By Dr Irengbam Mohendra Singh
Without naivete’ and arrogance,
The effete Meiteis were a warrior nation.
Take a stroll round their extraordinary history,
You will find there is no vibrant future
Manipur existed as an independent and civilised country in the subcontinent of India and the South East Asia. It had its own indigenous religion of Sanamahi, its own language and alphabet. It has been in existent since the Stone Age.
Manipur now is a failed State and the Meiteis are a vanishing nation. Manipur was in the 18th century a Hindu country with Hinduism as its State religion and Hindu Meiteis as the backbone of the nation. The Meitei cultural values were Hindu culture with an intermingling of Sanamahi religion.
The changing society in Manipur in late 20th century posed problems for the Meiteis and forced them to recreate a resurgence of Meitei national character. Manipur is now a multifaith, multicultural and multiethnic country. This is of course a change for the better provided every tribal community is taking part in the running and the development of the State for peaceful coexistence. But it is not to be. Some ethnic communities with different political ideologies are doing the opposite.
In the history of Manipur before the British colonial em (1891- 1947) it was not that the Kukis, the Tangkhuls, the Marings, the Kabuis and the Pangals did not fight for the defence of Manipur, but it was the Meiteis who bore the brunt of the fighting. Manipur was a princely State with Meitei kings. Manipur may not be a gift of the Meiteis but the Meiteis were responsible for keeping Manipur independent until 1891. It was mainly through the blood, sweat and tears of the Meiteis that Manipur is what it is today.
My thesis is non-political. It is a project to identify the collective qualities of the Meiteis as they were. The Meiteis were a Kirata tribe, now conveniently called Indo-Mongoloid tribe that were in existence in Manipur for 3000 years, though only recorded for 2000 years in the Cheitharol Kumbaba.
Nobody knows when and from where the Meiteis migrated to Manipur in the prehistoric times. It must be at least as old as the Aryan migration to India 3000 years ago. It is recorded that when the Vedas were compiled before 1000 BCE, the Kimtas were mentioned in the Yajurveda and Atharveda.
The native religion of Sanamahi cult is unique for the Meiteis. It has incidentally, some similarities in its philosophical and metaphysical content to Hinduism that started as a tribal Vedic religion of Sanatan Dharma.
My undertaking is to define what kind of people, “the Meiteis were” by studying the Meitei mentalities, attitudes, behaviour, social structure, physical prowess and the social status for women, influenced by a variety of religious, political, economic and societal debates with its stress on climate and kingdom, and how they evolved into the 18th century notion of “national character” of the Meiteis.
The Meiteis have always taken for granted who they are without an insight into what has made the Meitei elite and the ‘man in the street’ feel fundamentally alike. This is a form of national consciousness. Once we find it we find the national character of the Meiteis.
The idea of national character of the Meiteis must evolve around some psychological and cultural characteristics in common that binds them together and at the same time separates them from other people.
The concept of “national character” was a subject of debate during the 18th century Europe. It was later generally agreed that each nation has its peculiar characteristics. But what constitutes national character and what are the factors in shaping national traits are still not clear.
By the time of the French Revolution, the idea of a “national character” in France and Germany was formed. But in Britain, because of the nature of the United Kingdom and Empire it remained undeveloped. It took another generation and by about 1830, the idea of “an English national character” began to evolve, still blurred sometimes by the British identity.
In general terms, description of national character ranges from stereotypes to a complex mixture of a series of traits. Each country constitutes a nation with a peculiar set of characteristics. Sometimes the people of the neighbouring provinces and communities differ sharply from each other. Certain traits of the Meiteis differ for instance, from the Tangkhul Nagas or the Thadou Kukis.
For the identity of Meitei national character, it is necessary to see if there is any distinctive spirit, character, ceremonies, laws, tastes, quirks, habits and foibles. It is also important to observe how the Meiteis eat, drink, work, play, shop, drive, fight and flirt as well as their personality traits, adaptive skills, discipline, disunity or unity.
Equally valuable is the study of how the Meiteis told themselves who they were and how they related themselves to their history, culture, society, indigenous religion, new religion, climate and the Government.
The simpler view of a national character is a series of mental and moral qualities in terms of virtues and vices. It is recognized that women play an important role in moulding the nation and how the changing condition of women would modify national characteristics. It is also to be noted that qualities attributed to a nation are not found in every member of the society.
My article (a research paper i.e. borrowing from many) which is far from being an erudite and well crafted intellectual history has significant contributions from many authors whose names I intend to give a miss.
I am not writing a doctoral thesis with computations of significant deviations while judging the Meitei national character. The basis of my thesis is empirical analysis i.e. observation, experience and correlation of regularities.
National character does not reflect only simple personality trait levels such as in days gone by, when orthodox Meiteis did not eat food cooked by the Mayangs during their pilgrimage to Hindu holy places in India.
The concept of a nation having a national character was disputed by some outdated anthropologists and psychologists. I do not agree. There is an English national character, a Bengali or Punjabi national character. Nearer to home, there is a Tangkhul or Kuki national character.
What has prompted me to write this article? I have always had a nagging question at the back of mind about why the Meiteis tend to fight physically with the least provocation. I am the epitome of this unwelcome character.
I had my share of rough and tumble fights during my school and college days. They were because I thought rightly or wrongly, with or without sufficient provocation, when I felt I was intimidated or my character was assassinated. Among these only two deserve mention here as they could have ruined my entire life with imprisonment.
One was as a student at St Edmund’s college, Shillong when I beat up a College lecturer as I felt that my character was assassinated. The other was as a House Surgeon in Irwin Hospital, Delhi when I slapped a nurse on the Ward as I felt that she was too arrogant and she called me stupid.
As a young doctor in Imphal, I went to see an ill priest who was the Principal of the Don Bosco School. I recognised him as the Principal of St Anthony’s College at Shillong at the time of my incident, 10 years ago. Before my time, Meitei students at Shillong were infamous for pugnacious behaviour. This Catholic priest was very aware of this peculiar Meitei character.
As he did not know my past history of the Shillong incident, I broached the subject of why the Meitei boys were so disposed to physical fights. He simply told me that the Meiteis having lived in cloistered Manipur had “inferiority complex.” As a result they became aggressive when they came out of Manipur, by over asserting themselves.
I half-espoused his theory as it did not quite agree with my character. I never had any inferiority complex; just the opposite. I was born in a prosperous family; I grew up in style and affluence above the average youth of my generation. Besides, I had been out of Manipur. However, in my college studies I learnt that people with inferiority complex, suffered from an unrealistic feeling of general inadequacy caused by actual or supposed inferiority in one sphere, sometimes marked by aggressive behaviour in compensation.
Later in my life, I began to wonder about the truth of the matter. Even at my ripe old age with a successful medical career, I am still lumbered with this trait. As recently as 3 years ago, my son, my wife and I went to attend a wedding of a grand daughter of mine in Delhi. With lots of excitement we went. I organised a cocktail dinner with the military band through the good offices of my friend General Jagdish at his Army Headquarters in Delhi. We introduced ourselves and entertained the Punjabi fiancee and would be in-laws of our grand daughter.
The next day was the wedding at Gurgaun, which they organised mainly with some financial help given by the mother and uncles of my niece. We went there but were completely ignored by the in laws. As the evening wore on and the whiskies took away the inhibitions, my aggressive trait came to the fore. I gave them a piece of my mind.
It was very unpleasant and I was extremely sorry for my grand-daughter (she and her mother have since disappeared from the radar). But I am not repentant. I have never allowed an insult to pass without retribution. If I had been a Punjabi it would not have happened. I know from experience; I move in high Punjabi society in Delhi.
When I was a College student my eldest brother and I boarded a train in Delhi bound for Bombay. There were four of us in the first class compartment with 4 berths. As the train left Delhi station one of the Punjabi chaps asked me where I came from. It led to an argument. The man said to the other remarking that, “Heaps of these people (me) and heaps of these Sirdars (Sikhs) are giving India a bad name.” At this my brother who was lying on the upper birth said in a commanding tone: “That’s enough.” Everybody went silent and to sleep until we arrived at the Victoria Terminus the next morning.
Following my niece’s wedding I decided to do some research about our national character. The first thing the research tells me is that our personalities generally do not change after about the age of 25. They are well entombed within each of us as a lifetime habit, attitude and approach.
Research in the past (2000) always indicated that individuals with “low esteem” (inferiority complex) are more aggressive than individuals with “high esteem” (superiority complex). However recent research (2005) found that individuals with low esteem as well as high esteem were associated with self-reported physical aggression.
Further research (2006) concluded that the long standing view that low esteem causes violence has been shown to be wrong. And that a specific type of high esteem produces high aggression.
On further research, people who are high on a trait of an elevated type of self esteem are more reactive to moderate provocation than those who are low on the trait, react to strong provocation. The trait is known as “narcissism” (excessive interest in oneself). The Meiteis have this trait.
This Meitei trait of a superiority complex is easily discernable from old Meitei patriotic songs such as nungshida ima meitei leima, maikei salai khudingda... It was often sung by my friend Haobam Ibechaobi from Uripok and hougatlone ichin inaosa khonglakle mangolgi bashi often sung by Chanambam Ongbi Bimola also from Uripok.
The modern study of human physiology (2007) by brain scan shows that social rejection (negative complex) activates brain areas that generate physical pain. It also shows that when we feel or are made to feel socially inferior, two areas of the brain become activated. One area makes you feel like sinking at the bottom of the abyss; the other area motivates to stave off the pain of feeling second rate and we are compelled to compensate as a reward.
The purpose of my thesis is to discover what kind of people are the Meiteis and what are their characteristic traits and behaviour that distinguish them ftom other people.
— to be contd
Without naivete’ and arrogance,
The effete Meiteis were a warrior nation.
Take a stroll round their extraordinary history,
You will find there is no vibrant future
Manipur existed as an independent and civilised country in the subcontinent of India and the South East Asia. It had its own indigenous religion of Sanamahi, its own language and alphabet. It has been in existent since the Stone Age.
Manipur now is a failed State and the Meiteis are a vanishing nation. Manipur was in the 18th century a Hindu country with Hinduism as its State religion and Hindu Meiteis as the backbone of the nation. The Meitei cultural values were Hindu culture with an intermingling of Sanamahi religion.
The changing society in Manipur in late 20th century posed problems for the Meiteis and forced them to recreate a resurgence of Meitei national character. Manipur is now a multifaith, multicultural and multiethnic country. This is of course a change for the better provided every tribal community is taking part in the running and the development of the State for peaceful coexistence. But it is not to be. Some ethnic communities with different political ideologies are doing the opposite.
In the history of Manipur before the British colonial em (1891- 1947) it was not that the Kukis, the Tangkhuls, the Marings, the Kabuis and the Pangals did not fight for the defence of Manipur, but it was the Meiteis who bore the brunt of the fighting. Manipur was a princely State with Meitei kings. Manipur may not be a gift of the Meiteis but the Meiteis were responsible for keeping Manipur independent until 1891. It was mainly through the blood, sweat and tears of the Meiteis that Manipur is what it is today.
My thesis is non-political. It is a project to identify the collective qualities of the Meiteis as they were. The Meiteis were a Kirata tribe, now conveniently called Indo-Mongoloid tribe that were in existence in Manipur for 3000 years, though only recorded for 2000 years in the Cheitharol Kumbaba.
Nobody knows when and from where the Meiteis migrated to Manipur in the prehistoric times. It must be at least as old as the Aryan migration to India 3000 years ago. It is recorded that when the Vedas were compiled before 1000 BCE, the Kimtas were mentioned in the Yajurveda and Atharveda.
The native religion of Sanamahi cult is unique for the Meiteis. It has incidentally, some similarities in its philosophical and metaphysical content to Hinduism that started as a tribal Vedic religion of Sanatan Dharma.
My undertaking is to define what kind of people, “the Meiteis were” by studying the Meitei mentalities, attitudes, behaviour, social structure, physical prowess and the social status for women, influenced by a variety of religious, political, economic and societal debates with its stress on climate and kingdom, and how they evolved into the 18th century notion of “national character” of the Meiteis.
The Meiteis have always taken for granted who they are without an insight into what has made the Meitei elite and the ‘man in the street’ feel fundamentally alike. This is a form of national consciousness. Once we find it we find the national character of the Meiteis.
The idea of national character of the Meiteis must evolve around some psychological and cultural characteristics in common that binds them together and at the same time separates them from other people.
The concept of “national character” was a subject of debate during the 18th century Europe. It was later generally agreed that each nation has its peculiar characteristics. But what constitutes national character and what are the factors in shaping national traits are still not clear.
By the time of the French Revolution, the idea of a “national character” in France and Germany was formed. But in Britain, because of the nature of the United Kingdom and Empire it remained undeveloped. It took another generation and by about 1830, the idea of “an English national character” began to evolve, still blurred sometimes by the British identity.
In general terms, description of national character ranges from stereotypes to a complex mixture of a series of traits. Each country constitutes a nation with a peculiar set of characteristics. Sometimes the people of the neighbouring provinces and communities differ sharply from each other. Certain traits of the Meiteis differ for instance, from the Tangkhul Nagas or the Thadou Kukis.
For the identity of Meitei national character, it is necessary to see if there is any distinctive spirit, character, ceremonies, laws, tastes, quirks, habits and foibles. It is also important to observe how the Meiteis eat, drink, work, play, shop, drive, fight and flirt as well as their personality traits, adaptive skills, discipline, disunity or unity.
Equally valuable is the study of how the Meiteis told themselves who they were and how they related themselves to their history, culture, society, indigenous religion, new religion, climate and the Government.
The simpler view of a national character is a series of mental and moral qualities in terms of virtues and vices. It is recognized that women play an important role in moulding the nation and how the changing condition of women would modify national characteristics. It is also to be noted that qualities attributed to a nation are not found in every member of the society.
My article (a research paper i.e. borrowing from many) which is far from being an erudite and well crafted intellectual history has significant contributions from many authors whose names I intend to give a miss.
I am not writing a doctoral thesis with computations of significant deviations while judging the Meitei national character. The basis of my thesis is empirical analysis i.e. observation, experience and correlation of regularities.
National character does not reflect only simple personality trait levels such as in days gone by, when orthodox Meiteis did not eat food cooked by the Mayangs during their pilgrimage to Hindu holy places in India.
The concept of a nation having a national character was disputed by some outdated anthropologists and psychologists. I do not agree. There is an English national character, a Bengali or Punjabi national character. Nearer to home, there is a Tangkhul or Kuki national character.
What has prompted me to write this article? I have always had a nagging question at the back of mind about why the Meiteis tend to fight physically with the least provocation. I am the epitome of this unwelcome character.
I had my share of rough and tumble fights during my school and college days. They were because I thought rightly or wrongly, with or without sufficient provocation, when I felt I was intimidated or my character was assassinated. Among these only two deserve mention here as they could have ruined my entire life with imprisonment.
One was as a student at St Edmund’s college, Shillong when I beat up a College lecturer as I felt that my character was assassinated. The other was as a House Surgeon in Irwin Hospital, Delhi when I slapped a nurse on the Ward as I felt that she was too arrogant and she called me stupid.
As a young doctor in Imphal, I went to see an ill priest who was the Principal of the Don Bosco School. I recognised him as the Principal of St Anthony’s College at Shillong at the time of my incident, 10 years ago. Before my time, Meitei students at Shillong were infamous for pugnacious behaviour. This Catholic priest was very aware of this peculiar Meitei character.
As he did not know my past history of the Shillong incident, I broached the subject of why the Meitei boys were so disposed to physical fights. He simply told me that the Meiteis having lived in cloistered Manipur had “inferiority complex.” As a result they became aggressive when they came out of Manipur, by over asserting themselves.
I half-espoused his theory as it did not quite agree with my character. I never had any inferiority complex; just the opposite. I was born in a prosperous family; I grew up in style and affluence above the average youth of my generation. Besides, I had been out of Manipur. However, in my college studies I learnt that people with inferiority complex, suffered from an unrealistic feeling of general inadequacy caused by actual or supposed inferiority in one sphere, sometimes marked by aggressive behaviour in compensation.
Later in my life, I began to wonder about the truth of the matter. Even at my ripe old age with a successful medical career, I am still lumbered with this trait. As recently as 3 years ago, my son, my wife and I went to attend a wedding of a grand daughter of mine in Delhi. With lots of excitement we went. I organised a cocktail dinner with the military band through the good offices of my friend General Jagdish at his Army Headquarters in Delhi. We introduced ourselves and entertained the Punjabi fiancee and would be in-laws of our grand daughter.
The next day was the wedding at Gurgaun, which they organised mainly with some financial help given by the mother and uncles of my niece. We went there but were completely ignored by the in laws. As the evening wore on and the whiskies took away the inhibitions, my aggressive trait came to the fore. I gave them a piece of my mind.
It was very unpleasant and I was extremely sorry for my grand-daughter (she and her mother have since disappeared from the radar). But I am not repentant. I have never allowed an insult to pass without retribution. If I had been a Punjabi it would not have happened. I know from experience; I move in high Punjabi society in Delhi.
When I was a College student my eldest brother and I boarded a train in Delhi bound for Bombay. There were four of us in the first class compartment with 4 berths. As the train left Delhi station one of the Punjabi chaps asked me where I came from. It led to an argument. The man said to the other remarking that, “Heaps of these people (me) and heaps of these Sirdars (Sikhs) are giving India a bad name.” At this my brother who was lying on the upper birth said in a commanding tone: “That’s enough.” Everybody went silent and to sleep until we arrived at the Victoria Terminus the next morning.
Following my niece’s wedding I decided to do some research about our national character. The first thing the research tells me is that our personalities generally do not change after about the age of 25. They are well entombed within each of us as a lifetime habit, attitude and approach.
Research in the past (2000) always indicated that individuals with “low esteem” (inferiority complex) are more aggressive than individuals with “high esteem” (superiority complex). However recent research (2005) found that individuals with low esteem as well as high esteem were associated with self-reported physical aggression.
Further research (2006) concluded that the long standing view that low esteem causes violence has been shown to be wrong. And that a specific type of high esteem produces high aggression.
On further research, people who are high on a trait of an elevated type of self esteem are more reactive to moderate provocation than those who are low on the trait, react to strong provocation. The trait is known as “narcissism” (excessive interest in oneself). The Meiteis have this trait.
This Meitei trait of a superiority complex is easily discernable from old Meitei patriotic songs such as nungshida ima meitei leima, maikei salai khudingda... It was often sung by my friend Haobam Ibechaobi from Uripok and hougatlone ichin inaosa khonglakle mangolgi bashi often sung by Chanambam Ongbi Bimola also from Uripok.
The modern study of human physiology (2007) by brain scan shows that social rejection (negative complex) activates brain areas that generate physical pain. It also shows that when we feel or are made to feel socially inferior, two areas of the brain become activated. One area makes you feel like sinking at the bottom of the abyss; the other area motivates to stave off the pain of feeling second rate and we are compelled to compensate as a reward.
The purpose of my thesis is to discover what kind of people are the Meiteis and what are their characteristic traits and behaviour that distinguish them ftom other people.
— to be contd
0 comments:
Post a Comment