THE CANAANITE WOMAN, JESUS AND NAGAS

Thepfulhouvi Solo

I heard wise people say: ‘Satan can quote the Biblical to justify itself’. I was unsure of using biblical examples in support of temporal secular issues; then it dawned on me imperceptibly but reassuringly that scripture examples are for the wise guidance of Man in our lives. Rightly or wrongly -I could be wrong, I wish I am right- I am using the principle I could gather from the conversation of a Canaanite Woman and Jesus he Jew,  in a secular temporal issue.

Jesus was traversing the Philistine Territory of Tyre and Sidon in North Western Palestine outside the Territory of Israel when a Canaanite woman came and pleaded earnestly with him to heal her Demon Possessed Son.

Initially Jesus did not pay much attention but her continued crying, perhaps loudly, disturbed his Disciples and they urged him to shoo her away.

But Jesus spoke to the Woman very nakedly:

 “It is not right to take the Children’s bread and toss it to their dogs”.

The Woman replied matter of factly to the effect:

‘True, Lord; but I am not asking a Seat in the Table to share the Food of the Master’s children; I am only praying that the Crumbles that fall from the table be given me also’.  

Jesus praised her great faith in the Son of David and healed her son.

 I am not touching the Spiritual Dimension of the narrative: I am using this passage only to illustrate the Secular temporal fact Jesus brought out in illustration of the demand of the Naga Tribes of Outside Nagaland for the Privilege the Constitution of India gives only to the Naga Tribes of Nagaland.

This is not a case of Spiritual or Moral or Ethical matter. Nagas of outside Nagaland, whether from Myanmar or Manipur or Assam or Arunachal, are all united with Nagas of Nagaland Spiritually and Emotionally; we are all Nagas; Nagas of Outside Nagaland need great consideration in the State of Nagaland from the aboriginal Tribes of Nagaland.

But they are Temporally, Secularly and Constitutionally different from the Naga Tribes of the State of Nagaland. This is apparently unchristian but Gentleman; we are talking about temporal, secular and constitutional matters, not moral, ethical or religious matters. No Constitution of any State anywhere in the World treats a ‘foreigner’ (outside Citizen) the same as a bona fide citizen of the State. A Naga living in UK or America can not enjoy the same Social Securities the British or the American Nationals enjoy there. This is not moral or immoral question; this is constitutional, secular, temporal State matter; Democracy runs on this principle.

Non-Nagaland Tribes sadly do not have the same privileges the Constitution of India gives only to the Naga Tribes of Nagaland. This may be unchristian; but this is the way the Secular temporal world runs; the World has to be that way, otherwise it cannot stand! If Belzebub fights Belzebub, his Kingdom cannot stand.

We, the Naga Tribes of Nagaland feel very sorry for the Naga Tribes of Outside Nagaland: very unfortunately they missed historic chances when they failed to join the Naga Tribes of Nagaland in the boycott  of Constitution Assembly for Indian Union in 1946, in the Naga Plebiscite of 16 May 1951 and in the boycott of India’s first and second general Elections in 1952 and 1957.

The Writer heard from the Father of Naga Movement Mr. Phizo himself personally that Nagas of Nagaland informed the Leaders of Outside Naga Tribes, even Khasis and Mizos, to start the Movement together united. But they did not and missed the historic chance; once a historic chance is missed, destiny often does not repeat; refer the Parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Paradise.

Even the Cabinet of the Government of Nagaland has no authority to change a Constitutional Provision unless the Legislative Assembly of the State of Nagaland by a majority decides.

The Aboriginal Tribes of Nagaland and the State Nagaland cannot be bifurcated in matters of Constitutional Protection under Article 371 (A) of the Constitution of India for Nagaland.

Dr. Imkongliba Ao and many others, under tremendous condemnation and imperilment to their lives sacrificed their blood for this.

Long before the formation of the State of Nagaland, the Nagas held the principle of ‘URA UVIE’ literally meaning: “This Land Is Mine” which means the land of the Angamis belong to the Angamis, the land of the Aos belong to the Aos, the land of the Puchuris is their own etc and etc; Naga life runs on this principle: an Angami cannot represent the Yimchungers or vice versa among the Nagas.

The Constitution of India begins:

“We the People of India………give ourselves this Constitution”

Which means the people of India on the Midnight of 14th / 15th August 1947 gave themselves their land to the Union of India.

The Institution of the Nagas (NNC) is based on its Faith that the Creator (God) gave their forefathers this Land to them from ‘time immemorial’; therefore Nagas say: URA UVIE; conversely: the land of Non-Nagas is not the land of the Nagas.

Today the NNC comfortably keeps mum pronouncing Urra Uvie from their Seats; the State sits waiting on the Fence when Outsiders claim the Rights of the Land Owners. Mr. Muivah of the NSCN Leader on the other hand, has very categorically articulated: “We are not asking for land that belongs to the Meiteis”.

Surprisingly but understandably; the Naga Hohos, the NSF, the Tribal Hohos of Nagaland, many other Naga Civil Organizations barring the Eastern Naga People Organization (ENPO) keeps their winter herbination. 

Nice, wise and Elite Christian Gentlemen do not talk like this in the public: Only dirty foolish unchristian persons like this Writer brings out such true dirty linens to the notice of the Public.