CANAANITE WOMAN, JESUS AND NAGAS
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.
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.
Jesus did not pay much attention but her continued
crying, perhaps loudly, disturbed his Disciples and they
urged him to shoo her away.
Jesus spoke to the Woman very nakedly:
is not right to take the Children’s bread and toss it
to their dogs”.
Woman replied matter of factly to the effect:
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
praised her great faith in the Son of David and healed
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Imkongliba Ao and many others, under tremendous
condemnation and imperilment to their lives sacrificed
their blood for this.
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
Constitution of India begins:
the People of India………give ourselves this
means the people of India on the Midnight of 14th / 15th
August 1947 gave themselves their land to the Union of
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.
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”.
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.
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.