Tribal Traditional Religion

If the socio-religious values and practices of tribal traditional religion were sustainable, what were its defining features? What was the name of the Tangkhul traditional religion? Who was their God? How did they address their God? The ‘Pre-Colonial Period’ section will try to answer these questions.

12.2.1 Pre-Colonial Period

There was a distinct Tangkhul traditional religion before the arrival of the colonials. However, there are some key challenges when attempting to identify and describe the nature of the Tangkhul traditional religion. First, as Tangkhul Nagas practise oral tradi­tion, most, if not all, of their socio-religious practices were not written down. Instead, their religious beliefs and practices were passed down from one generation to another through folksongs, folktales, folkdances, myths, etc. Consequently, there are no written sources for the Tangkhul traditional religion⁸. Until recently, there was hardly any discussion on the topic (see Joy 2014a; Kharay 2017; Mataisang 2019; Kapai 2019a and Kharay 2021).⁹ Second, apart from the oral tradition, early reference to the Tangkhul traditional religion is found in the works of the colonials (see Pettigrew 1909 and Hodson 1911). While some of them tried to draw a comprehensive picture of tribal traditional religion, their reference to indigenous beliefs and practices were derogatory.

Considering this reality, I have given careful attention to distinguish tribal traditional beliefs and practices from Christianity. While there are several differences which are dis­tinguishable, there are key similarities which helped Tangkhuls to merge their beliefs with Christianity. These features of tribal traditional religion are sustainable in terms of princi­pality - and to some extent, compatible with the colonial faith. This feature is the colonial difference i.e., the elements of tribal traditional religions that were adapted with Christian beliefs and practices. For our purposes and clarity, the remaining part of this subsection analytically describes the key features of Tangkhul traditional religion.

The pre-colonial Tangkhuls believed in the existence of the Supreme Being, a benevolent spirit who is the creator and sustainer of the universe (see Pettigrew 1918:i)¹⁰. But there seems to be some confusion about how the Supreme Being is referred or called. One of the early Tangkhul scholars who wrote about tribal traditional religion, Jonathan H. Thumra, suggests that the Supreme Being is called Kasa Akhava/Reisang Chonme/Varivara (Thumra 2008:246).¹¹ The terms Kasa Akhava and Reisang Chonme are synonymously used with the term Varivara, while the latter term is that preferred by the contemporary Tangkhul church. To date, the usage of the term Vairvara is prevalent both in the works of the church and in the writings of contemporary scholars (see Joy 2014b:76-78)¹².

As Pettigrew engaged in a civilising mission, he felt the need to learn the local language i.e., Hunphun/Ukhrul dialect. As he began his mission work in Ukhrul, he was caught in a predicament: he was not able to understand Tangkhul nor did the locals understand Manipuri or English. This situation compelled him to learn Ukhrul dialect. As he began to learn the local dialect, he asked the locals about how they refer to God. His question was understood as referring to that which does not change; this miscommunication was likely because of the language gap between him and locals. The locals pointed to the term vari­vara, birds of all kinds, suggesting that nature does not change (Luikham 1974:458). While taking this expression literally, Pettigrew told the locals that the creator of this vari-vara is the Christian God-Varivara. In the long run, the term was used in his preaching, translation work, hymns, etc (see Pettigrew 1904, 1907).

Uncritical of the epistemology of the term Varivara, the colonials began to use the term in reference to God. To this day, the word Varivara is conveniently used along with Kasa Akhava Varivara (God, the Creator) or Kasa Akhava AvaVarivara (God, the Father and Creator). However, as indicated earlier, that was not how the pre-colonial Tangkhuls referred to their God or were accustomed to.

Along with a belief in Supreme Being, the ancestral Tangkhul believed in the existence of the land of the dead called Kazeiram. When a person dies, they hold that their soul/spirit would travel to the land of the dead. This concept of the land of the dead is like that of sheol of the Old Testament (cf. Ps. 6:5; 88:10-12; Is. 38:9-20 and Johnston 2000:443-445). In the Tangkhul traditional belief, this place of afterlife is governed by a god called Kokto. In their belief, the afterlife is a continuation from the living i.e., they go to the land of the dead and “live the same kind of life as they were before” (Thumra 1988:72). Hence, when a person dies, their family members bury him or her with their personal belongings and items¹⁴. They believe that the dead would continue to use their belongings and personal items in the land of the dead. If a family member forgets to put their items, the deceased would communicate to them in their dreams, which is another important feature of Tangkhul traditional religion (Thumra 1988:72).

The pre-colonial Tangkhuls also believed in the existence of spirits called kameo; these spirits can be benevolent or malevolent spirits (Thumra 1988:49).

An important element of Tangkhul traditional religion was commutation with the spirits or spiritual world. This was done by priests called sharva or sharvawo, the king-headman of the village. It is the sharva who makes sacrifices on behalf of and for the village, clan, and family (Peter 2004:151). At the corporate level, sacrifice is offered for the village when a village raids another village, hunts monsters and wild animals, or an epidemic breaks out; and at the individual or family level, sacrifice is also offered in times of sickness or con­tinual suffering from sickness (Peter 2004:151-152). It is said that the position of sharva is not chosen by the people. Instead, a person takes the role of sharva when Ameoa gifts an individual to heal sickness, understand omens, recognise herbs for healing purposes, com­mute with kameo, etc. (Mahaphang 2015:51). As someone who intercedes with the spirit and looks after the welfare of the villagers, the role of sharva was highly valued in the pre­colonial period.

What is also distinctive about tribal traditional religion is the interface of social and religious events. In their beliefs, their everyday affairs and festivals were carried out with a strong sense of spirituality or religious connotations. For instance, when boys and girls pierced their ears during chumpha festival, sharva offered some portions of the meat to kameo (Kashung 2012:82). In their beliefs and practice, everything was connected; there was no separation between the sacred and secular (Thumra 1988:48-49)¹⁵.

12.2.2 Colonial Period

Early mention of the Tangkhul traditional religion is found in the works of American mis­sionaries and British administrator-ethnographers (i.e., colonials). While they recognised the presence of tribal traditional beliefs and practices when they arrived, they also dismissed traditional religion. The colonials assumed that their religion and worldviews were higher than tribal traditional religion. Yangkahao Vashum suggests that “At the heart of the issue is the claim of European superiority” (Vashum 2020:131). In doing so, they labelled tribal traditional beliefs and practices as the worshiping of evil spirits, the devil, or false gods (Thumra 2003:53).

Pettigrew commenced his missionary work amongst the Tangkhul Nagas in 1896 (Pettigrew 1897:526). As his original plan to spread the good news to the Meiteis (Manipuri) did not materialise, he shifted his work amongst the hill areas. In terms of his work and interactions with the indigenous community, it appears to be seen as an unpleasant com- promise.¹⁶ In his first missionary report, he described the Tangkhul Nagas as ‘uncivilised’, ‘demon worshippers’, and ‘superstitious’ (Pettigrew 1897:526). In addition to the use of such derogatory words, he saw his work amongst the Tangkhul Nagas as a service to them i.e., he saw his work amongst them as a favour to the community. This critique is not to take away from what he did and accomplished amongst the Tangkhul community. But it is to identify that Pettigrew stayed in the Tangkhul inhabited areas with a strong superiority complex. While he claimed to do the Lord’s work, the researcher could not find any expres­sion of love and concern for the indigenous community in his writings (i.e., letter, report, or articles). As he referred to Tangkhuls in derogatory terms, he was more comfortable talking about his works and achievement in his reports.

As someone who was engaged in a civilising mission, he began his missionary work by starting a school in Ukhrul. However, the indigenous community was hesitant to attend the school. The locals were sceptical of the intention of starting a school. In fact, his arrival in Ukhrul was met with suspicion (Pettigrew 1897:526). T. Luikham, one of the early stu­dents of Pettigrew, informs that people came to school only after the political agent, Major Maxwell, threatened the village king and his council (hangva) (Luikham 1948:17-18). On his way to Burma (now Myanmar), Maxwell threatened them that they would be beaten, jailed, or their houses burned if they did not attend the state run school (Luikham 1948:17­18). Even with such threats, the village councils found it difficult to bring the learners to the school. It was only with the personal initiative of Raihao, the king of Ukhrul (or headman), that they were able to gather 20 students.

As the indigenous community suspected, running a school came with ulterior motives. It was used not only to impart Western education, but to spread the Christian faith amongst the indigenous community. Pettigrew states, “The books they study aim to inculcate Christian truth. The school is open daily with singing and prayer. On the Lord’s Day they come together for singing and to listen to the Gospel story” (Pettigrew 1899:53). J.S.M. Hooper suggests that those who were engaged in missionary work during this period were convinced that a vernacular approach to primary education and evangelism was seen as the way forward (Hooper 1963:11). They were convinced that being able to communicate in the same language/dialect would bring a positive outcome of their missionary work. On the surface, such an effort can be said to be done with good intentions. But the school was used as a snowball to the neighbouring village and to spread the Christian faith to them. Such a task was achieved with the help of the British colonials by way of using force. This is another way of saying that Christian mission started with a sense of forcing a belief sys­tem onto the indigenous community. And it was done with disregard for the existing belief system of the indigenous community. Gradually, as the colonials forced their socio-religious values, the surface practices of the indigenous community began to slowly fade.

After Pettigrew worked in Ukhrul for five years, 12 of his students were baptised (Pettigrew 1996:v). As more students were admitted to the school, more people began to slowly accept the new faith. In 1907 (after more than a decade), the church in Ukhrul had grown to seventy members (Luikham 1948:22). Such advancement came at the cost of doing away with their socio-religious and cultural values i.e., as their traditional religion was deeply integrated with the social life, it came with a price. However, as the missionaries could not understand this reality, there was a continual attempt to reform the indigenous way of life in conformation with the colonials (Luikham 1948:23). For example, in between 1906-1909, the new believers were asked to stop drinking khor, rice beer, their staple food; they were prohibited to attend festivals or cultural events which involved the invoking of kameo (Luikham 1948:23). While there were believers who did not want to go back to the life of drinking rice beer, eating the meat used for sacrifice or to the practice of sacri­fice, they constantly had to deal with the struggle of adopting to the new faith (Luikham 1948:34-35). The new believers faced the struggle of reverting to their traditional religion as they were persecuted by those who were holding on to the beliefs of ameoyan, the tra­ditional religion.

This struggle became more real as the community-oriented religion was being institu­tionalised with the plantation of churches in and around Ukhrul. With the planting of churches amongst the Tangkhul inhabited areas, a new set of practices and values were imposed. While these values and practices came with denominational bias and cultural imposition, the Bible, as the Word of God, was instituted as a key element of worship and community¹⁷. According to Down, this is evident “Through their organisation, literature, educational activities, and ideology the Christian missions provided the tribes with the skills and perspectives necessary to maintain distinctive identities” (see also Downs 1980, 1981, 2001:63). Rather than helping the Tangkhul Nagas see their socio-religious ingenuity, the idea of cultural inferiority (compared with the colonials) was planted in their thinking. Their belief in the all-powerful Supreme Being was replaced by a belief in the Triune God, God the Creator, Jesus the Saviour, and Holy Spirit the Comforter; their pietistic or spiritual practice of sacrifice by sharva (local priest) was taken over by the role and position of pas­tor; and their ceremonial singing of folksong was replaced by hymnal singing (and singing Western worship songs).

While many Tangkhul socio-religious practices were done away, some key aspects of the traditional faith were conveniently carried forward. This was done by way of camou­flaging with the new faith. Though several features of traditional religion were adapted, in this case, only the key features that are evidently apparent in the post-colonial period will be identified.¹⁸ First, their belief in the all-powerful Supreme Being was adapted with Christian Triune God, who is also the creator of the whole universe. As indicated earlier, with the influence of Pettigrew, God, the Creator is now referred to as Varivara in the pre­sent context. Reference to God as Ameoa is not preferred. Second, the role of sharva - now adapted as khanong - is continued in the contemporary context. They are now the local healers. They assume the role of prophesying, spiritual adviser, or local healer. Some aspects, if not the key aspect, of this role are also taken by the pastor or the elders of the church.

Third, associated with the role of khanong, the locals continue to belief in dreams. There is a general tendency to allow dreams to dictate the affairs of day-to-day living. Such belief comes with the assumed understanding that the divine communicates to the living through dreams. This belief is further reinforced by biblical instances of God speaking to the people in dreams giving divine instructions (e.g., Matthew 1:20; 23; 2:13; 19). Fourth, in terms of practice, both the pre-colonial and post-colonial Tangkhul bury their dead. They both believe in life after death; the former goes to kazeiram, the land of the dead, while the latter goes to the kazingram, heaven or meifa, hell, depending on the consequence of their life on earth. The key difference is in the belief in Christ i.e., only those who belief in Christ will go to heaven. Fifth, as Tangkhul Nagas are a patriarchal society, certain social-customary practices are carried forward to the teaching and practices of the church. For instance, the practice of village council, hangva, is imported to the practices of church leadership. Like the village council is made up of only male members, Tangkhul churches have adopted a male dominated leadership system into the church. What that means in terms of practice is that churches are hesitant to appoint women pastors or ordain women.

12.2.3 Post-Colonial Period-

After the last missionary left the state of Manipur in 1954, missionary-evangelistic work, school work, and translation work were carried forward by the locals. These locals were those who studied in the mission schools; and they were the ones who were associated with the Western missionaries. All of them became Christians through the direct influence of the Western missionaries. Consequently, their religious or mission work came with a strong Western missionary influence.

This is to suggest that their religious work and activities which used to be a part of their social life are limited to the church and church building premises. As the indigenous com­munity was prohibited to participate in social events, especially events that involved the invoking of kameo or Ameoa of Tangkhul traditional religion, they avoided social events when they embraced the new faith. For example, Pettigrew strongly opposed the celebra­tion of thisam phanit, the festival of the departure of the soul of the dead, where the living gives farewell to the soul/spirit of the dead (see Pettigrew 1909:37-46). Along with such prohibition, the new believers were discouraged to participate in socio-religious activities and events that are indicative of the traditional religion. And since the new believers had moved to a new village (also known as ‘mission compound’) with the help of the colonials, they got further detached from the social reality of the people (Luikham 1948:35). As the new believers were persecuted, moving at the periphery of the village was seen as provi­dential. But, in the long run, detachment from the larger community had a negative impact i.e., detachment from the social reality. Their reality is now limited to the activities of the church - their new found community. Unfortunately, after years of Christianity, they natu­rally remained detached from the socio-political realities of the larger Tangkhul community (see Ragui 2021b). While such detachment has much connection with coloniality¹⁹, it is also related with the influence of the school of thought (Thomas 2016:185-186). Liberals or free thinkers readily engage with the social-political realities, while the conservative-evan­gelicals are hesitant or precautious of dealing with secular issues. As Tangkhul Nagas tend to lean towards the conservative camp, they are slow to respond to social-political realities.

As indicated earlier, as religious beliefs and practices of the indigenous community are being shaped and influenced by the narrative of the biblical text, oral tradition is sub­consciously allowed to fade away. K. Thanzauva and R.L. Hnuni suggest that tribals of NEI transferred their understanding of supernatural power to the Bible (Thanzauva and Hnuni 2002:343-358). Such understanding came in conformation with the colonials which alienated the indigenous community from their culture (Thanzauva and Hnuni 2002:347). While the biblical text is foundational in their thinking, their view or reading of the Bible tend to take a dominant approach. Specific to the Tangkhul context, there was an attempt to do a contextual translation of the Bible (Kaping 2010). Translators tried to make use of Tangkhul phonetics attempting to contextualise certain key words of the Bible. However, such an initiative invited negative responses from across Tangkhul churches and by different church leaders. They hold that the contextualised Tangkhul Bible is awkwardly translated i.e., to read the names of people and places with Tangkhul phonetics (pronunciation)²⁰. As Tangkhul Nagas adopt colonial agendas, they are now indifferent to their own socio­religious values and practices, including their own indigenous phonetics.

Considering such colonial captivity, informed Tangkhuls began to question the presence of colonial influence in the 1970s. While reacting to colonial dominance, they questioned the influence of colonialism. This period saw some efforts to make the Christian faith cultur­ally relevant and relatable to the people. M. Horam observed that “Some devotional songs, especially songs with agricultural flavour, have been composed in their tribal fashion and sung during their worship” (Horam 1977:14). Such indigenous pursuit was also expressed in different parts of NEI (Natarajan 1977:193; see also Thanzauva 1989). In fact, a group of scholars began to argue that what was perceived as Christianity or Christian theology in NEI was irrelevant to the context and experience of the people (see Thanzauva 1997 and Longchar 1997). Thumra argued for the need to do contextual theologies that are relevant in NEI (Thumra 1973:5-7; see also Thumra 1995). Tribal theologians began to develop a sense of suspicion of the dominant theology, especially those that were associated with the Western missionaries and colonialism.²¹ This emphasis of contextual theological reflection was considered significant as the thinking and practices of the indigenous churches were perceived as ‘too superficial’ or unconnected with their culture (Keitzar 1982:310). In the later period, indigenous scholars would further argue that the prevailing theology of the time failed to connect with the indigenous worldview (Longchar 2003:1-16). Such an argu­ment was a confrontation to the preaching and practices of the indigenous churches that seem to prioritise only the spiritual aspect of the indigenous community/church.

12.3