Editor,
The recent coercive action taken by a certain local pressure group at NEIGRIHMS defies all norms of civility. Even if the group’s demands are legitimate and warrant attention, their approach fails to recognize the immense responsibilities shouldered by the head of the Institute in managing a complex and multifaceted organization involving many matters . A perceived lapse on his part—if there is any at all— to attend to the group’s demand does not justify coercion to force compliance.
Furthermore, the positive strides and progress made by the Institute , more so in in recent years which is much to the advantage of many from the “jaidbynriew” (a nomenclature voiced by such groups to signify the Khasi and the Jaintia community) seems to have been overlooked by the group .Instead , the group appears fixated on its agenda, which may be important, but pales in comparison to the many other significant factors that contribute to the overall success of the Institute.
NEIGRIHMS is a central government institute, and any incident occurring within its premises—such as this one—is certain to attract the attention of the central authorities. Moreover, the governments of the other Northeastern states, which have representatives on the Institute’s Governing Council and whose citizens also rely on its healthcare services, are likely to take note of such inappropriate developments. Unfortunately, such incident caused by the group could also reflect poorly on the “Jaidbynriew” as a whole to the outside world, portraying the community not as considerate or courteous, but rather as overly critical and confrontational.
If love for the “Jaidbynriew” is what motivates this pressure group to act, then I sincerely wish they would also channel that passion into more constructive efforts—for example, by exploring the possibility of establishing a Help Desk at the Institute’s building entrance with the authority’s cooperation. Such a desk could assist local patients and their attendants—especially those from rural areas with poor literacy who often struggle to read the signs and navigate within the corridors of the huge buildings in NEIGRIHMS in order to reach the appropriate departments.. Initiatives like this or other meaningful solutions the group might identify in the Institute would genuinely benefit the “Jaidbynriew” in a practical and significant way.
Yours etc
KL Tariang
Via email
Why link culture to religion?
Editor,
Over the past two weeks, two letters to the editor have questioned my assertion that Hinduism is a foreign religion and which accused me of prejudice against indigenous faiths. The first was sent by a good friend, Hiranmoy Dutta, and I am sorry for not having replied to it. I chose not to reply because I had already discussed in great length about Hinduism being a foreign religion brought by Central Asian Indo-European speaking pastoralists in almost half a dozen articles and letters to the papers last year. So, I did not want to wade into the topic again because I didn’t want to repeat myself. But I will suggest that Sir Dutta read my article, ‘Who was First? Does it Matter?’ published in this paper.
The Shillong Times search engine has improved and if you type the name of the article, it will take you to the relevant page. If Dutta wishes, he can also find the other articles and letters from the period which will give additional information and sources. Don’t believe my claims. My piece cites books and articles easily found online. The authors of those books and articles are people who are the top scholars in the world. So, he can read and inform himself and I am sure he will enjoy the experience. Thereafter, he can then do some research on his own, all online, where recent evidence has reiterated the conclusions that were already known many decades ago.
As for the other claim, that I am prejudiced against indigenous faiths by Omarlin Kyndiah, it is a ridiculous accusation with no basis. He has provided no specific passages that he deemed objectionable, which made him upset. I argued in my article (which he mentioned in the beginning) that indigenous faith is not the criterion for describing an indigenous community. First, such a claim is an attempt to divide the community and that, whatever the cost, I will always contest. Second, a set of objective and subjective criteria, rather than faith, has served as the basis for international negotiations and assertions of indigeneity. I will let Omarlin do the hard work to find those criteria and contemplate on them. If he wants to have a discussion on whether those criteria are adequate or appropriate, he can write an article showing the lacunae in them and I assure him I will respond to those.
I may be wrong, but I feel this is the source of his angst against me. If not, maybe he can point to specific passages which he feels reveal my prejudiced attitude towards indigenous faiths. For whatever reason, if he may not do so, I hope he will apologise for creating a fake issue and wasting the space provided by the paper for raising genuine issues. As for the Seng Khasi and Sein Raij, I agree I am disappointed with them and I have explained my reasons in the article. Is he upset about my disappointment and viewed it as prejudiced? That logic implies that anyone outside the government who criticizes the government is prejudiced against it. Or is there an attempt to make this the ‘Kunal Kamra’ moment? The difference is that they want to suppress not a joke, but a critical opinion. If that is his intention, it will not work. I will continue to be critical of institutions and individuals and that is going to continue. So, if he’s unhappy about it, he should brace himself up for more disappointment.
Yours etc.,
Bhogtoram Mawroh,
Via email
Hyperventilated fundamentalists
Editor,
Intolerance against India’s rich diversity is totally anti-national. In a video posted by MP Mahua Moitra on social media, two saffron-clad men were asking vendors at the fish market in Delhi’s Chittaranjan Park, Bengali enclave to shut their shops as they were near a temple. Interestingly, the temple was built by the shopkeepers. These men want to dictate what is Bengali culture where fish is an integral part of the diet of a large section of non-vegetarian Hindus. Some estimates show that 3 out of 4 Indians are non-vegetarian. Even meat and fish are offered to Goddess Kali at Kalighat Kali Temple, one of the 51 Shakti Pithas in India, as mahaprasad in Kolkata. Any design to bulldoze India’s unity in diversity must be curbed.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata