose all the benefits that the Government of India provides for self-governance at the grassroots level. It is time we wake up from our slumber and wake up now.
According to the document “Finances of Panchayati Raj Institutions” of the Reserve Bank of India there are 2,58,561 Panchayats in our country and each Panchayat’s revenue receipt is Rs 21.17 Lakhs in 2020-21, Rs 23.20 lakhs in 2021-22 and Rs 21.23 Lakhs in 2022-23. The grants from the Government of India and State governments constitute the bulk of the revenue receipts of each Panchayats which is almost 96 percent every year and only 4 percent is their Own Tax and Non-Tax Revenue. A question can be asked about the revenue receipts of the Dorbar Shnong. The answer is simple. We do not know or they do not have one. The role of the Rangbah Shnong and his Dorbar Shnong has been rightly called by some as a “thankless job”.
Your etc;
VK Lyngdoh,
Via email
Setting the Record straight
Editor,
Commenting on Bhogtoram Mawroh’s article ‘Michael N. Syiem: A man for all seasons’ (ST Oct 26, 2024) and thanking him for inviting me for an interactive discussion on the Oct 20, 2024, I’m sure he will recollect my opening statement after the introduction that, “I am one person who many would love to hate.” After that article I’m sure the ‘haters’ have increased. Personally I am more comfortable with facing criticism rather than praise, it allows me to introspect and correct myself.
Mawroh is correct when he writes that the MAITSHAPHRANG is an organization that is not “issue-based” but rather is “agenda-based” and the agenda that we are currently campaigning is for economic empowerment of all children both sons and daughters in the Khasi family through the Equitable Distribution of Self Acquired and Ancestral Property act which will ultimately uplift and strengthen the economic development of the Hynniewtrep community.
With government jobs having reached a saturation point, economic activity is the next best alternative for self- employment and uplifting the State’s economy. For those families who have the resources to share among the children, this will enable them to avail bank loans to invest in economic ventures which will in turn act as a multiplier effect to create more employment opportunities for others from less affluent families.
But the impression created through the article that we want to see the Khasi matrilineal system change to a patrilineal one is not correct and is not part of the MAITSHAPHRANG agenda. No system is without problems but in the prevailing context and environment that it exists one has to critically study whether merits outweigh the demerits and vice versa and accordingly initiate changes like what MAITSHAPHRANG is initiating for our society through the Compulsory Registration of Marriage act and the Equitable Distribution of property.
Yours etc.,
Michael N.Syiem,
Via email